Hurricane Sandy

[tw]

Originally Posted by orthodoc

There was somewhat more damage from Sandy than you're making out.

NYC was a different situation. A fire in Breezy Point burned at least 80 homes. The flooding in NYC (that has always been predicted) finally occurred. Remember, NYC is one of five cities listed (with New Orleans) at greatest risk. And NYC is about 100 miles north of those pictures. 100 miles where Sandy made landfall. NYC has long been that vunerable.

The storm was serious (as I said). Which means it should have been reported for five minutes each hour. Instead they canceled all TV to report the 'end of the world'. And rarely ever mentioned a fire in Breezy Point. Or flooding of PATH, subway, or regional rail tunnels in NYC. One story greater than all Philly area damage was Breezy Point. In Philly, even network news was preempted. That Breezy Point fire remained almost unreported in Philly until the next day. While the local gossip preached Philly disasters constantly for 24 hours.

Where did the hurricane eye go? North side of Wilmington Delaware. Did the local gossip mention that? Where is massive damage in Wilmington? Nothing to report.

xoxoxoBruce - your pictures of Tuckerton, et al (why do I know those towns) forget to mention those areas flood routinely. Those homes are built on stilts or above ground. Did the epitaph forget to mention that? They had to search far and wide for rare flooding. Only town that had unusually high flooding was Ocean City. So OC had sand on the streets.

View reporters today awaiting Pres Obama and Gov Christie in Brigantine. Another barrier island town adjacent to Atlantic City and near Ocean City. No homes damaged. No down wires. No debris or sand in streets. Most towns look like that. Was New Orleans damage that limited? So why does Philly news report like it was another New Orleans?

Sandy was barely a category one hurricane. Katrina was category five. Katrina was a news story. Sandy was only another Nor'ester storm. But local gossip hyped it like it was Katrina.

Philly gossip constantly reported destruction of Atlantic City's famous boardwalk. They forgot to mention is was a completely different and obsolete boardwalk. Scheduled for removal or replacement. And located where few people visit. But the local gossip forgot to mention that. The famous Atlantic City boardwalk: untouched.

That decaying boardwalk was on a NE beach where beaches suffer heavy erosion. Of course that decaying boardwalk washed away. Saving the city construction money. Why is that the end of the world?

View that boardwalk from another perspective. Nearby buildings undamaged (other than water on the first floor). Even electric wires remain intact. Where is this massive damage? View the following pictures. Oh. News forgot to show most everything behind that obsolete boardwalk was undamaged.

[tw]

Across Townsends Inlet is Sea Isle. In heavy rains, this town tends to flood more often. Due to lower ground levels. This town was also in the eye of Sandy. A news van takes a tour. View the massive damage - if you can find it.
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/video?id=8868873

Or fly in a helicopter that tours the south end of Sea Isle. See a disaster - of floating docks broken free. Eventually the flight moves north into Strathmere. Strathmere is one of the first towns to flood in any serious storm. So narrow that only one line of homes separate the ocean from the bay. Again, good luck finding massive damage.
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/video?id=8868229

The helicopter tour ends just at the bridge into Ocean City. Another town 'desvestated' by Sandy. But typically does not suffer damage like narrow and exposed Strathmere.

[tw]

Next town north is Ocean City. A town especially called devestated by local gossip. View unedited footage. Look hard for damaged buildings directly on the beach. About halfway is Ocean City's boardwalk and even a building built out to the ocean. Again, where is all this damage? Not even one board on the walk is missing.

Where some street sewers exist, I see piles of sand sticking out of water. Apparently some streets in the northern half cannot drain. A majority of street remain clear despite edited reports that only show streets covered in sand. Hypsters in a news department editted all that out. Where is damage to justify 24 consecutive hours of 'disaster reports'? Some streets still have puddles? A disaster? Ever wonder why sociology major makes a better news reporters? They learn how to hype rather than report logically and with perspective.

This video ends at a bridge that connects Ocean City to another barrier island that includes Atlantic City. Still looking for all this devastation.
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/video?id=8868224

[tw]

Previous pictures showed Ocean Ave feeding a bridge to Sea Isle. I would launch a kayak from a large beach behind that seawall. This chopper shows the same road and wall from the ocean side. Sea Isle to the right. Note a tiny beach that once extended well out from the seawall. A new rock wall extends leftward. Video follows that wall out towards the Atlantic.

