# Hurricane Dorian



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Its a big one.

It looks like the Bahamas would be a good place to leave. They don't know if it will land in Florida or further north.

It never ceases to surprise me how many people decide to stay and "ride it out".

I would have left and already be sitting in a hotel in Michigan.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

It's ironic sags...I was just saying to da wife earlier today:"the only thing that could switch the US tv stations from incessant coverage of the hurricane this weekend would be another mass shooting somewhere..."
....good god....just seeing ' breaking news' from Texas....What a world we're livin' in, man....


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Good Cripes man.......what the blazes is wrong with those people.

Give up the guns already. They are claiming gun ownership as a right from a tattered old piece of paper written when guns were single shot flintlocks.

I recently heard a guest on a Munk debate who said the US will not be destroyed by foreign countries. It will be destroyed from within. 

It will commit suicide by clinging to the failed and non-relevant documents written by misguided founding fathers so long ago.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Did you know Jargey........the Munk debate was about China being an enemy of freedom and a danger to the world, but here are some facts.......

China used to tell people what to eat, what to wear, where to live and they wouldn't allow anyone to travel.

In China today, people decide what to eat, what to wear, where to live, and 134 million Chinese a year travel the world...........and return to China.

In the last 40 years, the Chinese have not been involved in any war. They have not fired a single bullet in decades.

By contrast, in the last year of the "peaceful" Obama Presidency, the US dropped 36,000 bombs on 7 different countries.

The US recently sent two fully loaded destroyers through the South China Sea off the Chinese mainland.

There are no Chinese warships cruising around Staten Island.

I don't know......but somehow I think we have all been a little naive about the US being the "good guy".


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

On Friday night, 10 teenagers were shot, half of them critically, at a high school football game in Alabama.

It is an epidemic that too many US lawmakers refuse to deal with.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/31/us/mobile-ladd-peebles-stadium-shooting/index.html


----------



## Parkuser (Mar 12, 2014)

sags said:


> ...In the last 40 years, the Chinese have not been involved in any war. They have not fired a single bullet in decades... .


Try 30 years (if you do not count occupation of Tibet.) When Vietnam invaded Cambodia to stop China-friendly Pol-Pot, China invaded Vietnam in 1979. They were fighting through the eighties.
added: and Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

sags said:


> Give up the guns already. They are claiming gun ownership as a right from a tattered old piece of paper written when guns were single shot flintlocks.


Tattered old piece of paper  Actually, the right to bear arms was put in specifically to prevent government takeover, not to protect against bear attacks. Of course the left wants everyone unarmed...every single dictatorship starts by disarming the people.



> I recently heard a guest on a Munk debate who said the US will not be destroyed by foreign countries. It will be destroyed from within.


I agree...by leftists who push for full socialism/communism. Capitalist societies don't fail...the only way to defeat them is to disarm them and impose communism.



> It will commit suicide by clinging to the failed and non-relevant documents written by misguided founding fathers so long ago.


As stated....the left hates guns because they can't seize power against an armed population. I'll repeat as you seem to lack the ability to understand: Every single dictatorship starts by disarming the people.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Hurricane Dorian is now rated a Category 5 monster storm. Some Twitter "storm experts" say it may end up a Cat 6 (175 mph) which doesn't exist.

The rating system divides storms into five categories:

Category 1: Winds 74 to 95 mph (Minor damage)
Category 2: Winds 96 to 110 mph (Extensive damage — Can uproot trees and break windows)
Category 3: Winds 111 to 129 mph (Devastating — Can break windows and doors)
Category 4: Winds 130 to 156 mph (Catastrophic damage — Can tear off roofs)
Category 5: Winds 157 mph or higher (The absolute worst and can level houses and destroy buildings)


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Prairie Guy said:


> Tattered old piece of paper  Actually, the right to bear arms was put in specifically to prevent government takeover, not to protect against bear attacks. Of course the left wants everyone unarmed...every single dictatorship starts by disarming the people.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Capitalist societies fail by people forgetting how good they have it, and destroying it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The US Constitution guarantees both the right of gun ownership and the right to unfettered free speech (including what Canadians would consider hate speech)

The combination is a toxic brew when there are great divides between people. 

