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.


Where is the safest place on the planet??

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 12:30 PM
reply to post by fooks

if mountains can fall, they can also rise , no?

btw. just joking about atlantis

or maybe not??
edit on 15-4-2011 by intergalactic fire because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 12:40 PM
If you are avoiding volcanoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, nuclear power plants, etc., according to what I've read and looked into, it leaves the following areas (this assumes one needs to also be elevated for the tsunami potential):

South Africa (portions near the mountains; far from Cape Town)
Morroco (mountainous area)
High mountains of Spain (danger of nuclear fall-out)
High mountains of Turkey
Ethiopia highlands

Now, if leaving the country is out of the question, and one wants to know the safest areas, here's an idea that I did and it worked for me:

-- print out a map of your country on white 8 1/2 x 11.
-- one transparency paper, print out volcanoes
-- one transparency sheet, print out fault lines
-- one transparency sheet print out elevations
-- one transparency sheet print out nuclear power plants (it helps to take this transparency and draw a 50-mile radius around each plant)

You can also add a sheet for water sources, erc., depending on your needs. Make sure everything is printed using the same scale.

Then, all you do is lay one on top of another with the white map on the bottom and see which areas are left. To be honest, when I first did it, I was less than excited at the remaining prospects. (I am in the US).

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 01:11 PM
reply to post by lpowell0627

Can you post the links to these maps?
and a picture of the results of that?

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 11:16 AM
Ok this guy says Brazil

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 11:29 AM
after looking around alberta, it seems safe to me. no volcanos, faultlines, its inland enough to avoid earthquakes and tsunamis. large forests and plains with wildlife and wild edibles(cant immdiatly remember most outside of dandilions and indian paintbrush, wildberries). the only reall problem is the massive snow fall and winter conditions that can last from november to late april(sometimes into may)

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 11:35 AM
It isnt on this planet at all...its OFF of it.

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 12:03 PM
The Hopi Tribe know exactly where to go

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 12:21 PM

Originally posted by nakiannunaki
Considering "all things" destructive, apocaplytic and the like...

Where would be the safest place to uproot to.
Im currently living in london uk and although were not prone to earthquakes and volcanoes we are prone to flooding and london sits in a basin type platform that would completely flood if the thames barrier were to give way.

Were also in the firing line in terms of war and terrorism.

I know each country has its own problems but my question is if i wanted to leave london , keeping in mind my reason for moving (to avoid the end of the world, however it manifests).. where would i stand the best chance of survival on planet earth.. and why?

Would appreciate your feedback as it is something i am considering...


edit on 16-4-2011 by lyonheart because: south africa

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 03:42 PM
1. somewhere warm
2. somewhere several hundred feet above seal level
3. no where near any coastline
4. someplace that has a water source
5.lots of supplies
6, knowledge of hunting and gathering caviat if any wildlife still exists in the aftermath

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 04:03 PM
A site that my help is This Dynamic Planet (link below), their map allows you see faults, volcano's, impact crater, etc. It is configurable, biggest draw back is the zoom level.

This Dynamic Planet

But as many have brought up, depends on what the reason is for getting out of town.

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 04:15 PM
this is the safest place on the planet, a city in Arabia

but to get even more precise... the safest place is the cube known as the Ka'ba shrine

theres a goodly number that would do anything to protect it...short of nothing

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 06:26 PM
That naturally depends on what the "threat" is. Take an asteroid or comet. Comets are by their nature what are referred to as "long period objects". They come in to our part of the inner solar system at a sharp angle to the ecliptic, meaning we don't see them until they are very close. Moving at tens of miles per second a "small" object like a comet with a nucleus only a few hundred meters across has more kinetic energy by about ten orders of magnitude then all the nuclear weapons ever built. No matter where it hits, it ain't gonna be pretty. Any object of a size and with the kinetic energy to "erase us" is unfortunately likely by simple odds to hit the pacific or atlantic oceans. You don't need to be big, if you are fast enough an object no bigger then a small office block hitting with such speed as a comet, will be the same as if a mountain range was "dropped" in the ocean. The good news if your within 100-500kilometers, the thermal effects will vaporize and/or particleize you. For a brief moment you won't be able to breath and then its over. If your asleep you all know that song that says thats the best way to die? If I did live and die before, I don't remember. Sorry. Anyway you look at it the effect would be "Biblical"

They have calculated an object with enough "juice" will raise a tidal wave that is over 12,000 meters high. But that presents certain fundamental problems. Above 3,000 meters (roughly 10,000 feet) the air pressure quickly drops. And that rate a large portion of the ocean water will flash into vapor. All that transferred energy has to go somewhere. That might increase the pressure on the Earth's surface tremendously. One way or the other enough energy transferred, and lets say there is no way to describe it. We believe the possible death of the Clovis people in North America about 13,000 years ago, keep in mind these people inhabit an area that at the time was experiencing the the full melt at the end of the last ice age. And they occupied an area from what is now the central and near northern American plains (Canada was still under considerable ice) to the southern most part of the present continental United States. They built huge pyramid like mounds in what is now Missouri, very close to what was built in pre-historic Britain. Long before Stonehenge.