Numerous MacMansions were pushed in between existing houses and the ocean. With so many MacMansions, the 'powers that be' decided to spend NJ taxpayer money on a large, expensive rock seawall to protect those MacMansions. After all, the rich need that protection. So a beach that once extended down to the bottom of the screen no longer exists. Ocean waves now crash directly on that seawall. And still Sandy could not demolish even one house - despite devestating reports from the local gossip.

Anyone familiar with Avalon's history will remember the Avalon Hotel. Home of the Bongo Room and Grease Band. This video ends where that legendary building once stood.
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/video?id=8866824

[xoxoxoBruce]

Where did I say "massive damage"? So you've got a bone to pick with the media, cool. I agree they were over the top. But that doesn't mean a lot of people didn't get their shit fucked up. They did, no place to live, and many lost their wheels too. So don't dismiss them as media hype.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

and many lost their wheels too. So don't dismiss them as media hype.

Could a Governor and Weather Service not make the obvious any more obvious? On a barrier island, you either evacuate. Or expect to lose the car. Many lost cars because they stupidly stayed. So, yes, that is not just media hype. That is also an ignorant resident.

A few days later, go home. No damage. It was just another inconvenient storm. Reality - few lost their home. Enough to spend a full 45 seconds in a news report.

Where is that New Orleans, Japan, or Aesch type damage? Mythical. Be critical of news reports - the local gossip - devoid of any useful or valid perspective.

It's a barrier island. It has and it will periodically flood. That is not a disaster. And not worth 24 hours of continuous news reports. Sandy was only an inconvenient storm. Expected inconvenience made irrelevant by proper preparation.

So maybe the unreported news should have detailed so many who ignored the Governor and did no proper preparation. No. That would not create hype and increase ratings.

[richlevy]

Really?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/83105.html

FEMA Director Craig Fugate had a blunt response on Wednesay to his Bush-era predecessor who criticized President Barack Obama’s early preparation for Hurricane Sandy relief efforts.
“It’s better to be fast than to be late,” Fugate said on NPR’s “Morning Edition.”

“In the context of the election, I simply said he should have waited,” Brown said. “The storm was still forming, people were debating whether it was going to be as bad as expected, or not, and I noted that the president should have let the governors and mayors deal with the storm until it got closer to hitting the coastal areas along the Washington, D.C.-New York City corridor.”

Way to go Brownie! Thanks for sticking your head up and reminding all of use of your astounding success and the stellar qualifications that got you appointed to the job.

Fugate worked under Jeb Bush as is considered to be a) non-partisan and b) one of the best disaster guys out there. In Florida he handled many hurricanes, which is what brought him to the attention of Obama.

I cannot freaking believe Brown had the balls to second guess this.

TW, Hoboken NJ is not a barrier island. Neither is NYC. If you want to debate whether some serious effort should be made to shore up defenses against natural disasters instead of being reactive, then I agree. I would not downplay something that has had this much impact in NYC and made so many houses in NJ unlivable.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by tw

Could a Governor and Weather Service not make the obvious any more obvious? On a barrier island, you either evacuate. Or expect to lose the car. Many lost cars because they stupidly stayed. So, yes, that is not just media hype. That is also an ignorant resident.

There was a hell of a lot of people affected that weren't on barrier islands, both with flooding and car loss.

A few days later, go home. No damage. It was just another inconvenient storm. Reality - few lost their home. Enough to spend a full 45 seconds in a news report.

No damage? You have obviously never suffered the aftermath of water/sewage flowing through your house. Although the house looks intact, the damage is extensive and expensive, making the house uninhabitable until it's cleaned/repaired.

Another tw rant about the TV media coverage, which nobody is denying.

[orthodoc]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

There was a hell of a lot of people affected that weren't on barrier islands, both with flooding and car loss.

No damage? You have obviously never suffered the aftermath of water/sewage flowing through your house. Although the house looks intact, the damage is extensive and expensive, making the house uninhabitable until it's cleaned/repaired.

Thanks for this combination of fact, opinion, and emotion, Bruce. Amazing how the three make for an extremely effective post.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

No damage? You have obviously never suffered the aftermath of water/sewage flowing through your house.

Where are all those houses so low as to have sewage backing up inside? They are on stilts. No sewage or flood waters inside a house - except where built defectively. But again, to repeat the point. If this lesser storm caused that damage, then what would one do when an actual serious storm occurs?

