|
OT La Migra redux
wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 00:16:38 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: It's a pretty well-known fact that the wetlands surrounding the entire area have been degraded to the point that they're no long viable to dampen storm surge. Sure. The water came from the lake. Where do you think the water in the lake came from on that fateful occasion? Look at a map. Then learn a little about the Coriolis effect and low pressure systems. Ponchartrain is north of New Orleans, the wetlands are south. If you look at your map, look at the path of the storm, east of New Orleans and understand the wind circles counter clockwise around a low you see the water circling around the peninsula and into the inlet that feeds Ponchartrain. The lake level rose and overtopped the levees north of the city along with the industria canal that goes south from the lake and that was the area where the flooding started. Once it started, the bowl simply filled up. Assuming the facts are correct, it was the storm surge that caused the levee damage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...in_New_Orleans Yes and that storm surge was in Lake Ponchartrain, the opposite direction from the bayou. I know they look south towards the gulf but the danger is from the north. Surge is wind blown water and that wind blew the water right into the lake. Get a map and look at the l;evees that failed, Wiki has a list. They are on the north side. The Mississippi river levee on the south side held. There are good reasons to restore the wetlands but that would not have saved them from Katrina. Perhaps taking some of that Corps of Engineers money Nagin spent on port improvements instead of the levees it was intended for might have helped. They are still just a ticking time bomb, waiting for the next storm. Katrina wasn't even that powerful. It came in as a Category 3. They get a lot worse. You're just wrong: http://world-wire.com/news/0908260001.html |
OT La Migra redux
On 8/24/10 12:31 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"TopBassDog" wrote in message ... On Aug 24, 2:16 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 20:36:24 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:40:32 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: The wetlands had absolutely NOTHING to do with it. The water came from Lake Pontchartrain, a direct connection to the Gulf. Those were the levees that failed. Have you ever been to New Orleans or seen a map of the area. The places that flooded were on the lake and the industrial canal. It's a pretty well-known fact that the wetlands surrounding the entire area have been degraded to the point that they're no long viable to dampen storm surge. Sure. The water came from the lake. Where do you think the water in the lake came from on that fateful occasion? Look at a map. Then learn a little about the Coriolis effect and low pressure systems. Ponchartrain is north of New Orleans, the wetlands are south. If you look at your map, look at the path of the storm, east of New Orleans and understand the wind circles counter clockwise around a low you see the water circling around the peninsula and into the inlet that feeds Ponchartrain. The lake level rose and overtopped the levees north of the city along with the industria canal that goes south from the lake and that was the area where the flooding started. Once it started, the bowl simply filled up. Who supplies the dirt, money, etc.? The same people who underwrite their flood insurance You and Me BTW nobody would supply my dirt if I had to rebuild my house under the same circumstances and I would be doing it at the point of a government gun. The gun is owned by you and I. If you don't like it, vote for another Congressman or Senator. I do and it doesn't change. I can never fight the billion dollars fat cats pump into our political system every year. The community Judy built required over 4 feet of dirt to be brought in over the whole development, just for the road surface height and the houses were 3 feet above that on a stem wall. The rich (certainly better off) community... If you were poor you would have to follow the same laws, everywhere but NOLA You know that's not the case. There are almost always differences in regs and enforcement, depending upon the situation/location. I don't know of anywhere else where the FEMA elevation rules do not apply. It certainly is not being ignored in Florida. We have written it into our building codes. I wonder how these people can get a mortgage without flood insurance and how is FEMA writing insurance on a home that was rebuilt below sea level? Assuming the facts are correct, it was the storm surge that caused the levee damage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...in_New_Orleans Very good, D'Plume. And what does that have to do with "...I wonder how these people can get a mortgage without flood insurance and how is FEMA writing insurance on a home that was rebuilt below sea level?" What do you have to do with intelligent discourse? TopBass = TopAsshole. |
OT La Migra redux
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
... wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 00:16:38 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: It's a pretty well-known fact that the wetlands surrounding the entire area have been degraded to the point that they're no long viable to dampen storm surge. Sure. The water came from the lake. Where do you think the water in the lake came from on that fateful occasion? Look at a map. Then learn a little about the Coriolis effect and low pressure systems. Ponchartrain is north of New Orleans, the wetlands are south. If you look at your map, look at the path of the storm, east of New Orleans and understand the wind circles counter clockwise around a low you see the water circling around the peninsula and into the inlet that feeds Ponchartrain. The lake level rose and overtopped the levees north of the city along with the industria canal that goes south from the lake and that was the area where the flooding started. Once it started, the bowl simply filled up. Assuming the facts are correct, it was the storm surge that caused the levee damage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...in_New_Orleans Yes and that storm surge was in Lake Ponchartrain, the opposite direction from the bayou. I know they look south towards the gulf but the danger is from the north. Surge is wind blown water and that wind blew the water right into the lake. Get a map and look at the l;evees that failed, Wiki has a list. They are on the north side. The Mississippi river levee on the south side held. There are good reasons to restore the wetlands but that would not have saved them from Katrina. Perhaps taking some of that Corps of Engineers money Nagin spent on port improvements instead of the levees it was intended for might have helped. They are still just a ticking time bomb, waiting for the next storm. Katrina wasn't even that powerful. It came in as a Category 3. They get a lot worse. You're just wrong: http://world-wire.com/news/0908260001.html Show us precisely what proves him wrong. -- I'm the real Harry, and I post from a Mac, as virtually everyone knows. If a post is attributed to me, and it isn't from a Mac, it's from an ID spoofer who hasn't the balls to post with his own ID. |
OT La Migra redux
wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:34:24 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Allowing a half million people to live below sea level is criminal negligence. It will take at least one more Katrina like disaster to prove that but it is going to happen. If there is anything to this global warming thing it is going to happen a lot. If? I guess you don't keep up on the news. FYI, as I said, it was the storm surge that caused the problem. If you want to fix the problem (or come close), you need to fix the wetlands. In the City of New Orleans, the storm surge caused more than 50 breaches in drainage canal levees and also in navigational canal levees and precipitated the worst engineering disaster in the history of the United States.[3] The wetlands have nothing to do with the lake. It has a direct access to the gulf. It was the levee system on the lake side that failed. Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Did you look at a map? There is a good one on that "drainage" link from Wiki showing the low areas. They are on the north, "lake" side of NOLA If the surge had come from the river side you might have a case but bear in mind, the channelization of the river was a response to the 1927 flood where the water came down the river. They were trying to get it out to the gulf as fast as they could. You can do all the mitigation you want but as long as people are living below sea level they are going to be flooded. You can't beat physics. That is why FEMA has the datum plane rules in the first place. I posted the text of a link that described the problem. Why is that so hard for you to grasp? Feel free to dispute the study. |
OT La Migra redux
wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:36:12 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 00:16:38 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: It's a pretty well-known fact that the wetlands surrounding the entire area have been degraded to the point that they're no long viable to dampen storm surge. Sure. The water came from the lake. Where do you think the water in the lake came from on that fateful occasion? Look at a map. Then learn a little about the Coriolis effect and low pressure systems. Ponchartrain is north of New Orleans, the wetlands are south. If you look at your map, look at the path of the storm, east of New Orleans and understand the wind circles counter clockwise around a low you see the water circling around the peninsula and into the inlet that feeds Ponchartrain. The lake level rose and overtopped the levees north of the city along with the industria canal that goes south from the lake and that was the area where the flooding started. Once it started, the bowl simply filled up. Assuming the facts are correct, it was the storm surge that caused the levee damage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...in_New_Orleans Yes and that storm surge was in Lake Ponchartrain, the opposite direction from the bayou. I know they look south towards the gulf but the danger is from the north. Surge is wind blown water and that wind blew the water right into the lake. Get a map and look at the l;evees that failed, Wiki has a list. They are on the north side. The Mississippi river levee on the south side held. There are good reasons to restore the wetlands but that would not have saved them from Katrina. Perhaps taking some of that Corps of Engineers money Nagin spent on port improvements instead of the levees it was intended for might have helped. They are still just a ticking time bomb, waiting for the next storm. Katrina wasn't even that powerful. It came in as a Category 3. They get a lot worse. You're just wrong: http://world-wire.com/news/0908260001.html That is a great piece of propaganda about the wetlands but it ignores the fact that the water came in from the east, not up from the south. You still have not looked at the map and the inlet to lake pontchartrain. Everyone agrees the surge that overtopped the levees came from the lake, not rising water in the river, where the wetlands would have the effect of buffering it. The fact that the Army Corps is piling on is just to divert attention from their levee failures. Elevation map http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Msyelevst.jpg That water to the north is the lake Region map http://www.neworleanscvb.com/cvbmap/default.cfm?_map=3 See all that water north east of the city? That is the gulf actually worse than just the gulf, it is the end of an inlet off of the gulf in the direction of the wind in a hurricane. Water piles up in that inlet (AKA surge) with no place to go except into the lake. The wetlands destruction everyone is talking about is south of the city and had exactly zero effect on the lake surge. "The severity of Katrina's damage in Louisiana was caused, in part, by the fact that the state has lost 1/3 of its original wetlands -- about 2,000 square miles -- an area larger than Delaware. " Sure... the EDF and the NWF don't know what they're talking about. Sure. |
OT La Migra redux
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
... wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:36:12 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 00:16:38 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: It's a pretty well-known fact that the wetlands surrounding the entire area have been degraded to the point that they're no long viable to dampen storm surge. Sure. The water came from the lake. Where do you think the water in the lake came from on that fateful occasion? Look at a map. Then learn a little about the Coriolis effect and low pressure systems. Ponchartrain is north of New Orleans, the wetlands are south. If you look at your map, look at the path of the storm, east of New Orleans and understand the wind circles counter clockwise around a low you see the water circling around the peninsula and into the inlet that feeds Ponchartrain. The lake level rose and overtopped the levees north of the city along with the industria canal that goes south from the lake and that was the area where the flooding started. Once it started, the bowl simply filled up. Assuming the facts are correct, it was the storm surge that caused the levee damage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...in_New_Orleans Yes and that storm surge was in Lake Ponchartrain, the opposite direction from the bayou. I know they look south towards the gulf but the danger is from the north. Surge is wind blown water and that wind blew the water right into the lake. Get a map and look at the l;evees that failed, Wiki has a list. They are on the north side. The Mississippi river levee on the south side held. There are good reasons to restore the wetlands but that would not have saved them from Katrina. Perhaps taking some of that Corps of Engineers money Nagin spent on port improvements instead of the levees it was intended for might have helped. They are still just a ticking time bomb, waiting for the next storm. Katrina wasn't even that powerful. It came in as a Category 3. They get a lot worse. You're just wrong: http://world-wire.com/news/0908260001.html That is a great piece of propaganda about the wetlands but it ignores the fact that the water came in from the east, not up from the south. You still have not looked at the map and the inlet to lake pontchartrain. Everyone agrees the surge that overtopped the levees came from the lake, not rising water in the river, where the wetlands would have the effect of buffering it. The fact that the Army Corps is piling on is just to divert attention from their levee failures. Elevation map http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Msyelevst.jpg That water to the north is the lake Region map http://www.neworleanscvb.com/cvbmap/default.cfm?_map=3 See all that water north east of the city? That is the gulf actually worse than just the gulf, it is the end of an inlet off of the gulf in the direction of the wind in a hurricane. Water piles up in that inlet (AKA surge) with no place to go except into the lake. The wetlands destruction everyone is talking about is south of the city and had exactly zero effect on the lake surge. "The severity of Katrina's damage in Louisiana was caused, in part, by the fact that the state has lost 1/3 of its original wetlands -- about 2,000 square miles -- an area larger than Delaware. " Sure... the EDF and the NWF don't know what they're talking about. Sure. Absolutely, Yup, Uh Ha, right you are. Greg is just being contrary to get you riled up. And you fell for it. Have a cookie. -- I'm the real Harry, and I post from a Mac, as virtually everyone knows. If a post is attributed to me, and it isn't from a Mac, it's from an ID spoofer who hasn't the balls to post with his own ID. |
