Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I feel bad about that erosion though, there any talk about maybe a jetty or something to slow it ?
Indeed, there has been a huge, and multi-pointed, effort over the past couple decades.
Several different sorts of barriers have been put into place, and the wind driven waves have swept over and around all of them.
Two major multi-millions of dollar projects have been considered. One was to barge rocks from a quarry location a couple hundred miles away, an build a permanent jetty. That would have cost something like $35 million dollars, but it would probably have been a permanent solution.
The second project, which was funded at something like $20 million (I'm citing numbers from memory of what I heard several years ago, and am probably off by several millions), was to purchase an ocean going dredge, which could be used for other projects in other villages too, and then use it to build up the beach areas in front of locations that were eroding.
So the dredge was designed and built, and was a genuine engineering work of art. The crew was half local and half made up of operators from other places with experience. Those guys all said this dredge was the neatest thing since sliced bread. And they worked it for a year over at Wainwright I think (might have been Point Lay), and then brought it to Barrow and set it up and began work. They started just off shore of the location we've been discussing.
In July of the second year at Barrow, just after they got it into operation, we have a freak summer wind storm that was not predicted, and they found themselves in big trouble with 70+ MPH winds blowing. The little tender boat that was used to keep floating ice away from the barge headed for Point Barrow and Elson Lagoon (and it took them several hours to make it, long enough that there was real concern that they had been sunk). The dredge, which was designed to be able to pull up and move very quickly to avoid ice, was unable to make headway against the wind. They dropped all anchors, but were blown onto the shore directly between Barrow and Browerville. The boat is irrepairably damaged when the waves washed over the stern, filled the engine room with water, and essentially warped the frame as it sank into the sand on the beach.
End of project. And it has never been restarted. However, so far at least the erosion at the point we've been talking about has totally ceased.
Now they are planning on moving the Top of The World Hotel, and I assume will be less concerned about erosion at that point. Every wind storm of any size in the summer (usually only 50-60 mph winds) has washed out the road that can be seen on the webcam. They rebuild maybe a bit over a quarter of a mile of beach front after those storms. But still, before the middle 1990's there were several houses from the area in the view of that webcam which were washed into the ocean literally as people ran out the back door to escape.
edit: Here's a document you'll really enjoy looking at! It has pictures of the dredge hard aground, bulldozers in the ocean surf, etc etc. This is a document by Ann Jensen who is the Chief Scientist for Uqpeagvik Inupiat Corporation (UIC).
Floyd, it is Amazing how much your photos look like a good discription of history when you stand in the proper context to whatever it was you were trying to prove..
Not only does your "New" pictures make for a very interesting view of the history, but one of the changing shoreline! So hats off to both your photos and that of stiffneck for taking the first one!
AND your welcome for my directions on where to stand for the proper perspective on you latest shots, not bad for a guy that just stops by a couple times a year!
Floyd, it is Amazing how much your photos look like a good discription of history when you stand in the proper context to whatever it was you were trying to prove..
Not only does your "New" pictures make for a very interesting view of the history, but one of the changing shoreline! So hats off to both your photos and that of stiffneck for taking the first one!
Now, if only the two of you had been honest about it all to start with... we could have had a pleasant discussion, without all the hatefulness you spouted.
Quote:
AND your welcome for my directions on where to stand for the proper perspective on you latest shots, not bad for a guy that just stops by a couple times a year!
Except that you didn't give the right instructions. Don't you understand that the distance I moved from image #2 to take image #3 was only about 20-30 feet? (And the error on #3 is that I went about 5-10 feet too far.) It didn't make one iota of difference as to what it actually showed! The first two images showed everything necessary to make the point for anyone with half a thimble of brain cells.
The only distinction was that the original images were shot so that the Blue House was clearly visible to identify the general area, while the 3rd image did not require that, and was shot to allow proof that it was indeed showing exactly the same place as Stiffy's picture (and that it wasn't "zoomed in" or a block away either one). You of course were saying it was not even the same place was from the southeast, etc etc etc. All total malarkey and obfuscation posted just to avoid reality.
Here was one of your more absurd statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starlite
But unless someone took the house in question and rotated it clockwise about 20 degrees (which I doubt), you were off a couple of hundred feet to the "Northern" direction from where the photo taken twenty years ago was at, which of course distorts your claim.
But hey, supprise, supprise... Who would notice little details like that?
Little details, like the fact that you weren't even close... Never mind the fact that even if I had walked out on the ocean ice 200 feet from the place where Stiffy took his picture it still would have shown the fact that the area has eroded, that new building exist, and that the old ones are entirely gone, including the ground they were sitting on. The fact is that I did not claim that image was from exactly the same place, and pointed out in my original post that it was from a slightly (and not anything like 20 degrees) different angle for a specific purpose. You didn't notice a danged thing! All you did was try to exaggerate what I'd said into something you thought would make it less credible than it is! You summarized your statements as "which of course distorts your claim", yet when we look at the pictures involved it is exceedingly clear that there never was any distortion, except in your mind!
And we know darned well that you didn't say a word of that because you thought it was true, you just figured you'd call me a liar and assumed, as you usually do, that there's no way to prove otherwise.
The trouble with making up stories that aren't true is that you can't possibly make them remain "true" after someone with better logic skills than you provides genuinely accurate evidence.
Your claims about when Barrow people use boats, and why, fit that. Your claims about currents due to a six inch tide fit that. Virtually everything you ever discuss about the North Slope except for your own little boat (where I suspect it is actually the same poppycock, but won't argue it because I simply have no way to tell) is filled with imaginative, and inaccurate, hokum.
Your points were all sort of, well, you know... flushed.