The end result can be a government crackdown and military control to end the violence, and that is how freedom is lost.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

For those who want to follow live updates from people in the Bahamas........

https://twitter.com/hashtag/dorian?lang=en

This storm is a perfectly formed monster and may set new all time records for sustained wind speeds.

There are some video images in the link that show the storm from satellite images.

Edit.......Dorian now has sustained winds of 175 mph with gusts over 200 mph. That wind speed would blow away well built homes.

Worse....a possible 15-20 foot storm surge and several feet of rain. Dorian may continue to strengthen over the warm water.

Greg Postel of the Weather Network....

Hurricane & Storm Expert, and Co-Host of Weekend Recharge (9a-1p) at The Weather Channel. M.S./Ph.D. Atmospheric Dynamics, UW-Madison

"I have never seen this"........


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

I think it'll die down by the time it hits the Florida coast on Wednesday as per the NHC's map. Too much excitement being driven up by NHC on Twitter.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Hope you are right. Better to be wrong than have the widespread devastation predicted.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It doesn't sound good......the latest.

_Sustained winds of 185 mph and gusts up to 220 mph._

From the NHC, bearing in mind the Abaco Islands are only a few feet above sea level.

_Catastrophic Storm Surge of 18 to 23 feet from #Dorian will affect the Abaco Islands during the next several hours. SEEK ELEVATED SHELTER IMMEDIATELY! Take action now to protect your life!_

I gotta wonder why people are still there with children.

_11:40 am. Pounding. CRASHING. Boards prying off windows. We're moving children to a safe space, wrapping them in blankets._


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Removed video from storm.....too disturbing to post.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

Prairie Guy said:


> Tattered old piece of paper  Actually, the right to bear arms was put in specifically to prevent government takeover, not to protect against bear attacks. Of course the left wants everyone unarmed...every single dictatorship starts by disarming the people.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


While I agree that the intent was to protect the people against a government takeover, that argument no longer holds water at all. I don't care if you give every citizen a fully automatic 50 cal. machine gun mounted in the back of their pickup trucks. It won't stop an army with tanks, planes and missiles. It only made sense when the arms of the 'people' were the equal of the arms of the government armies. That hasn't been true for a very long time.


----------



## accord1999 (Aug 9, 2013)

Longtimeago said:


> While I agree that the intent was to protect the people against a government takeover, that argument no longer holds water at all. I don't care if you give every citizen a fully automatic 50 cal. machine gun mounted in the back of their pickup trucks. It won't stop an army with tanks, planes and missiles. It only made sense when the arms of the 'people' were the equal of the arms of the government armies. That hasn't been true for a very long time.


But with enough local support and some supplies (usually foreign supplied but the US probably has enough stockpile for itself), even lightly armed groups can hold out and harass local or foreign professional forces for a long time. The Americans and its allies still can't completely subdue Afghanistan and neither could the Soviets. And the Communists in Vietnam managed to outlast the US and reunify Vietnam once the US tired and left.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

accord1999 said:


> But with enough local support and some supplies (usually foreign supplied but the US probably has enough stockpile for itself), even lightly armed groups can hold out and harass local or foreign professional forces for a long time. The Americans and its allies still can't completely subdue Afghanistan and neither could the Soviets. And the Communists in Vietnam managed to outlast the US and reunify Vietnam once the US tired and left.


Yes, but can those lightly-armed groups hold back a hurricane? That, at least at first blush, would appear to be the topic of this thread.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Longtimeago said:


> While I agree that the intent was to protect the people against a government takeover, that argument no longer holds water at all. I don't care if you give every citizen a fully automatic 50 cal. machine gun mounted in the back of their pickup trucks. It won't stop an army with tanks, planes and missiles. It only made sense when the arms of the 'people' were the equal of the arms of the government armies. That hasn't been true for a very long time.


What has this all got to do with Dorian?????????


