There's a link to send him an email on the page with his article. I hope you guys flood his inbox. I did. View attachment 8844 LSU!
Unfortunately this is an all too familiar theme throughout the country. As much as I hate Douche Bag Dodd, he is echoing what I hear in my travels from those outside LA. Dodd is only playing to the masses because he knows the prevailing public opinion is blowing in the same direction. If you want to relate it to football, its the same way much of the country considers USC co-champs in 03 because of their AP title. *shrugs*
Dude, you have no idea what you're talking about. Your whole point cruxes on the argument that New Orleans is prone to flooding. Correct. That's why we have one of the best pumping systems in the world, and why it took a hurricane to flood the city. How many hurricanes have ever flooded the city? Two. Betsy in 65 and Katrina in 05. Using the same reasoning, they should relocate the entire state of California to a place less prone to earthquakes. It doesn't matter that the whole state isn't necessarily hit by earthquakes every year, just that's it's possible. Or the entire midwest to a place less prone to tornados, since, after all, doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results is insanity. Please.
Let me preface this post by saying that I certainly disagree with this idiot. BUT, it would not be without precedent to "relocate" a city/town after a major destructive weather event. In 1993, after the great flooding that took place all along the Mississippi River in the midwest, many towns relocated away from the river. There are laws on the books that no structures can be built in those locations now. Bottom line, whether it happens again ever, or in 40 more years, or later this year, is something NONE of us can predict. The city is below sea level, and surrounded by water. It was predicted by many that it would happen, and it did. NOLA is very lucky that the storm A:weakened before landfall B:tracked east of the city Had Katrina made a direct impact on NOLA like it did in Buras/Venice and then MS, we would not even be having this discussion...it would be a moot point. If another storm anything like Katrina makes landfall that close or closer to the city anytime soon, it'll be history. Hopefully, we will be able to do something about the loss of wetlands, as well as figuring out a way to protect the city, which will be below sea level whether the wetlands are restored or not. If we can't do that, it won't matter if another storm ever hits NOLA. Eventually, it will become part of the Gulf of Mexico. Katrina may actually have a positive effect on NOLA in that regard...that it opened some eyes to a much bigger problem. It is not prudent to compare Andrew/Miami to Katrina/NOLA. First of all, Andrew was a wind event, not surge. Secondly, Andrew didn't hit Miami, it hit Homestead. If you think that's trivial, know that Andrew was a very small storm, physically speaking. Yes, it was strong, but not large like Katrina. Northern areas of Miami hardly felt any effects from Andrew, while homestead looked like a nuclear bomb had been detonated. Katrina's surge came from the physical size more than from the winds, as well as the fact that the area from about Mobile to NOLA is highly prone to huge surges. If Katrina had hit Miami with the same exact winds and physical size, the surge would've been about 10 feet, with a direct hit. The surge in Buras and MS was closer to 30 feet. I am a native New Orleanian, and I do a lot of research on the subject of tropical weather, and weather in general for that matter. I just thought I'd add my two cents. Like I said, I don't agree with this idiot, but he isn't completely off base...he just hypes it up a bit much.:thumb:
Again, I have to point out that, as a native of NOLA, there have been MANY floods in the RECENT history (my lifetime) of NOLA. May 3, 1978, 2 in 1980, November 1989, May 7th, 1995, just to name a few. I agree though that the city has an unbelievable pumping system. I saw where 3 inches of rain flooded areas of the midwest this weekend, and have personally witnessed 3/4" of rain flood the interstate in AZ! Difference is, they naturally drain off quickly, while the water in NOLA has to be pumped out, and USUALLY is effectively.
It is along his lines of thought...he's talking about "Significant storms" and I'd say Andrew was. He's also talking about windows shattered.......winds cause that. And Katrina's size/strength was every bit related to winds.
Yes, Andrew was certainly signiificant. But again, it didn't directly hit Miami, and was so small that parts of Miami felt little impact. Ft. Lauderdale may have had a breezier than normal day, but that's about it. Wilma did more damage to Miami proper than Andrew. And yes, Katrina's winds shattered windows, but shattered windows aren't keeping anyone from rebuilding and moving back to NOLA...the flooding is. Honestly, and I say this as a NOLA native...I wouldn't move back now until I knew that improvements had been made to prevent that kind of damage from occurring with a Cat 3 storm, preferrably Cat 4 or 5. Bottom line, Katrina was a Cat 3 at landfall, and a Cat 2 in NOLA at best. Because of the positioning of the storm to the east of NOLA, the winds weren't as strong as they were in other areas, BUT, water was pushed in thru the MRGO, Rigolets and Chef Passes, and eventually, Lake Pontchartrain into the many canals along which levees failed. There are so many scenarios that could've been WORSE...that's what is so scary. I am currently working in NOLA, and commuting to my home in MS. It would make my life a lot simpler to move back down there, but from my point of view, it wouldn't be wise at the point. I do believe the city has a chance to come back, but they have a more serious problem than even storms and coastal erosion...NO LEADERSHIP! I have no confidence that the current local, state, OR federal leaders have any clue how to make this thing work. They come up with some great ideas, but then they cannot work together to make it happen. This is nothing new there, and one major reason why I no longer abide there. I am not a Katrina "refugee"...I got out in the mid 90's. I wish it were prudent to move back...I would do it if it were...but it's not.
I have to agree with you completely here, as you've obviously done a lot or research into this topic instead of willfully blinding yourself to the truth. Part of the problem why people outisde the state are skeptical is because the voters in Louisiana elected the same officials who spectactularly failed the first time around. Mayor Nagin should have been recalled, and instead he's rewarded with another term in office. Nobody has had the political courage to step forward and admit the difficult truths the state is faced with. Some areas of the city, like the French Quarters which are on higher ground, can stay entact. But, other areas, which are the most vulnerable to future floods and which were the hardest hit, should be rebuilt in another location. Instead, all we hear are these trite slogans such as 'Right to Return'. The problem with america today is that too many people think they're entitled to everything, that that is their right.
I will tell you what the true problem is. I work for a major company that could have helped NO with its flooding problems and levee rebuilding effort. After many meetings with the great politicians and present buisness leaders of louisiana our company president said that under no circumstances would we deal with Louisiana on any projects. He basically said that the attitude of the politicians was one of what are you going to do for me and how is this going to benefit me. This is being repeated throughout the buisness world outside of La. by other companies trying to work with N. O. Companys outside of La. are not going to play good ol boy politics. As long as this continues N.O. is in danger of loosing all that it has including the Sugar Bowl.
