It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


best survival locations?

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 10:33 AM
In the US specificaly, because I don't think I could get to Europe if I wanted tol
Though that is a pleasant thought.

I have always wondered in my head, in the case of SHTF, where is the best place to go and survive?

Would it be the south where you don't have winters? But lots of bugs, and maybe gators. *grins*

Or maybe the north where you have permafrost and can have an underground refridgerator? But then you have to worry about winter weather. Hot muggy summers.

maybe soco? despite earthquakes? but the weather is always nice....

the midatlantic area? where the weather isn't too much one way or the other.

Or the Mississippi so you can grow crops.

Granted, I understand that people have survived all over teh world in every condition, but I am thinking of what would be easiest. Especially since a lot of us are not prepared for any kind of conditon or situation.

Just curious as to what your thoughts were?

[edit on 27-6-2008 by nixie_nox]

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 10:40 AM
Well, if I told you the best place, everyone would want to go there and it wouldn't be the best place anymore.

Seriously, you just have to take the good with the bad. Find a place that suits you and run with it.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 10:43 AM
reply to post by jerico65

Aw now, that is no fun.

.......Can you send me an IM?

The best place for me might be Cancun but I don't know that it may not be agricultural efficient. lol

Corn just doesn't grow well on a beach for some reason.

Maybe where I am is good, we have farmland, and a coast. And a bay, lots of seafood.And you can grow stuff.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 10:45 AM
Equador. The mountains are high the real estate is cheap and there's lots of natural abundance

[edit on 27-6-2008 by Swingarm]

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link the middle of the country, safe distance from all shores (north, south, east, and west), no volcanoes or earthquakes. but if # really goes down there may be no place to be hide.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:25 AM
Colorado. Nuff said.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:49 AM
I don't think things could get so bad that there's nowhere to hide. Someone will survive somewhere.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 12:04 PM
I think that if I was American or was visiting the US when the SHTF, I would head to the Pacific North West ....... good injun country.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 12:57 PM
reply to post by Wotan
Just stay away from the coast.To many people, and it's a prime target for attack.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 01:19 PM
the coasts are bad because when the asteroid strikes the earth hits the ocean and splash!
(praying, praying for the asteroid, come on asteroid, asteroid or bird flu, bird flu, bird flu, come on bird flu, you can do better, like you know how to do)
I like Salt Lake cause the population is overall docile and submissive, and the Mormons practice foodstorage, they're supposed to have like a years supply of food storage set aside for disasters, and many actually do, so there's extra food available in some scenarios
problem with Salt Lake is if
Yellowstone volcano blows, last time it did it would have depopulated SLC, so they say, evidently
Plus Utah feels survival cause it's the youngest state in the country, so it shows magical will to live, to breed, such places are good luck and places full of dead and dying old persons with below replacement birthrates are bad luck, to my way of thinking...
since you ask

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 01:25 PM
What cit X happened?

The perma frost is way north like Alaska not Wisconsin, and its only a few feet deep not dozens.

Most of the south is gator free. look at the south west, most anything west of the Mississippi river is gator free.

If the Cit X changed the climate hotter then montana and dakotas sound good, if it gets colder then equator zones. If cit X is a war, then the mountains for safety (ask the Russians)

if Cit X is ELE then a city would be good after a few months when alot of people are dead, but not for long; most civil engineers say urban centers rely on humans to keep them standing. But in the interim you can get a lot of supplies and good shelter with little work.

so it depends what the Cit X is.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 01:30 PM
Since I am close to the Yosemite area I would most likely bug out to a familar area up there. There are plenty of places you can go to up in the high country where little contact with others would be possible and you can lay low for awhile. There is plenty of fish and game as well as insects and vegetation to live off of.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 01:38 PM
I know its sci-fi. Read World War Z. It realy illustrates in one part what happens when a bunch of people have to realy use the land... I wont ruin it for you, but it is a realy good book.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 01:39 PM
Don't depend on the perma-frost up north. It's all starting to melt. In the last 10 years the poles have shifted about 7 degrees and it's becoming a lot warmer up there.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 07:30 AM
Iowa has a abundance of wildlife like deer, Rabbits ECT. Plus good soil to grow things/

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:22 PM
reply to post by Anuubis

Guys, I am based in the UK and am looking for suitable locations near the London Area. However, in the event of: a) asteroid hit; b) supervolcano eruption or c) Compulsory RFID chip implants, I am looling for a suitable public location which can provide shelter, food and a storage place for tinned food. The only locations I can think of are based in woodlands in places with a significant altitude above sea level. You could then survive for a short time before resorting to a plan B. However, one of the dangers in the scenario where people are rounded up into camps prior to being ID-chipped is that helicopters with Infra-red detectors would be able to scan individuals from the air.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:47 PM
Thisis one of those questions only an individual or you and your family can answer. Different situations have different answers. If you're talking about nuclear war, stay away from big cities. If you are talking an economic crisis, you want to be near a big city for resources.

Several questions you have to answer. If you move to a safer area now, what do you do to make a livivng.

All parts of the world have advantages and disadvantages starting with weather extremes, to local population in need during a time of dispare, to geological events that can happen such a earthquakes or volcanos.

Some areas of the US are much more costly to buy and the cost of living is higher. This must be considered, what is your of income?

No simple answer that says live in death valley but bring bottled water.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 11:51 AM
reply to post by hinky
I have to disagree with you on the financial disaster. If your in a city of any size your going to be fighting for supplies and it WILL turn deadly. You have a better chance learning how to live off the land outside of metro areas.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 11:53 AM
reply to post by Heronumber0
Stay away from cities and if you can, find an area with caves. IR cannot find you if your far enough underground.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 12:05 PM
I think in any situation X avoid cities and people!!... common sense!!

People will behave badly in desperate situations!!..

My thinking ...get awya and keep your head down!! and watch!!..until you feel its safe to come out!!

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in