Norway – Christmas Hurricane Dagmar causes Millions in damage, leaves 100 000 without power in freez - Polidicks

[QUOTE=valkery;33906999] Fahrenheit or Celsius?[/QUOTE] I think there still would be snow outside if it was 10 degrees fahrenheit.. But no. 10 Degrees Celsius. It's warm.

[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2668640/hurricane.jpg[/img] I'm not seeing the hurricane.

That's a badass name for a hurricane

[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;33909966]We had some monster winds here last month in Southern California and lost power for two days. It sucked because the temperatures were in the low 60s and with no way to turn up the heat it was frickin' cold! So I feel your pain Norway.[/QUOTE] lol Even in Australia we have colder weather than that.

the wind make out greenhouse flip

Wait it was only 100mph? Why is everyone so awe'd?

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33920878]Wait it was only 100mph? Why is everyone so awe'd?[/QUOTE] Why was everyone so awed by a 7.0 earthquake in Haiti when a 8.0 hits Japan every month or so? Why do you think? Unlike places like Florida that are prepared for strong weather as such, Norway isn't.

[QUOTE=mac338;33903575] I hope our house is okay, I can't tell since I'm on vacation in Florida.[/QUOTE] Just be glad you're alive, once a hurricane swallows you up there is norway out.

[QUOTE=mac338;33920982]Why was everyone so awed by a 7.0 earthquake in Haiti when a 8.0 hits Japan every month or so? Why do you think? Unlike places like Florida that are prepared for strong weather as such, Norway isn't.[/QUOTE] The whole Easter seaboard from Texas to DC gets hurricanes stronger than this and we manage. Learn to build more sturdy structures. Also according to the weather reports these "sea hurricanes", "wind storms", what ever you call them are fairly common.

In these parts it was the strongest since the New Years hurricane of '92. "Learn to build sturdier structures", really?

[QUOTE=mac338;33921191]In these parts it was the strongest since the New Years hurricane of '92. "Learn to build sturdier structures", really?[/QUOTE] Why wouldn't you want to put decent money into your homes structure? That way you are prepared for things like this.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33921165]The whole Easter seaboard from Texas to DC gets hurricanes stronger than this and we manage. Learn to build more sturdy structures. Also according to the weather reports these "sea hurricanes", "wind storms", what ever you call them are fairly common.[/QUOTE] Wow are you trying to be a dick as much as you possibly can or something?

[QUOTE=LarparNar;33921231]Wow are you trying to be a dick as much as you possibly can or something?[/QUOTE] It's a basic wind storm hell my area is suppose to have a front coming through with 50+mph gusts tonight, it is called building sturdy structures, if it idiotic to not invest extra into supports and integrity of the place you are going to reside in.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33921361]It's a basic wind storm hell my area is suppose to have a front coming through with 50+mph gusts tonight, it is called building sturdy structures, if it idiotic to not invest extra into supports and integrity of the place you are going to reside in.[/QUOTE] Well if you look closely [IMG]http://static04.vg.no/drfront/images/2011-12/26/88-b99ca007-59099df6.jpeg[/IMG] The house is still standing.

So if most of the houses are whats the big deal over a storm, this is hardly news

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33921471]So if most of the houses are whats the big deal over a storm, this is hardly news[/QUOTE] Well if you look even closer on the picture...

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33921361]It's a basic wind storm hell my area is suppose to have a front coming through with 50+mph gusts tonight, it is called building sturdy structures, if it idiotic to not invest extra into supports and integrity of the place you are going to reside in.[/QUOTE] I don't give a shit what it is, people are dying and your area having weather similar to this is not a valid argument. Other than that, the difference between 50 and 100mph winds is pretty fucking huge.

Or read the title [B]EDIT:[/B] Automerge

[QUOTE=mac338;33921488]Well if you look even closer on the picture...[/QUOTE] Insurance will pay for the car, assuming they purchased it, probably still drivible after it gets tipped back over [editline]27th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=LarparNar;33921490]I don't give a shit what it is, people are dying and your area having weather similar to this is not a valid argument. Other than that, the difference between 50 and 100mph winds is pretty fucking huge.[/QUOTE] Yeah that is sad, maybe you should vote to have the government put the electical lines underground so when storms roll through people don't lose power and freeze. Which is what most of the world learned to do.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33921506]Insurance will pay for the car, assuming they purchased it, probably still drivible after it gets tipped back over[/QUOTE] The point. Your head.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33921506]Yeah that is sad, maybe you should vote to have the government put the electical lines underground so when storms roll through people don't lose power and freeze. Which is what most of the world learned to do.[/QUOTE] Because driving huge digging equipment up on mountains and through fjords is a really simple and inexpensive thing to do, and it doesn't damage the nature at all.

