Where is the safest place on earth

reply to post by Isawsomething


I live very close to a Prime target area...I'm no worried about suffering ......I'll be obliterated in a millisecond ! lol

The Cabinet Mountains in Northern Idaho. I saw it in a dream.

I know Antarctica has been dismissed by most as too harsh an environment to survive in, but hear me out. Between 60°S and 65°S is a stormy area of low pressure called the Antarctic Circumpolar Trough. North of the ACT there are strong prevailing westerly winds between 40°S and 60°S, the 'Roaring Forties' and 'Furious Fifties', which rapidly circle the Southern Ocean as there's virtually no land mass to slow them down. South of the ACT and you're in the Antarctic Circle, conditions are generally a lot calmer and clearer here so in the event of a nuclear war you should be shielded from a lot of the fallout (assuming these weather patterns wouldn't be disrupted). You could live off penguins, seals, whales, fish and squid. Whale/seal/penguin fat could be used for fuel. There are plenty of highly elevated islands to set up camp while hunting near the Antarctic peninsula, most of these islands are permanently glaciated so fresh water wouldn't be a problem. With a sufficiently large vessel, you could take enough supplies (including weapons) for a fair sized crew to last the worst of the fallout, and if supplies do run out or conditions become unbearable you'd be within reach of New Zealand or a South Pacific island which may not be as badly affected by the fallout as places closer to the northern hemisphere (assuming Australia doesn't get nuked), plus there's dozens of research stations dotted about the coast and the Antarctic/sub-Antarctic islands (assuming they're not occupied by any armed forces).
To prepare for the Antarctic climate, find some Eskimos who are willing to let you live with them for a bit and learn their ways, then buy a boat and learn to sail.
I might be missing something obvious, but it seems to me that getting as far away from the northern hemisphere as possible would be the biggest priority.

Originally posted by mel1962
The Great Lakes is full of farms, fresh water, fish and game, coal, trees, etc. Just my humble opinion!

I'm in Grand Rapids and very thankful to live in Michigan! It's a beautiful state, and only one side short of an island. It'll be very safe I feel, because we have completely sustainable natural resources.

According to the projected pole shifting hypothesis, where does that put the equator after the proposed great upheaval? that makes a bid difference when discussing the safest place on earth.

i dont think that any place on earth is safe,pretty much everyplace
on earth is dangerous,,you wouldn't survive in Antarctica because you would freeze to death,
the outback is a big desert,not a lot of water,its a very harsh enviroment,i dont know about
the Himalayas though.

I think that there will not happen anything to you when you are six feet under.

Originally posted by worldwatcher
Islands could be flooded and completely submerged.

I'm thinking the middle of South America, Amazon country, somewhere between the borders of Guyana, Brazil and Venezuela.

Ill see you in Guyana

reply to post by Echtelion


just want to let you know that the drought is officialy over has been for a while. i dont live in the outback but the whole country is recieving a #e load of rain its acctualy starting to piss me off a bit ( cant fish in the rain when its windyer than standing behind one of our pollititians) . also there is much more to my beutiful country than the outback sure its nice and remote but not more than 40 clicks from where i am is a large mountian range and its roughly 70 % wilderness never stood on by man plenty of water heaps of food lots of medicinal plants and hard for intruders to find you if you dont want to be found. thats not including the absolute butload of farms lakes rivers and small towns that abound in the area for foraging suplies . i know where me and my family are going

Originally posted by JimBob77

As for Australia we have the "Full Up" sign at the moment while we are trying to sort out these Lebanese Criminals who think they have taken the country over

Australia and NZ, too isolated and far from the rest of civilisation. Let's say you want to leave that place 10 years down the line after Sit X, how are you going to do it, with no planes? As we can also see from Mezzroth's post above, the Australian people might not be too friendly to foreigners.
[edit on 5-4-2007 by JimBob77]

That's funny. I read the opposite into his post. If you come to Australia and cause trouble you will be stopped. If you contribute to society you will be treated as an equal. You can't afford equality when you have parasites stripping everything of it's worth and destroying competition, forcing their own brand of corruption etc.

If I were you I wouldn't go banging on about racist propaganda if you went there. You will be considered a threat to social cohesion. It's probably a very similar story in any highly civilised area.

I think that there are areas around Australia's dessert that would make a good choice, but I won't say where . I'd pick Tasmania over most places including NZ, but I think I could get there afterwards. The dessert doesn't have much weather. Some places see rain 1-2 times a year and see clouds a few times a month. The artesian basin covers most of the dessert. Water isn't a big problem. The draught broke and lake Eire is full again.

I think midland America would be the best if the damage wasn't too extreme. Anywhere too far North strikes me as uninhabitable because of glacial coverage.

The places most likely to endure would be Sub Saharan Africa, South America and Australia, along with some very large islands along the equator included. The middle east and West Asia would do well. I say that because these places have the oldest surviving humans, (or did have until recently).

Appalachia, most likely. It seems the Gatlinburg area that I live in has remained untouched for many many years.

I just this interactive map again after some searching with different search words.. I think it's, perhaps, the best map to get a great Idea of just how to get a birds eye view & calculate the damage from ground zero and get better idea of where you live and how safe you'll be..

I wish it was an App all by itself.. but it's the best I can do for now.. and wish I had a I-phone and this app to go with it.. )

Plz stay safe everyone,

Interactive Nuke Map

Originally posted by skylightsintheillions
According to the projected pole shifting hypothesis, where does that put the equator after the proposed great upheaval? that makes a bid difference when discussing the safest place on earth.

would be a good thing to consider, if this will happen.
Could be tomorrow or in a 100 years or more......
This is what i found from the website of Ivon Stein.
He has some lectures on this subject, dont know if he is a good source, but hey who is these days.

20 Degree Pole Shift

40 Degree Pole Shift

A nuns vagina. A climbing as far up one as I can and staying till I get through the gates.

reply to post by manchurian_candidate


Liechtenstein Its land locked so takes hurricanes out especially being in the alps. Earth quakes your good there even nuclear disaster do to altitude would have lower radiation.Liechtenstein is situated in the Upper Rhine valley of the European Alps and is bordered to the east by Austria and to the south and west by Switzerland. The entire western border of Liechtenstein is formed by the Rhine.There very self sufficient they produce almost everything.Its capital is Vaduz; the biggest town is Schaan. Liechtenstein has the second highest gross domestic product per person in the world

Id stay right here in NZ.
Sure theres a huge fault-line going right through the middle of the country, but the land is self sustaining.
Plenty of wild boar, and deer, blackberries grow pretty much everywhere, and kaimoana (seafood) galore.
Lots of volcanoes in the Nrth Is, and high risks of Tsunamis, in the Sth Is. theres still volcanoes, in the hills theres a high earthquake risk which would cause rock slides, but no Tsunami threat.

If i make sure im over a good 500m above sea-level like in the Southern Alps, and the East cape.
Someone i know has a son that lives in a small community on top of the East cape that are all 2012 believers and they're prepared lol.

reply to post by manchurian_candidate


You will be a fool if something happens in one of those remote places and your name is on a short list of people that died from it. Just saying, it's a crap shoot.

I would say the highlands of Norway.

The biggest floods will not reach up there, the population density is extremely low, and once we approach normality after an event you'll have a lot of old riverbeds between the mountains that are lustrous green and fruitful.

Of course you'll still have to stock a lot of food, since the highlands are mostly rock. Make sure you bring solid tools that wont break right away.
You might come across wild game, but in a dog eat dog world, I wouldn't expect them to be around for long.

reply to post by mazzroth

New Zealand, as cold as Antartica? I don´t think so...