I can't remember which I liked best (and I might be remembering some of Starlite's silliness, because he
made claims about direction too, and that I was across the road or something equally ridiculous.)
You claimed it was taken from just about every direction there is except pointing southwest. Wasn't it you that said I needed a wider angle lens (notice that I'm using a significantly wider angle lens that you did).
And I'm still betting that the actual reason you took the picture was because that is where the bodies were recovered. The trash of course is the remains of buildings that collapsed due to erosion or were removed prior to falling in. That's the sort of thing that happens everywhere... for example I seem to recall seeing one of the most expensive areas around Los Angeles with similar trash as a result of mudslides destroying multi-million dollar mansions.
The point of course is that you are not a credible source of information about Barrow.
Thanks for proving me right again!! Your just awesome!!
Well I took a couple more pictures to get a better angle on just how far off base some folks can be (and to show just how confused and dishonest they get about it too).
Confused about location yes, dishonest no. Them's fighting words Floyd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd_Davidson
So much for AQHA's observations that nothing has changed.
Don't twist my words Floyd. That comment was about the fact that Barrow is still the junk yard of the North, at that point in the thread we were not even discussing erosion.
The amount of effort you have put into this thread is impressive, but if you will look on the other side of the road from the blue house, or over by Arctic Grocery or any number of places around town you'll see that we have a trash filled village. Nothing has changed.
Now, if only the two of you had been honest about it all to start with... we could have had a pleasant discussion, without all the hatefulness you spouted.
Except that you didn't give the right instructions. Don't you understand that the distance I moved from image #2 to take image #3 was only about 20-30 feet? (And the error on #3 is that I went about 5-10 feet too far.) It didn't make one iota of difference as to what it actually showed! The first two images showed everything necessary to make the point for anyone with half a thimble of brain cells.
.
Floyd, you were a few hundred feet out towards the beach when you took the first "Wrong" photo, not twenty to thirty feet... You are really a non class act....
Floyd, you were a few hundred feet out towards the beach when you took the first "Wrong" photo, not twenty to thirty feet... You are really a non class act....
You are, as usual, very misguided.
First, as noted, either of those images makes the required point that entire buildings are gone, almost everything there is new, and the bank has eroded significantly. Hence the initial image was the "Right" image. The only thing wrong is how clueless your comments are.
Both images were taken from the little access road going to the back of Inupiat Cleaners. I posted a map, you really should have looked at it. The location doesn't allow for any "few hundred" feet! You are again just making up bull s h i t that has no valid point, is totally illogical as a non-sequitur, and is incorrect anyway.
Here's the silly comment you made to start with:
Besides the angle that Floyd took it at is from the Beach from the East, the other photo taken twenty years ago from what appears the next street back headed South and still there and was taken from a Southeastern position, not all washed away into the ocean as claimed.
What part of that is correct??? You are now quibbling about a few degrees, yet in that statement you claimed I took the image from the "East" (roughly a 45 degree error). And you claimed the Stiffy's picture was from a "Southeastern" direction, or roughly a 90 degree error. "I'm not sure what "the next street back" means, as there is no next street back within sight of that location. Obviously your statement that nothing was washed away into the ocean is wrong, as literally about half the land mass in Stiffy's image is now ocean beach.
You claim to be some kind of supersnoop to have noticed that the angles of the pictures are different, yet the fact is that in the article where the image was posted, directly under the image is this statement about angles:
I can't quite get the same angle because one building would block most of the identifying marks on the building in question, but it does show that same shed, even with a stack in the same place, and several other characteristics that clearly identify it as the same one
Clearly the point was to use the Blue House as a landmark to identify the area. Using the same angle as the old photograph is unnecessary, and obscures not just the landmarks that still exist, but doesn't show as much detail of the remaining shoreline and the new buildings that exist. The facts being contested were whether that area was the same today as it was 20+ years ago in the older photograph. AQHA lied about that, and I simply posted a current image to show that he was not being honest. (AQHA now admits he was confused and denies being dishonest, even though he still maintains that he walks past it every day... yeah, sure!)
You then lied about the current photograph, claiming to know Barrow well enough to tell it was photoshopped! Stiffnecked claimed I'd zoomed in, and was not taking a picture of the same place too. So we have the three stooges, all claiming to know Barrow extremely well, making up lies to distract from the fact that they just got hung out to dry.
You all then got skewered on the attempts to obfuscate! I simply moved a few feet over, to a position that allowed lining up a couple of objects to show exactly what the angle actually was (virtually the same) and did an overlay to show how wrong you were about what had changed and whether I was "zoomed in" to avoid the surroundings.
Now here you are again... saying I was out on the ocean ice to take that picture! Even after you've been presented with a map that shows the beach contour at the point it was taken! You are being dishonest about how much you've been in Barrow if you don't know the beach contour where that little creek runs right along the side of Inupiat Cleaners!
You just continue to step in excrement with these absurd argument about things that you've never seen and I'm looking at. Repeatedly!
Tell us again how the 6 inch tides here cause tremendous currents that affect the erosion and topology of the beach. Damned, that was a good one too! Tell us again how I copy everything I write, because it is too well written to be my work! Tell us again how one time you called everyone in town and asked about me and they said horrible things, but the next time you called nobody knew who I am! Tell us again about my pickup truck! Tell us again about how you rescue Barrow whalers on the ocean, how they can't use boats earlier in the season than you or later either.
Oh, yeah... tell us again that the Ahmaogak crew flag stands for whiskey. And that it is a violation of International law to use it.
Damned man, you post more funny stuff than almost everyone else put together. Rance is absolutely right about the humor that exists in every single thread you (and your two buddies) get into.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
