Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Katrina was CAT 3 when it hit NO!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 08:05 PM
link   
I was looking through here and was reminded of a few weeks ago when I was watching the Weather Channel. They stated that Katrina was at a Cat 3--THREE!--when it hit Louisiana.

Those levees were able to withstand up to a Category 3.

I'm more convinced that those levees were blown.


It's really weird because I had my eye on Katrina last summer. First they said Cat 5 when it hit. Then 4. Now 3.

Not only that, but the levees, from what I heard, broke AFTER the storm had gone through, not during.

I wish I had some links. I'll see what I can hunt up.




posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Here is a Wikipedia article about it. It says Cat 3.

Note--I didn't try to edit my previous post because lots of times when you edit, the original post gets deleted somehow.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Amthyst, It might have been a cat 3 when it hit shore. But the real problem was the CAT 5 storm surge it brought with it. 30 feet! Now did they blow the levees still...Maybe! So much to gain... AAC



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 08:30 AM
link   
I was watching this storm, along with others on Fark.com (they have hurricane discussion threads).

Here are the Fark threads:

New Orleans: National Weather Service officially loses all bowel control

Where everyone roots for ParadeCam

All we were talking about was Katrina being a Cat 5. If it were a Category 3, the levees would have held.



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 08:37 AM
link   
I don't believe at all that they were blown. I find it idiotic to even pretend to think such nonsense. The levees were in bad shape and needed major revitalization. This was never done. Yes they were to be able to withstand cat 3 storms and a cat 3 hit. There was the first test and with bad levees. No conspiracy. Just bad engineering and bad upkeep with a huge storm.



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Cat 3 has to do with the wind speed. The wind speed decreased from a Cat 5 to 3 after landfall. What broke the Levies was the storm surge (50 feet of water) that was pushed onshore while it was still a Cat 5 before landfall. Therefore, the Category has to do with wind, but the water is what broke the Levies…



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by I See You
I don't believe at all that they were blown. I find it idiotic to even pretend to think such nonsense. The levees were in bad shape and needed major revitalization. This was never done. Yes they were to be able to withstand cat 3 storms and a cat 3 hit. There was the first test and with bad levees. No conspiracy. Just bad engineering and bad upkeep with a huge storm.


I thought the reason why people were speculating about that is because there IS a precendent. Blow one part of the levee to save the rest of the city. Sort of like digging a trench near a volcanoe to direct the lava away from houses. I don't necessary know whether or not they were blown or not, but considering the current political climate in the US I wouldn't be surprised if they did and covered it up as people would be screaming for blood no matter how justified they were in their decision. My opinion on the matter is that was gonna happen sooner or later NEways sooo. I think the big conspiracy is in the response AFTER the storm happened... Holding up Canadian Disater teams at Customs for 3 days :shk: Refusing Aid offers from other countries :sigh: Pridefull arrogance stood in the way of saving lives....

[edit on 18-2-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I've been watching the Katrina story on the National Geographic Channel lately and agree that many f'd up things happened. There are just too many people involved in a natural disaster such as Katrina. How many people do you think are in on this coverup? I just see bad planning, preparation and idiots who try and run these operations.



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 09:26 AM
link   
The windspeed at landfall is irrrelevant in terms of the collapse of the levees. They were designed to withstand the expected storm surge from a CAT 3 hurricane. Katrina, as has already been mentioned, produced a CAT 5 storm surge. Hence levees broke. Simple.

If you want a conspiracy, then maybe the authorites were claiming the levees would withstand a CAT3 and in reality they were only good for CAT2?



posted on Feb, 18 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
If you want a conspiracy, then maybe the authorites were claiming the levees would withstand a CAT3 and in reality they were only good for CAT2?




Well I've heard that Maintanance was piss poor. Any NO residents confirm this?



posted on Feb, 23 2006 @ 04:43 PM
link   
absolutely. I am from the area and it is an inside (not Really) joke in new orleans how absofreakinglutly corrupt the city and state are. everybody in the city has an angle on some kind of scam. i'm not talking race or rich or anything. i am talking everyone.
my mom and brother are on the other side of the river , no flooding no damage, and they were receiving a case of water a day from the national guard just because my mom made friends with them. they also received more MRE's than they could ever use. yet i heard of stories where there were no food to be had for ppl who really needed it

makes me sick

prairie tsunami



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 10:40 PM
link   

If it were a Category 3, the levees would have held.

