I wonder if they counted Ice Death & the impending Locust Plague

[3rdgensooner]

Where to Live to Avoid a Natural Disaster (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/05/01/weekinreview/01safe.html)


Weather disasters and quakes: who’s most at risk? The analysis below, by Sperling’s Best Places, a publisher of city rankings, is an attempt to assess a combination of those risks in 379 American metro areas. Risks for twisters and hurricanes (including storms from hurricane remnants) are based on historical data showing where storms occurred. Earthquake risks are based on United States Geological Survey assessments and take into account the relative infrequency of quakes, compared with weather events and floods. Additional hazards included in this analysis: flooding, drought, hail and other extreme weather.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/05/01/weekinreview/01safe/01safe-custom1.gif

[MsProudSooner]

Tulsa and OKC/Norman are equally screwed.

[Soonerfan88]

So why did they only highlight the metro areas on that first map? Should have made it just like the others, covering the entire region. You can't tell me that OKC and Tulsa are superdangerous red but the drive in between is fine. I can just see Bubba saying it's okay to live in Stroud because this map says it isn't dangerous.


And why is Dallas the most dangerous when they aren't on either the hurricane or earthquake risk map?

[DIB]

So why did they only highlight the metro areas on that first map? Should have made it just like the others, covering the entire region. You can't tell me that OKC and Tulsa are superdangerous red but the drive in between is fine. I can just see Bubba saying it's okay to live in Stroud because this map says it isn't dangerous.


And why is Dallas the most dangerous when they aren't on either the hurricane or earthquake risk map?

If you look at the map it says "Lots of almost everything but quakes: twisters, hurricane remnants, hail, wind, drought, floods."

[Jammin']

I thought, for whether related such, that a trailer house in Moore was teh mostest dangerous place on the norht america planet, no?

[dynersooner]

the only one of those that doesnt scare me in the least is the Hurricanes. i mean, you get WEEKS to prepare for those. uurffquakes and 'naders just up and land on ur arse...

[Penguin]

That poll is clearly slanted. The West Coast must deal with earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis, mudslides, rock-slides, avalanches, wildfires, and sasquatch stampedes.

I'll put up with an occasional thunderstorm any day.

[NormanPride]

No, Penguin. The fact that a tornado went through a corn field 200 miles from Tulsa means that Tulsa is a dangerous place that all should fear.

[sappstuf]

Austin is at number 7.... 5-7...

[Jammin']

That poll is clearly slanted. The West Coast must deal with earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis, mudslides, rock-slides, avalanches, wildfires, and sasquatch stampedes.

I'll put up with an occasional thunderstorm any day.

you forgot laker and dodger fans.

[cantwait48]

I always thought the west coast was gonna get flattened by a quake at some point, they say we are due for a big one

[3rdgensooner]

In the last couple of years, our state has had:

flooding
earthquakes
blizzard
wildfires
remnants of hurricanes
tornadoes
drought
softball size hail
90 mph winds


What have I left off?

[Jammin']

In the last couple of years, our state has had:

flooding
earthquakes
blizzard
wildfires
remnants of hurricanes
tornadoes
drought
softball size hail
90 mph winds


What have I left off?

stu

[Soonerfan88]

If you look at the map it says "Lots of almost everything but quakes: twisters, hurricane remnants, hail, wind, drought, floods."

And if you look at the actual maps they have below, Dallas isn't even considered risky for either hurricane or earthquake. By those maps, Memphis is riskier than Dallas.

[KantoSooner]

The listing covers only hurricane, tornado and earthquake. and then uses that to extrapolate generalized 'risk'. Tornadoes shouldn't even be on the list as they very rarely effect more than a very small area, compared to hurricanes or earthquakes.
To list Corvallis as low risk is a bit eye-brow raising considering that the city is ringed by volcanoes which, when they erupt, will send giant walls of water and debris roaring through town followed by pyroclastic flows that will entomb the city by baking the mud and bodies into a concrete-like caliche.
I think I'll remain in Okieland and replace a few shingles and retrieve my trashcan from the neighbor's backyard every couple of years.

[SoCaliSooner]

I'll take southern California. Sure we are due a quake but major one's in 1971 and 1994 revised building codes, but even 1994's Northridge quake damaged a small area. The fault lines here won't produce a tsunami of any significance and if it did, the elevation inclines put some neighborhoods 100 feet above sea level just a mile or two from the shore.

I'll take California simply because of the lack of crazy weather.