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.
Yeah, OKC is definitely exposed to a lot of potential natural disasters but I just don't think any one of them has the capability of truly decimating the entire city, even an F5 tornado.
An F1 Sooner can wipe that trailer park from the map in a second. F2, F3, and the whole state could go *poof*. In other news, earthquake warnings in Oklahoma.... A prolonged dust bowl can kill a city while most hurricane ravaged cities in modern times have bounced back.
after checking my charts and graphs, I can say with 1000% accuracy that the US City in the bulls-eye of the next monumental disaster (Boll Weevil Plague) is Teaneck, New Jersey...consider yourselves duly warned.
You must not have read the whole thread. I mention fire in my first post:
"Oklahoma City: tornado alley, prairie fires, drought, dust bowl, softball sized hail, Sooners. Like fellow trailer parks, the place is a disaster magnet."
When taking all the original criteria from first post into consideration, Oklahoma City is the answer.
No, I saw your reply. I wasn't really referring to your comment.
I'm just surprised more people don't see dangers other than Hurricanes .
and,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Lance
"I think...the explosive potential of those tanks... Lightning will strike one of them every now and then and they have some explosive potential... Those tanks have been there for years and... hundreds... of lightning strikes, I think... they're ... explosive potential will be ...more concerned with an environmental impact...
... Get treatment soon its not too late.
Yes, Houston with those lightning strikes and those Oil and Gas things all over the place
are a risk. YOu took the words right out of my mouth, Mr Jack.
That's why I voted Houston as a risk.
I'm glad I live here, where it's SAFE. !
Which doctor do you recommend, and have they cured you yet ?
Two large US cities have been destroyed in our history. San Francisco in 1906, and New Orleans in 2005. Both cities were rebuilt in the same hazard zones, so both are likely to face the same fate again. Other towns with the sword of damaclese hanging over them would be LA, and Seattle. Earthquakes and tsunamis are not the friend of the west coast.
I vote NYC because I feel that neither the people or the infrastructure is ready for another 'Sandy.'
Other considerations:
San Francisco: ticking time bomb for a major earthquake. Ditto LA, but IIRC San Francisco is more at risk.
Chicago & Dallas: high risk of a downtown tornado occurring.
Miami: high risk of another 'Andrew' happening, but is likely more prepared than it ever was before.
In this thread some weirdo thinks a decade and a half is a significant measurement of time in regards to the topic.
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.