*should*

that's the word you're looking for... *should*

as in "the levees should have held." ... but they only should have if they were properly maintained, if there wasn't a cat5 wall of water crushing them, if blah blah blah...

them breaking != they were blown up.


besides them breaking, what *other* evidence is there that they were blown up?



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 08:28 PM
link   
When Katrina's eye made landfall it was a cat 3. But the winds before that were over 200 mph. You cant tell me that 145 mph winds could completely destroy many houses and completely obliterate the mississippi gulf coast?

The levees are what destroyed the city. The flooding.

Everone talks about New Orleans, but they forget about the surrounding areas that are not even there anymore. Such as lower Plaquemines Parish (Where I am from) and St. Bernard. Those people were not rescued for weeks after the storm. WEEKS!

They were stranded there. St. Bernard is no more. Everything was flooded.

100% of St. Bernard flooded due to Levee's busting.

The levees were not blown. I can assure you that. Engineers who designed the levee's a long time ago lied about there strength. The government was paying them for CAT 4 levees and they only built CAT 3.

The levee's broke 24 hrs after Katrina hit. There was no flooding the day Katrina hit (I say day because it made landfall at 5am).



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kazkek
When Katrina's eye made landfall it was a cat 3. But the winds before that were over 200 mph. You cant tell me that 145 mph winds could completely destroy many houses and completely obliterate the mississippi gulf coast?

They were not over 200mph when they hit this city. Maybe in Lower Plaquemine, but I doubt it still, the imagery would have shown that. Where ya' at, cher?



The levees are what destroyed the city. The flooding.

Everone talks about New Orleans, but they forget about the surrounding areas that are not even there anymore. Such as lower Plaquemines Parish (Where I am from) and St. Bernard. Those people were not rescued for weeks after the storm. WEEKS!

You expected otherwise? Come on now! This is the media we are talking about, and they are going for the sensational part! Though I am going to tell you right now, cher, this was not nearly the same as what you could have experienced down there, and not nearly the same scale of a humanitarian crisis.


They were stranded there. St. Bernard is no more. Everything was flooded.

Funny, I ate in the Parish the other day, and it is more. It is coming back, and it is going to thrive because the will of the people is there!


The levees were not blown. I can assure you that.

And how could you? You were in Plaquemines Parish You wouldn't have heard a boom if it slapped ya with Boudreaux's paddle!

Engineers who designed the levee's a long time ago lied about there strength. The government was paying them for CAT 4 levees and they only built CAT 3.

No, most reports show that they knew they couldn't withstand even a 3 due to the fact that they were built upon a peat mound and were not even supported enough to hold.



The levee's broke 24 hrs after Katrina hit. There was no flooding the day Katrina hit (I say day because it made landfall at 5am).

Come on! Please stop now! Give Me A Break

I will tell you, I'm waiting for my first Plaquemine's satsuma from Becnel's, too. But don't come on here and put information up that isn't even accurate. Someone from here can see through it, but people from out of town can't always.
We want them to understand what happened, not to be more confused that the government already allowed them to be.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
I was looking through here and was reminded of a few weeks ago when I was watching the Weather Channel. They stated that Katrina was at a Cat 3--THREE!--when it hit Louisiana.

Those levees were able to withstand up to a Category 3.

I'm more convinced that those levees were blown.


It's really weird because I had my eye on Katrina last summer. First they said Cat 5 when it hit. Then 4. Now 3.

Not only that, but the levees, from what I heard, broke AFTER the storm had gone through, not during.

I wish I had some links. I'll see what I can hunt up.