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

agent99 said:


> What has this all got to do with Dorian?????????


Nothing. sags crated the thread then took it off topic. Blame them


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

OK, back to Dorian by 'popular'? demand.

What gets me is that given global warming and our changing climate, we can only expect more of this kind of thing. Whether it is a hurricane or just a river flooding its banks, it isn't going to get better, only worse.

At some point people are going to have to be told, don't live in these areas or if you do, you are on your own. I have sailed in the Bahamas and been in some of the areas that were badly hit like Marsh Harbour. Take a look at the elevation of these islands here: http://www.floodmap.net/Elevation/CountryElevationMap/?ct=BS Then click on a smaller area like Marsh Harbour and see the elevations there. Then read about what a 'storm surge' is and how high they can reach. https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/storm-surge/

It is storm surge that does most of the damage from a hurricane, not the wind and rain. A storm surge can reach as high as 10 metres and most of Marsh Harbour is at an elevation of less than 6 metres. It doesn't take a genuis to know what that means.

The same is true along all coasts where a hurricane might be an issue. Yet people keep living in these potential disaster areas.


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

It is not as simple as saying "don't live there". This is not like a flood plain in our part of the world. Much/most of the Bahama land is less than 15ft above sea level. The storm surge was 20 ft. or more. Between rising sea levels and hurricanes, the choice is really: abandon the Bahamas and move elsewhere (like where?). I suspect we don't have the technology (in the foreseeable future) to stabilize these islands long-term. It means telling an entire population that most of them have to leave their country, homes, and livelihoods. I don't disagree they need to talk about it, but it isn't going to be simple. At some point in the future there will be room for a small remnant clustered around the few high points. Who will the lucky few be? What will they live on? Where will everyone else go? What will it all cost?


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

I don't know, istm that if the Chinese can create new islands in the SCS for military ppurposes, the technology exists to dredge and cement coral sands to protect low-lying islands in some (perhaps not all) circumstances.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> OK, back to Dorian by 'popular'? demand.
> 
> What gets me is that given global warming and our changing climate, we can only expect more of this kind of thing. Whether it is a hurricane or just a river flooding its banks, it isn't going to get better, only worse.
> 
> ...


If you're using this hurricane as an example of climate change, you are fighting against virtually every piece of evidence out there. Hurricanes are at multi decade lows. 

This is an example of really poor logic. Hurricanes have been around for a very long time. And while there are plenty of "if X then Y" ways to look at it (if warmer climate = warmer oceans = more energy, less gradient = less wind sheer, etc etc), but taking a single hurricane in a year with an extremely low amount of hurricanes, in a decade with an extremely low amount of hurricanes, is a pretty easy argument to blow over.

Easier than blowing over a twig shack in the Bahamas.

CBC earlier this year had to recall stories over false alarmism. There is absolutely zero evidence of more extreme weather events occurring outside of long term norms. Yes, the climate is warmer. It *should* result in more events. But it hasn't. But people keep repeating it anyway. Fake news is everywhere, on all sides of every argument and every political stance.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

A twig shack in the Bahamas ? The storm totally destroyed the airport made of steel beams. 

One description of the intensity of the storm was having an F5 tornado sit over your house for 2 days.

The rapid intensity of the storms from tropical depression to a Cat 5 hurricane is evidence of climate change and predictor of more severe storms in the future.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

doctrine said:


> If you're using this hurricane as an example of climate change, you are fighting against virtually every piece of evidence out there. Hurricanes are at multi decade lows.
> 
> This is an example of really poor logic. Hurricanes have been around for a very long time. And while there are plenty of "if X then Y" ways to look at it (if warmer climate = warmer oceans = more energy, less gradient = less wind sheer, etc etc), but taking a single hurricane in a year with an extremely low amount of hurricanes, in a decade with an extremely low amount of hurricanes, is a pretty easy argument to blow over.
> 
> ...