So every car on every street was destroyed by falling trees? Nonsense. Isolated cars crushed by trees is not even a news event. Routine loss that many suffer in a storm. While most others do not. I even had a cement truck take out one. Three fire trucks, electric trucks, cable trucks, three police cars, etc were all on the scene. It was a traffic jam. Why not reported by the local gossip? Cars destroyed by falling trees: just another car crash. Not even a news story.

Household destruction (ie sewage in the building) begs the obvious question. What were you going to do when a really serious storm approaches? That (and not the hype) is a news story not reported by local gossip.

Other more responsible news sources are reporting what may actually become a major problem. Not trivial damage on the Jersey coast. Extreme damage to NYC's electrical infastructure. Key details include two major substations at 14th Street and 23?rd Street. A news story about something that was a concern even before New Orleans. Things that NYC's 'powers that be' need 20+ years to address. Well apparently they will now get more attention. Because a Nor'easter located over 100 miles away demonstrated why technical people were so accurately concerned. Damage, in part, because the 'powers that be' did not sufficiently address this problem. A news story unreported by local gossip's 24 hours of 'end of the world' reporting.

Crushed cars pictures are relevant to those who want to be emotional - ie orthodoc who took the bait. Even to homeowners, it is only a routine event in life. Sewage inside a house is the warning for homeowners who need to get prepared for an actual hurricane. Proper perspective also means viewing what may become a real news story. Electrical problems in NYC and in Northern NJ. Far from South Jersey where the 'end of the world' was being hyped. Over 100 miles from Sandy's eye.

[orthodoc]

Originally Posted by tw

The storm was serious (as I said). Which means it should have been reported for five minutes each hour. Instead they canceled all TV to report the 'end of the world'.

Sandy was barely a category one hurricane. Katrina was category five. Katrina was a news story. Sandy was only another Nor'ester storm. But local gossip hyped it like it was Katrina.

Clearly you're enraged about the extensive media coverage of Sandy. Does the routine extensive coverage of even less newsworthy topics get you similarly riled? Do you have no other source of news than the networks?

You could've just turned off the 'end of the world' reports you found so irritating. Live and let live.

[tw]

Originally Posted by richlevy

TW, Hoboken NJ is not a barrier island. Neither is NYC.

Flooded areas were *clearly* defined in evacuation orders along with barrier islands. Large areas in NYC, et al (including Breezy Point, Lower Manhattan, Red Hook, Staten Island, and NJ waterfront - Hoboken) had orders to evacuate. Because those areas would flood just like barrier islands.

Anyone who did not leave should have expected to lose their car. Anyone who suffered flooding damage should be reconstructing with expectactions of future floods. This was a trivial storm; not a serious hurricane. As demonstrated by so little actual damage. And is a lesson about future threats.

24 constant hours of news hyped victims distressed or crying because they were trapped and flooded. Press forgot to mention: those people ignored orders to evacuate. Or drove through water that was half way up their tires. Logical is to criticize them for intentionally making themselves a victim. Logical is to criticize local gossip reporters for being so unprofessional.

Extremely blunt and justified criticism is directed at the most emotional (ie local gossip news reporters) who failed to be logical. They failed to put everything into perspective. All local stations were more concerned with ratings rather than being news reporters. They even preempted logical news sources to feed the emotional and illogical among us. Defining them as unprofessional is being kind.

[tw]

Originally Posted by orthodoc

You could've just turned off the 'end of the world' reports you found so irritating.

First read what was posted. They even preempted the network news to hype 'end of the world'. Even Fukishima, a real news story, did not get this attention. Explains why so many in the Cellar also denied the Fukushima meltdown. Unprofessional local gossip reporting.

Please stop doing what emotion adolescents do. Posts were blunt, logical, and directed at a problem. With plenty of supporting facts and examples. Including their own video showing almost no damage.

An adult does not invent emotion when blunt facts are the topic. Please stop doing so. Defined were unprofessional reporters. Even their uneditted 'local gossip' video shows a completely different reality. Massive damage, invented by emotional reporters to target an orthodoc, did not exist.

I am criticizing you with the same unemotional and blunt logic that also criticized the local gossip. Expecting you to reply emotionally. Your choice. Read this logically. Or respond like an emotional adolescent. It is intentionally worded to test your ability to remain logical and on topic.

Either stick to the facts. Reply about an unprofessional local gossip. Reply about the massive damage that did not exist. Or post more of your own emotions. Your choice. Worded to make it easier for you to demonstrate emotion. Your choice.

richlevy's post on Brownie's comments are an example of hard logic that targets the topic. He is posting relevant facts.