If it were deliberate they wouldn't blow up the levees too obvious... All they would have to do is dig a small chanel on the top of one and let the water erode the rest away. I've heard about a crater at a levy but if you ever seen a water fall you understand that when water crashes upon a surface it digs a hole where it lands.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 12:28 PM
link   
You people...why would they want to blow the levees? What in the world has it gained?



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by undecided2
You people...why would they want to blow the levees? What in the world has it gained?


ITs possible i don't buy it BUT, I was watching a program on the history channel and they were talking about the dutch. Who are very much like N.O> below the sea level and they do have a plan to reduce preasure and water level by deliberatly flooding certain area. HOwever its a known plan and people understand it, it makes sense.

If its a small area destroyed or the whole area you destry the small area. And I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case and it was a plan put together on the fly because the incompetent "chocolate city leaders" never looked past their nose...



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Madman
ITs possible i don't buy it BUT, I was watching a program on the history channel and they were talking about the dutch. Who are very much like N.O> below the sea level and they do have a plan to reduce preasure and water level by deliberatly flooding certain area. HOwever its a known plan and people understand it, it makes sense.


Well, it has happened before, so you have to understand where these people are coming from. The dutch do have a great plan! It is a well built system of dikes. However, is each city buying their own dike? It's all our fault, remember?


If its a small area destroyed or the whole area you destry the small area. And I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case and it was a plan put together on the fly because the incompetent "chocolate city leaders" never looked past their nose...


Actually, destroying the small area would have been destroying the area that in fact, was not destroyed. And there you go with the chocolate city stuff. You may find this thread of interest on PTS. It's all about race, and race cards. You're calling a spade a spade, I know, but you can't seem to get off the issue, which leads me to think you've played right into that spade's purported purpose.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82

Originally posted by American Madman
ITs possible i don't buy it BUT, I was watching a program on the history channel and they were talking about the dutch. Who are very much like N.O> below the sea level and they do have a plan to reduce preasure and water level by deliberatly flooding certain area. HOwever its a known plan and people understand it, it makes sense.


Well, it has happened before, so you have to understand where these people are coming from. The dutch do have a great plan! It is a well built system of dikes. However, is each city buying their own dike? It's all our fault, remember?


If its a small area destroyed or the whole area you destry the small area. And I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case and it was a plan put together on the fly because the incompetent "chocolate city leaders" never looked past their nose...


Actually, destroying the small area would have been destroying the area that in fact, was not destroyed. And there you go with the chocolate city stuff. You may find this thread of interest on PTS. It's all about race, and race cards. You're calling a spade a spade, I know, but you can't seem to get off the issue, which leads me to think you've played right into that spade's purported purpose.


Nope I just find it fun to use other people strategies and then be yelled at for it. While the person who is responsible for launching the strategy gets elected.
Why do you care if I quote nagin? Its not racist to poke fun at other people stupid remarks, in fact being that nagin is political and so are my remarks I believe I'm protected by the first amendment.

If you don't like my remarks don't read or respond to them.

The dutch local govs may not be doing it all by themselves but they are soundly involved. Like most people who look after themselves instead of waiting for others to do it for them.

Maybe if a plan was in place that small area would have been the one destroyed.

How much do you want to bet a plan still isn't in place for future use now knowing what can happen.

[edit on 25-8-2006 by American Madman]



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 11:25 AM
link   
I firmly believe that Katrina wasn't a Category 3 when it hit NOLA. The destruction it caused was not that of a Cat 3. Some people say that Katrina was a Cat. 5 when it hit, it may have been when it hit Mississppi but not NOLA. I would most certainly have to say that Katrina was a Cat 4 when it hit New Orleans. I say that the damage was to severe for a Cat. 3. Answer this for me. If Katrina was a Category 3 when she hit New Orleans, then how did it tear a hole in the roof of the Superdome?

Now the storm surge is a different story when it comes down to something like that. What probably happened is that the storm surge grew in height, not due to the sotrm itself, but due to the fact where it was coming into Lake Ponchatrain. This is what caused the storm surge to reach over thirty feet high, hence topping the levees. People do talk about the levees being bombed by the Army Corps of Engineers or the military. Spmething like that could have actually happened, we may never actually know.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join