[QUOTE=LarparNar;33921616]Because driving huge digging equipment up on mountains and through fjords is a really simple and inexpensive thing to do, and it doesn't damage the nature at all.[/QUOTE] Not if you have the right equipment it is basically digging a ditch then laying a pipe, and the covering up the ditch

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33921654]Not if you have the right equipment it is basically digging a ditch then laying a pipe, and the covering up the ditch[/QUOTE] The amount of electricity that needs to be transferred across the mountains requires more than a small ditch. And moving away from electricity, but staying at the topic of mountains, a lot of the damage is from landslides and trees falling. Are you suggesting reinforcing every mountain and tree?

[QUOTE=LarparNar;33921693]The amount of electricity that needs to be transferred across the mountains requires more than a small ditch. And moving away from electricity, but staying at the topic of mountains, a lot of the damage is from landslides and trees falling. Are you suggesting reinforcing every mountain and tree?[/QUOTE] We manage to do 2 mountain ranges in the US so I don't see the difficulty. Hell even in California where earthquakes are a daily thing. Sure if you deforest areas of land then yeah that will cause a mud slight but with AC you should be able to go quite some distance, then convert to DC once in the house. Do you understand Alternating Current (AC) works? A ditch would be fine. Assuming you aren't powering a large cities which should be on their own grid if separated buy a mountain range

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33921769]We manage to do 2 mountain ranges in the US so I don't see the difficulty. Hell even in California where earthquakes are a daily thing. Sure if you deforest areas of land then yeah that will cause a mud slight but with AC you should be able to go quite some distance, then convert to DC once in the house. Do you understand Alternating Current (AC) works? A ditch would be fine[/QUOTE] I actually agree with you that we should build underground, yet we haven't and I'm trying to figure out why, and so far what I've discovered is that the geology is too difficult to build in. Besides, rebuilding the entire system now would be even more expensive than repairing damages. That wasn't my point though. My point is that you come in here and say this is nothing because you often get winds at this speed, and thus it's not news, but you disregard that the damages are from landslides and trees crushing cars, people and houses. Already without strong winds there are problems in some places with rocks falling off mountains and crushing cars, because the roads look like this: [img]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2489/3772001438_91a669c083.jpg[/img] Your geology is not the same as ours, thus nature is going to affect it differently.

[QUOTE=LarparNar;33921902]I actually agree with you that we should build underground, yet we haven't and I'm trying to figure out why, and so far what I've discovered is that the geology is too difficult to build in. Besides, rebuilding the entire system now would be even more expensive than repairing damages. [/quote] More efficient in the long run due to less downtime, meaning paying less for workers constantly fixing shit. [quote]That wasn't my point though. My point is that you come in here and say this is nothing because you often get winds at this speed, and thus it's not news, but you disregard that the damages are from landslides and trees crushing cars, people and houses. Already without strong winds there are problems in some places with rocks falling off mountains and crushing cars, because the roads look like this:[/quote] Smashing time good fellow, Opinions everyone has them and anyone can share them [quote]Your geology is not the same as ours, thus nature is going to affect it differently.[/QUOTE] Mostly rocky, ridged mountains... sounds like the Rocky mountains, which are in that country I always forget

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;33922068]Mostly rocky, ridged mountains... sounds like the Rocky mountains, which are in that country I always forget[/QUOTE] Close to what coast with common hurricanes?

[QUOTE=LarparNar;33922081]Close to what coast with common hurricanes?[/QUOTE] I could then say the Appalachian mountains which runs from Canada down

[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/USA_topo_en.jpg[/t] Both small and fairly far from the coast. And don't even try to suggest there has never been a natural disaster there. [editline]27th December 2011[/editline] I still don't get what your point is by the way. You have common 50mph winds so 100mph isn't damaging?

[QUOTE=LarparNar;33922211][t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/USA_topo_en.jpg[/t] Both small and fairly far from the coast. And don't even try to suggest there has never been a natural disaster there. [editline]27th December 2011[/editline] I still don't get what your point is by the way. You have common 50mph winds so 100mph isn't damaging?[/QUOTE] Amazing seeing how the rocky mountains is part of the largest above sea level chain of mountains, and both have higher elevations and lengths. Hurricaines reaching the Appalachians are common, we have 50mph which does to damage but we don't see it on the news because it happens because wind happens everywhere We are getting of topic, this really isn't worth it