It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Look Who’s Buying Up Flood Ravaged Farm Land

page: 3
53
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by IamJustanAmerican
Nobody should be living in a flood plain.


For thousands of years the Egyptians counted on the annual flooding of the Nile to survive. They learned to deal with it.

Now why they can't build concrete platforms or hills that are higher than the average flood water to put their houses on... that I don't understand. Just pour an anchored concrete pad with a bowsprit to fend off the water. Can't cost any more than rebuilding every year. The flooding is usually not that deep.

But since most of the fertile farming land in the world is a flood plan, moving out is hardly a practical option. The land is the best growing area BECAUSE it is a flood zone




posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by IamJustanAmerican
Nobody should be living in a flood plain.


For thousands of years the Egyptians counted on the annual flooding of the Nile to survive. They learned to deal with it.

Now why they can't build concrete platforms or hills that are higher than the average flood water to put their houses on... that I don't understand. Just pour an anchored concrete pad with a bowsprit to fend off the water. Can't cost any more than rebuilding every year. The flooding is usually not that deep.

But since most of the fertile farming land in the world is a flood plan, moving out is hardly a practical option. The land is the best growing area BECAUSE it is a flood zone


Good points.

I'm not an engineer so I couldn't even guess at the scale of such a project and the problems that could develop. I'm going to assume that the Egyptians didn't use as much land because of much less population and this might not be feasible on a larger scale.

Also, the amount of concrete needed to accomplish this would be astronomical. Not to mention the possible impact on the environment.

Just throwing it out there.

Thanks



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
I'm not an engineer so I couldn't even guess at the scale of such a project and the problems that could develop.


PFFT that is why we have the Corp of Engineers


Simple solutions for simple problems do not need an engineer




Some stilt houses remain along the main highway through Gilchrist, Texas, after Hurricane Ike virtually wiped out the town.

standeyo.com...



This was something primitive natives came up with thousands of years ago






posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Let them buy the land..it will probably get taken away by China in the near future



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


Intentional? We had a monumental winter with massive accumulations of snowfall. The most on record in
some states. Well now, when it melts, it has to go somewhere. Water travels in a Zen like manner through
a path of least resistence and downward. That means from higher ground to lower ground. When the soil
becomes super saturated , displacement occurs. In other words, erosion and run off. This kinetic element
moves in the above described manner into streams, lakes, ponds,rivers, and eventually the ocean. Except
the percentage that is evaporated into the atmosphere. Now add to that a massive spring rainy season, and
bingo! We have the conditions that we scrambling to deal with currently. (No pun intended


The extreme counter balances of flooding and drought are a signature of the North American Midwest.
It has been this way before you and I could breathe. The danger ,and therefore "drama" is more pronounced
due to population growth in these volitile areas. As well as the HyperMedia attention.
Please accept my dissent to the angle of your post, as it is with respect to you and in good faith.

S&F to you




posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wildmanimal
reply to post by jude11
 


Intentional? We had a monumental winter with massive accumulations of snowfall. The most on record in
some states. Well now, when it melts, it has to go somewhere. Water travels in a Zen like manner through
a path of least resistence and downward. That means from higher ground to lower ground. When the soil
becomes super saturated , displacement occurs. In other words, erosion and run off. This kinetic element
moves in the above described manner into streams, lakes, ponds,rivers, and eventually the ocean. Except
the percentage that is evaporated into the atmosphere. Now add to that a massive spring rainy season, and
bingo! We have the conditions that we scrambling to deal with currently. (No pun intended


The extreme counter balances of flooding and drought are a signature of the North American Midwest.
It has been this way before you and I could breathe. The danger ,and therefore "drama" is more pronounced
due to population growth in these volitile areas. As well as the HyperMedia attention.
Please accept my dissent to the angle of your post, as it is with respect to you and in good faith.

S&F to you


Well presented and thought provoking!

You believe it's a cyclical event? Could be.

If it is, it's coming on very fast and not taking decades or centuries to unfold but rather years. It's not supposed to happen this way from what we've been taught but then again, Mother Nature doesn't play by our rules.

Thanks!



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:55 AM
link   
I was sure the answer was going to be the Chinese.... and I'm sure they are buying up a lot of farmland anyway, just as they are so many things for sale here in America..... and after all, isn't most of our country for sale? To me, foreign ownership of resources in our country spells disaster. Imagine being sold what was ours to begin with? Sure, the oil and gas beneath our lands belong to the people in some way, but when we get ripped off at the gas pumps for what was essentially ours, isn't that wrong? Why should oil companies make record profits at our expense? Shouldn't the royalties be linked to the profits? I don't mind Reasonable profits but record profits to buy back our own resources? Come on! So, now the small farmer sells out to a large corporation....that's been going on for years, but shouldn't we stop subsidies for corporate owned farmland and only help out the family farmers? The corporations wouldn't be in it if it weren't hugely profitable in some way.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


I believe we give the weather too much attention, and believe its some omen. Yes this weather is rather odd, but lets put our minds on how to create an equilibrium between nature.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
The Government gets to involved in peoples lives... The Government abuses the people... The Government wont give me money because I was dumb enough to build in a flood plain.

Personal Responsibility..

I really wish people would get over this sense of entitlement.

This coming from someone paid by the government.
Your'e right about CT's,
pretty pointless, the evil that is government is all around and very easy to see.

It is a wearying but essential task to keep reminding people that the state is nothing but an agency of violence. When someone talks about “the welfare state helping the poor,” we must point out the gun in the room. When someone opposes the decriminalization of marijuana, we must point out the gun in the room. When someone supports the reduction of taxes, we must point out the gun in the room – even if one bullet has been taken out.

The Gun in the Room



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


How is it helping anyone, unless they are going to provide them with enough money to support themselves and their family for the rest of their life, then they are effectively making them redundant, if a Farmer has no more farm land he cannot farm, if he has no other professions, what is he to do ? It seems you've overlooked this fact.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


I heard this and I wondered what could be on that land that the government might want?

Maybe they are trying to help these people?

Maybe they don't want the stupid people to rebuild and have to be evacuated and rescued all over again?
Maybe they don't have the resources to keep going through this for these folks?

It is flooded and chances are with the weather patterns continuing the way they have been or worse, it is swampland.
What does our government want with swampland?
We are selling off portions of protected lands and National Parks to oil drilling companies to make money now.
Does anyone think there are some valuable resources in that land and if so I think sellers should request a clause that if anything is found on that land they retain a share of it.

Maybe they are just trying to help these people and with the housing market the way it is they are probably going to be doing better than some who are stuck in their homes without a buyer or a bite.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant
We are selling off portions of protected lands and National Parks to oil drilling companies to make money now.
Does anyone think there are some valuable resources in that land and if so I think sellers should request a clause that if anything is found on that land they retain a share of it.

I don't know about anywhere else, but I know you can sell land in Texas and retain mineral rights.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 





Does anyone think there are some valuable resources in that land and if so I think sellers should request a clause that if anything is found on that land they retain a share of it


Sounds like a very viable option i think, the gov dont do something for nothing.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


I don't think it is for monetary gain... I think it is far more sinister than that. In my opinion they are buying up the land to control the food supply. I think it is one of a few serious attempts at future population control, all in the name of man made global warming. This is about the depopulation of the Earth and sustainable development.






posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 06:41 AM
link   
They always offer to buy out flooded areas...if you dont sell,you are no longer eligiable for flood insurance....we saw this after Katrina in Bay St Louis and Waveland Ms.the threats they use on you are outrageous."We cover you one time,thats it" sort of stuff.They will resell this land tyo the Big Agra companies and make money doing it.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


SPOT ON

Put them in small lots where they are less able to provide for them selves, more controllable and make them dependable on the system for first livings needs ( Housing, food and Medicare)

1. Population Control by making people more dependant and less self-sufficient.
2. Remove all virtile land from private ownership to government or big (pro Gov.) companies.
3. Sell it to them as a blessing

Agenda 21




edit on 28-6-2011 by EarthOccupant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:10 AM
link   
i'll go ahead and say it...since i've never thought of it before....

FEMA CAMPS!!! lol.

ok, i'm done. have a good morning/evening/afternoon.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Wildmanimal
 


The problem with "natural" and "cyclical" is that we have altered the natural state. We build storm drains, and levees. We usher the melting snow and storm runoff into the tributaries and streams as quickly as possible to keep it from disrupting traffic and parking lots. It has no time to soak into the earth and replenish the deep water tables. Instead it gets funnelled as quickly as possible off through concrete drains, into tributaries that have been dug out and widened and concreted, then it hits the rivers, the Mississippi, and heads down to the Gulf of Mexico at record speed. If the Missouri, Ohio, and Mississippi can't handle it all, we build giant levee systems to keep it there anyway. We can't let it back up into the cities, so we erect this whole system to keep the water flowing down to the Gulf as fast as possible.

All the while, we wonder why the lakes are dropping, and why the wells are drying up, and why the water tables are not getting replenished. We complain about contamination and erosion and sinkholes. If we allowed the natural and cyclical process, the majority of this water could soak into the farmlands and plains, the Earth would filter it as it penetrated through to the deep water veins. The erosion would be less, because the water would move slower and soak in better. The contamination from runoff would be less, because the earth would filter it. The natural floodplain farmland would get its seasonal replenishment and the crops would be more bountiful and nutritious.

Sadly, there is nothing "natural" or "cyclical" about our current system. The floods are just a dangerous nuisance that man thinks it can eventually out-engineer and show mother nature who is really the boss. Then, when she proves us wrong, it is a "natural disaster."
The arrogance of man will be our downfall.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Wildmanimal
 


The problem with "natural" and "cyclical" is that we have altered the natural state. We build storm drains, and levees. We usher the melting snow and storm runoff into the tributaries and streams as quickly as possible to keep it from disrupting traffic and parking lots. It has no time to soak into the earth and replenish the deep water tables. Instead it gets funnelled as quickly as possible off through concrete drains, into tributaries that have been dug out and widened and concreted, then it hits the rivers, the Mississippi, and heads down to the Gulf of Mexico at record speed. If the Missouri, Ohio, and Mississippi can't handle it all, we build giant levee systems to keep it there anyway. We can't let it back up into the cities, so we erect this whole system to keep the water flowing down to the Gulf as fast as possible.

All the while, we wonder why the lakes are dropping, and why the wells are drying up, and why the water tables are not getting replenished. We complain about contamination and erosion and sinkholes. If we allowed the natural and cyclical process, the majority of this water could soak into the farmlands and plains, the Earth would filter it as it penetrated through to the deep water veins. The erosion would be less, because the water would move slower and soak in better. The contamination from runoff would be less, because the earth would filter it. The natural floodplain farmland would get its seasonal replenishment and the crops would be more bountiful and nutritious.

Sadly, there is nothing "natural" or "cyclical" about our current system. The floods are just a dangerous nuisance that man thinks it can eventually out-engineer and show mother nature who is really the boss. Then, when she proves us wrong, it is a "natural disaster."
The arrogance of man will be our downfall.


I have never even thought of it like that... Thank you for sharing your opinion and making me think about things from this aspect.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Keep in mind that these have mostly been historic, record-setting floods. So to wipe out 50-100 years worth of harvests in some of the most ideal farmland in the world seems absolutely absurd... especially in a world of exploding populations, dramatically increasing food demands, and crippling food price increases.

Yeah, if these lands aren't sold off wholesale to Montesanto (or worse yet, nations growning in wealth, influence, and population like China, India, Brazil, etc.) in the next 2-3 years, I think we will find ourselves in a very bad situation where the 'state' owns the farmlands, and begins to farm them again. Collectivism? A return to a peasant class? I don't know, but it doesn't seem good.



new topics

top topics



 
53
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join