Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Worst disaster in U.S. History

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    131

    Worst disaster in U.S. History

    Due to a murder trial that captivated America, and someones body part that had the same name of the person, filling the news. An event that could/can change America as we know, has slipped by the media. Or has it? Some report that censorship is in full swing.

    http://www.salem-news.com/articles/j...ka-nuclear.php

    We have heard of the North Dakota floods, even the Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant; that many say is Fukishima is slow motion.

    But the main focus needs to be at the head of this disaster, which is the Fort Peck Dam. It was reported only a few weeks ago, the capacity of Fort Peck was at 112%.Scary to think that a dam that had a failure during construction in 1938, sat at 112% capacity.
    Currently it sits at 101% http://www.nwd-mr.usace.army.mil/rcc...p.cgi?3MRDTAP7

    Now while 101% sounds better than 112%, and the rain has held off. The biggest concern is the snow run off. "With well below average temperatures so far in 2011 and with well above average snowpack, Montana is facing a huge run-off season. Heavy spring rain has already put much of the state in flood conditions so what does this mean when the weather heats up and the snow starts melting? Much of Montana still has 200%-300% of average snow levels"

    http://www.deaddriftoutdoors.com/blo...looding-update

    So by the sounds of it, they won't be able to expel water fast enough, using the dams release abilities. So next step is, to divert the water. The link I am about to provide, was not found on any news site, but from digging through search engine pages.

    http://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportuni...=core&_cview=0





    The bid was posted June 11, and the contract was awarded June 14. Wow only 3 days needed until they found the lowest bidder? It must be urgent. The contract was to stockpile rock, at the Fort Peck Dam. Why would rock be needed at the dam? Seeing as there are no reports on the current situation at the dam, my only guess, is diversion. They know they can not expel water fast enough, so they will divert it. Sounds like a great plan, but.....

    http://ncrenegade.com/editorial/an-i...clear-station/

    Basically what the article is saying Fort Calhoun and Cooper Nuclear stations, are on the back burner right now. If they don't "control" the flooding, the dams will break. After they release water, they will then focus their attention to the slow motion Fukushimas.

    Thankfully FEMA has been doing training exercises in May. Not exactly for floods, but the New Madrid earthquake that is soon upon us. http://www.fema.gov/media/fact_sheets/nle2011_fs.shtm

    But thankfully they have supplies ready for any occasion. 140 million meals, blankets, and underwater body bags.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    I am the only person in the world that thinks e might need to re-evaluate our propensity to build EVERY SINGLE nuclear power plant on the planet within 50 miles of a major fault line, and about 75% of them are ALSO in flood plains or tsunami zones?

    It's almost like these insane locations for nuclear power plants were chosen on purpose...

    Just sayin'...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Sometimes you just can't win. Standard electricity is vulnerable to hackers, wind power kills poor helpless birds, solar power isn't reliable, oil is bad for the enviroment, coal is dangerous to obtain, and nuclear power will kill you. What can we do?
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  4. #4
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    You can't guarantee any natural disaster will ever happen to any nuclear plant, or any plain ol' power plant period, regardless of where you build it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by thebigsd View Post
    Sometimes you just can't win. Standard electricity is vulnerable to hackers
    Don't buy into that hype. "The internet" doesn't work like that.

    Being able to monitor things over the internet is an ENTIRELY different animal than having control over it. The controls don't exist like that.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    I thought you were going to discuss the 2008 election results.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  7. #7
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241
    I say Obama being elected is the worst disaster in U.S. History.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by jbone View Post
    I say Obama being elected is the worst disaster in U.S. History.
    Ha! He's bad but it's not even close!

    Woodrow Wilson?
    Franklin Roosevelt?
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  9. #9
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    I may be a tad prejudiced, but I'd say A. Lincoln.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by SFCRetired View Post
    I may be a tad prejudiced, but I'd say A. Lincoln.
    You never give up, Johnny Reb...

    lbj--the blood of 57,000 American boys on his hands;
    peanut farmer--incompetent wuss;
    obooba--change we can go down the toilet with;
    slick willy klinton--draft dodger in chief;
    fdr--father of marxism in the US.

    Having served in Vietnam, my perspective is a bit different.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  11. #11
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    You never give up, Johnny Reb...

    lbj--the blood of 57,000 American boys on his hands;
    peanut farmer--incompetent wuss;
    obooba--change we can go down the toilet with;
    slick willy klinton--draft dodger in chief;
    fdr--father of marxism in the US.

    Having served in Vietnam, my perspective is a bit different.
    Of course not. I'm still trying to live down the one great grandfather who served in the 44th Indiana Volunteer Infantry.

    On LBJ, part of that blood must rest on the hands of John Kennedy. He was advised by a well-respected military man and scholar to leave Vietnam alone. He didn't listen.
    The peanut farmer surprised me. I would have thought a naval officer would have been far more competent; especially one chosen by Hyman Rickover.