Perhaps I didn't make what I was saying clear enough doctrine. Whether it is a weather event that is 'nothing new' like a hurricane or a river flooding as it has 100 times before, or an event attributable to climate change, the result is the same. People die and property is destroyed. Yet even though people know if they are living in a hurricane area for a river flood plain etc. they continue to return to these places and we keep giving them money to rebuild.

What I am saying is that at some point, we should be saying NO more money. Move to somewhere that it is not inevitable that you will be flooded out of your home yet again. So yes, the Bahamas are not suitable for habitation in my opinion, along with many low lying coastal and riverside areas. But if someone chooses to live there even when they know the risks, then what I am saying is they should also accept responsibility for what happens, not expect others to bail them out.

Every time there is an event like this current one, we see as we do now, people choosing to ignore a 'mandatory evacuation order' and remain in place. Then after the event has passed, these same people have to be rescued by someone and/or are the first to put their hand out for money to rebuild. Why do we continue to 'enable' them in this way?


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

OhGreatGuru said:


> It is not as simple as saying "don't live there". This is not like a flood plain in our part of the world. Much/most of the Bahama land is less than 15ft above sea level. The storm surge was 20 ft. or more. Between rising sea levels and hurricanes, the choice is really: abandon the Bahamas and move elsewhere (like where?). I suspect we don't have the technology (in the foreseeable future) to stabilize these islands long-term. It means telling an entire population that most of them have to leave their country, homes, and livelihoods. I don't disagree they need to talk about it, but it isn't going to be simple. At some point in the future there will be room for a small remnant clustered around the few high points. Who will the lucky few be? What will they live on? Where will everyone else go? What will it all cost?


I would agree it is not simple but enabling it to continue is not the answer as far as I am concerned. Do you see any concerted effort to try and get people to leave such places whether it is the Bahamas or a river flood plain in Quebec? Instead what I see is the 'enabling' of people to stay. 

Why do you say 'at some point in the future'? Why not say 'no help for anyone or any property below say 10 metres in altitude', now? They don't need to 'talk about it', they need to DO something about it. Instead what we see is 'doing more of the same while expecting different results', which is one definition of insanity.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It is going to come down to government spending. They will have to raise taxes to pay for it all. 

The carbon tax should be used to build a fund to pay the inevitable damages. Revenue from the carbon taxes might not even be enough.

There is no free lunch.


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

Longtimeago said:


> I would agree it is not simple but enabling it to continue is not the answer as far as I am concerned. Do you see any concerted effort to try and get people to leave such places whether it is the Bahamas or a river flood plain in Quebec? Instead what I see is the 'enabling' of people to stay.
> ...


Only that it easier said than done. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Bahama#/media/File:GrandBahama_15ft_4p572_shaded.png. There isn't much of Grand Bahama that is above 10 metres. All the green and yellow is below 30 ft. And the rest of the Bahama islands are about as bad.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

OhGreatGuru said:


> Only that it easier said than done. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Bahama#/media/File:GrandBahama_15ft_4p572_shaded.png. There isn't much of Grand Bahama that is above 10 metres. All the green and yellow is below 30 ft. And the rest of the Bahama islands are about as bad.


Same is true for a good part of Florida and other coastal states. Even parts of New York. Should aid to those areas be stopped to encourage residents to move? 

That map of Grand Bahama may look bad. But like many low level islands, much of that green is swamp and people don't live there. They live on the higher ground and in this case Freeport & Lucaya (yellow/red) 

The Bahamas do have problems with building codes. Last update was in about 2003. As a result, even new structures likely can't withstand normal hurricane force winds, never mind the much higher winds that hit this time. But even in the USA, codes are only loosely adhered to. At least in Carolinas. Basically, they need homes built to withstand at least 150mph winds with main living areas above some maximum possible flood level. Unfortunately, the population in Bahamas is not wealthy and only a few can afford new homes.

We have spent quite a bit of time in the Abacos. It's a wonderful place and the people are just great. Mostly they live a great life. But every now and then mother nature hits them hard. Nevertheless, no way will they be moving. They will recover. 

Some already have "treehouses"


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

For those who are interested, this site allows you to set an elevation above sea level and find places anywhere in the world that would be under water if water rose to that level.

http://www.floodmap.net/


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

jargey, 1980 & others in newfoundland (afaik i don't believe that newfoundlander has moved there yet, despite his name), are you guys alright? battening everything down as safe as possible?

they're saying sunday for the maritimes & newfoundland, the map projection looks like full blast on The Rock. But hopefully the storm force will have deteriorated a lot by sunday.

take care guys


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

Yes, you folks in Newfoundland take care, as well as the rest of Atlantic Canada that could be affected. 

It looks like where I am on the Atlantic Eastern Shore it will be more of a rain event with 90mm or so, sustained winds 68k and gusts to 111k. Hopefully that's as bad as it gets and doesn't seem anything close to Juan. Thankfully.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

OhGreatGuru said:


> Only that it easier said than done. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Bahama#/media/File:GrandBahama_15ft_4p572_shaded.png. There isn't much of Grand Bahama that is above 10 metres. All the green and yellow is below 30 ft. And the rest of the Bahama islands are about as bad.


Don't we just love that phrase, 'easier said than done', as if it means something.

It is as easy to SAY, 'no more aid' as it is to say anything else. What you are trying to say is that 'it is not easy to DO.' The word 'say' has nothing to do with it. It's a silly phrase if you think about it.

OK, so it is not easy to do, so what? There are many things that are not easy to do and yet must be done regardless. How does continuing to rebuild in an area that we know is subject to repeated flooding help anyone? How does doing more of the same and expecting different results help anyone? Just because something is not easy to do does not mean we should not do it. We should do what makes SENSE, not continue to do what does NOT make sense, however hard it might be.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

agent99 said:


> Same is true for a good part of Florida and other coastal states. Even parts of New York. Should aid to those areas be stopped to encourage residents to move?
> 
> That map of Grand Bahama may look bad. But like many low level islands, much of that green is swamp and people don't live there. They live on the higher ground and in this case Freeport & Lucaya (yellow/red)
> 
> ...


Yes aid should be stopped to any flood prone areas anywhere. Continuing to enable them is not going to result in change, only more of the same.

What does where some people live have to do with where others live? If people are living above say 10 metres elevation, they have only to build to deal with wind and rain. But we are not talking about them, we are talking about those who are living at lower elevations where they ARE subject to storm surges of up to 10 metres in height. Should we keep enabling them to rebuild there?

They will not 'recover' without handouts of money and their 'recovery' if they return and build in the same places will be temporary. To me it's like we keep using bandaids when surgery is needed.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

RBull said:


> Yes, you folks in Newfoundland take care, as well as the rest of Atlantic Canada that could be affected.
> 
> It looks like where I am on the Atlantic Eastern Shore it will be more of a rain event with 90mm or so, sustained winds 68k and gusts to 111k. Hopefully that's as bad as it gets and doesn't seem anything close to Juan. Thankfully.



maritimes too are on canada's watch list. 90 mm rainfall, yikes. As if the maritimes didn't suffer enough already from flooding this past spring. Keep fingers crossed.


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

Looks like the NS will be well hit and this thing has increased in strength from a cat 1 to a 2. up to 160k winds, rain somewhere between 50 and now saying up to 150mm.

Just did a more serious batten down the hatches here, moving boat, kayaks, all outdoor furniture etc. 

Still on track for my 24k run early tomorrow though!


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

RBull said:


> Looks like the NS will be well hit and this thing has increased in strength from a cat 1 to a 2. up to 160k winds, rain somewhere between 50 and now saying up to 150mm. Just did a more serious batten down the hatches here, moving boat, kayaks, all outdoor furniture etc.
> 
> Still on track for my 24k run early tomorrow though!


May the wind be at your back!


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> May the wind be at your back!


Thank you!


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

It's nice to see that many in the world are responding to the needs of the Bahamian people. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...3ba688-cff4-11e9-a620-0a91656d7db6_story.html

https://www.canadahelps.org/en/crisis-relief-centre/hurricane-dorian/

Hopefully most of us will see fit to make donations.


----------