There is evidence of an asteroid, in astronomical parlance referred to as a boloid, or "grainy asteroid", as opposed to a solid iron mass exploded over North America around this time. Both it's energy release and "scattered pattern" would have bean like a gigantic shot gun shell exploding over its target. It never reached the ground, as may have been the case with the Tunguska Incident of 1908. If that object in 1908 had hit a few hours sooner, it would have vaporized London. No doubt our entire religious mythology would have been rewritten that very day. Just imagine the headlines at that time the British Empire was the most powerful state the world had ever known. The Roman Empire in its day thought they ruled the world, they just didn't know how big it really was. They "missed" China, OOP's. At that time in history military power was determined by the power of a nations navy. And the British ran righted over the entire Earth. Until Hitler was stupid enough to declare war on my country after Pearl Harbor was attacked, and power of the American economy that laid waste not just to his empire but the Japanese as well. We barley worked up a sweat. But we learned and tasted power. An intense narcotic.

But what if something happened in the coming year that is the opposite of apocalyptic? Lets face it gang, if the Sun farts a big one a major solar flare that hits us at the wrong time? We will be lucky if we only loose all our satellites (and that means GPS, the Internet, cell phones, and our VELA early warning detection system designed to spot missile plumes rising above the Earth...) If we are lucky we will keep the lower band millimeter wave radar systems intact, but anything with a solid state circuit is likely to be fried. And all current radars use solid state electronics. As with the Cuban missile crises and the 1973 Yom Kipper war we came oh so close. By then (1973) Nixon was near the end of Watergate and frequently drunk. No, you don't want to know the details.

What if it was "understood" that we as an intelligent species were not alone. Good gracious, hardly. If nothing else happens the internet will connect the entire human race with each other with in twenty five years. Technology is not blame for the lag time but politics is. But in time if we survive long enough as a race, no government on Earth will be able to stop the inevitable. And that scars dictators to death. It will be what will be. Embrace the unknown. We don't have much of a choice now but to win over hate. Never give up.

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 11:14 PM
Any one who considers the safest place on the planet for survival is quite right to do so at this time.

For those who are not thinking this all the way through, i.e.....asteroid hit, no place to run, etc, listen up.

First, we all know that an event like a huge asteroid or super volcano could wipe out most life on this planet. We who are thinking of best places to survive are NOT trying to run from an event like that, so stop wasting our time posting foolish remarks.

What we ARE doing is considering the most survivable place for a plausible manmade or geological event. When the last super volcano (Toba) erupted 74,000 years ago, humans were reduced to only 10,000 people on the planet. Every one alive today can be traced back to a gene pool of that few inhabitants. Personally, I'm happy they were in a survivable place on the planet.

Most danger whether natural or man made is in the northern hemisphere, as well as most of humanity and their WMD's, including nuclear power stations, nuclear weapons and nuclear targets. Most of the earth pollution and major cities are in the northern hemisphere as well. When Chernobyl released that massive radiation plume, it circulated and settled mostly thoughout the northern hemisphere.

When Yellowstone errupts, you deffinitely do not want to be in the northern hemisphere. History shows that lizards, even the big ones like alligators and crocs, turtles and many other animals have survived many super eruptions over millions of years. Of course they were culled back to the equatorial regions because of the ice freezing most of the rest of the earth's surfaces.

I would say just south of the equator (but within 500 km) and above 1,000 m.

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 11:39 PM

Originally posted by connorromanow
after looking around alberta, it seems safe to me. no volcanos, faultlines, its inland enough to avoid earthquakes and tsunamis. large forests and plains with wildlife and wild edibles(cant immdiatly remember most outside of dandilions and indian paintbrush, wildberries). the only reall problem is the massive snow fall and winter conditions that can last from november to late april(sometimes into may)

I hope your right... but reallly, I would agree, except on one thing, our snow fall gives us fresh water. To all of everyone, Canada might have the fresh water, but we put up with the snowfall to get it. So there.......

Seriously, I love all you americans, but ....

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 12:30 AM
CANADA!!! well Northern Canada. No fault lines, no oceans, no people....

You guys are going to jinx the Aussies!

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 02:33 AM
Subterranean locations...

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 03:30 AM
This is considered to be the safest place-- The shrine(house) of the supreme god(creator) in the gifu mountains in japan. Believe it or not ! The problem is whether you are allowed to remain inside for any time period. Any way, it is your destiny as to whether any of us will survive through the great earth changes.

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 04:00 AM
reply to post by nakiannunaki

The safest "place" you can find is your own belief and confidence that you will survive.

In the end, that's all the safety there is.

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 02:18 PM
reply to post by nakiannunaki

I also live in London and I've been thinking about the same kind of thing, but don't really want to leave the country. My initial thoughts are anyway at least 50 miles from a nuclear reactor, and somewhere preferably high above sea level.

So I guess that means moving up north? Scotland?

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 08:19 PM
It's hard to say because nobody knows what may happen for sure.

Just factor in some key points and make a decision.

In my opinion (which is usually worthless)

Stay away from the coastlines
Stay away from fault lines
Stay away from large populations (good idea no matter what the scenario)
Stay out of volcanic areas
Stay away from low lying areas
Stay away from military installations or targets of strategic importance to
I like sparsely populated areas around 5,000' elevation or higher that's not near a large fault line.

Central Arizona is a decent spot. About the only worry I have here is forest fires but those give plenty of warning and potential fallout from nuclear strikes in southern California.

Montana & Wyoming would be good except for Yellowstone

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in