    Save yore Confederate money, boys! The South will rise again!!

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    You never give up, Johnny Reb...

    lbj--the blood of 57,000 American boys on his hands;
    peanut farmer--incompetent wuss;
    obooba--change we can go down the toilet with;
    slick willy klinton--draft dodger in chief;
    fdr--father of marxism in the US.

    Having served in Vietnam, my perspective is a bit different.
    I'd say Wilson was what enabled Marxism to take root here. Both he and FDR were disasters though.

    On Vietnam, IMO killing commies was a noble endeavor. Your efforts to try and stop the spread of marxism in SE Asia was commendable service, and I still resent the hell out of the hippie scum who disparaged you men for doing your duty. Since you actually did the service I suppose it's up to you to decide the validity of the effort, but I salute you Sir. Welcome home.
    Last edited by PrayingForWar; 07-07-2011 at 05:45 PM.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  13. #13
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Thank you. And I agree Wilson took the first steps, but fdr and the commies in his cabinet pushed us hard. lbj then picked up the effort.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  14. #14
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    I also am a Vietnam Vet, I was a supporter at the time I was in Vietnam, but as I age, I realize, just as with our more current conflicts, we really have no business wasting our countries resources so we could to force our opinion on another country's government.

    It has never gone well, and is the fundimental reason for the "terrorist" problem and cr$% we are going through now.

    WW and FDR top my list of bad. Other's are bad, they were the worst. Remember too FDR brought us the NFA 34.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    I think that just about everything that happened in Washington DC in 1913 was one of the biggest disasters in US history...

    The establishment of the federal income tax through the 16th Amendment

    The beginning of the Federal overreaching on "interstate commerce" by application of the Commerce Clause to the regulation of hunting of migratory birds was begun.

    The 17th Amendment, putting the election of Senators in the hands of the People (rather than the State Legislatures) was enacted.

    The Rockefeller Foundation was chartered.

    The Federal Reserve was established.

    Richard Nixon, William Casey, Richard Helms, Gerald Ford, and W. Mark Felt were born.

    1913 was, by most historical yardsticks, the "beginning of the end" for the Republic...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    You never give up, Johnny Reb...

    lbj--the blood of 57,000 American boys on his hands
    Not even a tenth of Lincoln's total: 625,000 Americans dead in four years.

  17. #17
    Regular Member papa bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    mayberry, nc
    Posts
    2,258
    i will agree with the presidents listed but lets not give the republicans a break. Teddy Roosevelt was probably the first progressive

    here is an article by John Silveira that i like
    http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/silveira49.html

    and here are some other article by him
    http://www.backwoodshome.com/sview.html
    Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

    "guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
    - unknown

    i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by papa bear View Post
    i will agree with the presidents listed but lets not give the republicans a break. Teddy Roosevelt was probably the first progressive

    here is an article by John Silveira that i like
    http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/silveira49.html

    and here are some other article by him
    http://www.backwoodshome.com/sview.html
    +1

    I always enjoyed his articles, and I wish I still subscribed to BWH. Maybe I should renew again.

    Teddy was a progressive ******, for whatever good he did he gave the gov't too much power. Had it not been for him and his stupid "Bull Moose" party splitting the vote, we never would have had a Wilson. Just like we wouldn't have had a Klinton if not for Perot. Third parties haven't done $#!t for anyone. Look at the UK if you want to see how bad it would be here if we didn't have a "right or wrong" system, because that "grey area" is far too full of idiots.

    Most of us know democraps are wrong. There's no point in splitting us further.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  19. #19
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Not even a tenth of Lincoln's total: 625,000 Americans dead in four years.
    At least there was a cause--on both sides, in that bloodbath. There wasn't one supported by Washington in 'Nam. We won all of the battles; they lost the war, and I put Nixon on the ledger for that as well. "Peace with honor" my ass.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  20. #20
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Back to the OP...

    The REAL story behind most of these over-capacity midwestern dams isn't that they are sitting at over their designed capacity now, after weeks of heavy rains.

    The REAL story is that they KNEW they had a record snowfall last winter. They had forecasts for above-average rainfall weeks ahead of time this summer. And yet they STILL let these dams sit at near-capacity all spring, rather letting some of the spring runoff water through the dams in a controlled manner, to lower the water levels, and increase their capacity for the impending late-spring and early-summer snow runoff and rains.

    Rather than drop the retained water levels to give them the capacity to hold excess rain and snow runoff and control flooding (like they were DESIGNED to do), these dams were allowed to be essentially "topped off" long BEFORE the heavy runoff season started, pretty much GUARANTEEING that they would actually CAUSE flooding--perhaps catastrophic floods if these dams fail...

    But to even suggest that anyone in the government might be considering CAUSING a disaster--to clear the land, kill and displace tens of thousands of people, and enable an even further expansion of "emergency powers"--would be a "conspiracy theory", so I won't go there...