OT La Migra redux
wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:45:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:36:12 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message m... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 00:16:38 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: It's a pretty well-known fact that the wetlands surrounding the entire area have been degraded to the point that they're no long viable to dampen storm surge. Sure. The water came from the lake. Where do you think the water in the lake came from on that fateful occasion? Look at a map. Then learn a little about the Coriolis effect and low pressure systems. Ponchartrain is north of New Orleans, the wetlands are south. If you look at your map, look at the path of the storm, east of New Orleans and understand the wind circles counter clockwise around a low you see the water circling around the peninsula and into the inlet that feeds Ponchartrain. The lake level rose and overtopped the levees north of the city along with the industria canal that goes south from the lake and that was the area where the flooding started. Once it started, the bowl simply filled up. Assuming the facts are correct, it was the storm surge that caused the levee damage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...in_New_Orleans Yes and that storm surge was in Lake Ponchartrain, the opposite direction from the bayou. I know they look south towards the gulf but the danger is from the north. Surge is wind blown water and that wind blew the water right into the lake. Get a map and look at the l;evees that failed, Wiki has a list. They are on the north side. The Mississippi river levee on the south side held. There are good reasons to restore the wetlands but that would not have saved them from Katrina. Perhaps taking some of that Corps of Engineers money Nagin spent on port improvements instead of the levees it was intended for might have helped. They are still just a ticking time bomb, waiting for the next storm. Katrina wasn't even that powerful. It came in as a Category 3. They get a lot worse. You're just wrong: http://world-wire.com/news/0908260001.html That is a great piece of propaganda about the wetlands but it ignores the fact that the water came in from the east, not up from the south. You still have not looked at the map and the inlet to lake pontchartrain. Everyone agrees the surge that overtopped the levees came from the lake, not rising water in the river, where the wetlands would have the effect of buffering it. The fact that the Army Corps is piling on is just to divert attention from their levee failures. Elevation map http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Msyelevst.jpg That water to the north is the lake Region map http://www.neworleanscvb.com/cvbmap/default.cfm?_map=3 See all that water north east of the city? That is the gulf actually worse than just the gulf, it is the end of an inlet off of the gulf in the direction of the wind in a hurricane. Water piles up in that inlet (AKA surge) with no place to go except into the lake. The wetlands destruction everyone is talking about is south of the city and had exactly zero effect on the lake surge. "The severity of Katrina's damage in Louisiana was caused, in part, by the fact that the state has lost 1/3 of its original wetlands -- about 2,000 square miles -- an area larger than Delaware. " Sure... the EDF and the NWF don't know what they're talking about. Sure. Expand those abbreviations and get back to me. Do you think there is an agenda there? Umm... environmental concern? Hard to tell from the names. LOL |
OT La Migra redux
wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:17:32 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Sure... the EDF and the NWF don't know what they're talking about. Sure. Expand those abbreviations and get back to me. Do you think there is an agenda there? Umm... environmental concern? Hard to tell from the names. LOL They make their money (the F stands for "fund") getting people to do things like restoring wetlands. They were saying the loss of wetlands would endanger NOLA years before Katrina. The reality is the real danger is the lake, not the bayou. That bay below Mississippi acts like a funnel and pipes the water straight into the lake if the storm goes that way. We watch hurricanes around here like people watch football games and we saw guys like Jim Cantore explaining exactly what ended up happening a day before the storm hit. It becomes very easy to understand as soon as you draw that cyclone over a map of the area. I bet I can find one if you want to see it. They have been talking abut this exact storm for decades before it happened. They have a similar scenario for New York City with Long Island Sound acting the same way. The History Channel even did a show on it. Sure. All environmental organizations are motivated by profit. All big corporations are motivated by altruism. I get it. |
OT La Migra redux
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:17 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com