    Just sayin'...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 07-09-2011 at 11:41 AM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  21. #21
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    I must say, obama is absolutely turning out to be one of the worst presidents with no respect for our constitution. First we have cash for clunkers, federal govt. Spending tax payer dollars to by automobiles for outrageous prices, not to mention most of these vehicles were setting in tall weeds for years until the owners heard they could get 100 times what they were worth. Then we have big business bail-out. Once again they spend our hard earned money to bail out the auto industry, and assured us the money would be recovered!?!? Then we say well we should bail out these large financial institutions as well, because they deserve our tax dollars, after all they gotta give their ceo's million dollar blue collar tax bonuses, and buy new corporate jets. Then Obama says screw the constitution, this isn't the great country most Americans believe it is, and the document that supports it isn't worth the ink it was written with and forces his beliefs on us, then says if you don't buy what I tell you to, then I'll fine you for it, just like the mob boss he is. (health care). We have a debt ceiling of 14.6 trillion dollars and he wants it raised???!!!! He says if it isn't raised that our country will be back in the ice age? Whats gonna happen if we raise the amount of debt our country can have? Our children are gonna be left with a country with no funds to sustain itself then we will certainly be back in the old days not to mention at war with all the countries we owe, but can't afford to pay!!! Un-employment was between 5-6 percent when he took office, now it almost double that at 9.6. And was in double digits for awhile, and almost there again. And who does he blame? Republicans of course, u don't hear him placing it where it belongs, because that wouldn't get him re elected if he took it like a man and said I was wrong. This is y he is one of the worst presidents of our time and ever.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    I am the only person in the world that thinks e might need to re-evaluate our propensity to build EVERY SINGLE nuclear power plant on the planet within 50 miles of a major fault line, and about 75% of them are ALSO in flood plains or tsunami zones?

    It's almost like these insane locations for nuclear power plants were chosen on purpose...

    Just sayin'...
    Something about proximity to large bodies of water for cooling... or something.
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    I've had three different nuclear engineers (one who worked for NIST) tell me strictly "off the record", that many nuclear engineers actually believe that they "work better" when placed on or near fault lines. They say the ones that are placed in locations remote from fault lines (mostly at research universities) are nowhere near as efficient. They believe it has something to do with the "fluxes in the earth's electromagnetic fields"...

    In other words, nuclear engineers believe that ley lines make nuclear reactors more efficient.

    But they will never say that "on the record"...

    BTW, the New Madrid Fault Line is only near a river--not an ocean--and it has nearly 30% of the commercial nuclear reactors in the US along it's path, so the "proximity to large bodies of water" idea doesn't really pan out.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  24. #24
    Regular Member riverrat10k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    on a rock in the james river
    Posts
    1,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    Back to the OP...

    The REAL story behind most of these over-capacity midwestern dams isn't that they are sitting at over their designed capacity now, after weeks of heavy rains.

    The REAL story is that they KNEW they had a record snowfall last winter. They had forecasts for above-average rainfall weeks ahead of time this summer. And yet they STILL let these dams sit at near-capacity all spring, rather letting some of the spring runoff water through the dams in a controlled manner, to lower the water levels, and increase their capacity for the impending late-spring and early-summer snow runoff and rains.

    Rather than drop the retained water levels to give them the capacity to hold excess rain and snow runoff and control flooding (like they were DESIGNED to do), these dames were allowed to be essentially "topped off" long BEFORE the heavy runoff season started, pretty much GUARANTEEING that they would actually CAUSE flooding--perhaps catastrophic floods if these dams fail...

    But to even suggest that anyone in the government might be considering CAUSING a disaster--to clear the land, kill and displace tens of thousands of people, and enable an even further expansion of "emergency powers"--would be a "conspiracy theory", so I won't go there...

    Just sayin'...

    Cite for any of this? I guess I could go the USGS water site and check the levels for the last few months. If they have been running high for months, it would discredit your statement. Other than the "creasting a disaster" scenario, was there some other justification for holding lake/river levels high?
    Last edited by riverrat10k; 07-10-2011 at 02:10 PM.

  25. #25
    Regular Member riverrat10k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    on a rock in the james river
    Posts
    1,453

    Dreamer, just an unscientific spot-check...

    From the USGS website:

    http://waterdata.usgs.gov/mt/nwis/uv...te_no=06132000

    Would take a little more research to determine an intentional hold-back.

    Interestingly, this page does not show the same data I can get on my local river. My graph has a "median daily dishcharge" data point allowing you to compare the days discharge as a deviation from a historical average. Useful for me, sometimes.

    If Dreamer is correct, a similar graph for this gauging station would possibly show below average discharges earlier in the year, in his opinion done on purpose. Wasn't it cold this year? How does ice-up affect the realeases from this dam?

    Looking at the other guages in the upper midwest and west, it looks like the rivers have been running above average or high since ice-out.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •