119 replies to this topic

[Sarah Jayne]

+1 to Gibbs

Brings me to tears watching the news. Just think one day something might happen to wa I don't know what I'd do if I lost my little girl

[ceagle]

just out of interested how many people have checked their house insurance for flood cover? i just did and no i don't have any but it is listed as an optional extra.
i'm also a lot concerned, that i didn't know this. it's clearly written on my policy. how often do we just pay bills etc and don't take the time to read what we are paying for?

[Ivan Sng]

Well today a workmate told me that he knows someone that will not get his $400K house covered by insurance. Apparently the insurance company covers flash (rapid) flooding not flooding where the water slowly rises into your property... WTF?? I think insurance company will be finding ways and means not to pay...

[Den]

Seems I must clarify, I did not call anyone stupid, what I did say is that rebuilding on land that is floodprone which repeatedly floods is stupid, I agree I should have written it better.

Im a tosser because I showed concern about taxes? a $20+billion dollar bill thanks to terrible planning by consecutive Queensland goverments, this means less money for roads/infrastructure, police, healthcare and schools, etc etc, this bill will cost lives you can be sure, and likely more than the flood itself.

Can we dispell some stupid comments we've all heard in the media...

"200 year event"
A rediculous statement for 2 reasons. 1. Although the forecasters have for decades predicted future floods for QLD they did not acurately predict the timing of this event until it was upon us, so why should we believe they can now predict when it will come again? 2. They give a false impression that Qld will not flood again for 200 years, this is silly, what will they call the next type of flood formation, a 25,50,75,100 year event?

"The drought excuse"
Goverment has had almost 40years to build protection for Brisbane, has the drought been on for 40years? Its a lame excuse for the current Goverment. Also this does not excuse new areas where they have allowed construction which is unfit for human habitation, goverment and developers have profited from selling this land, I smell corruption and incompetance.

Edited by Den, 19 January 2011 - 10:25 AM.

[Rod]

Wrong...
And
Wrong...

Your first statement shows a lack of understanding in event probability
This flood was a 200 year event.....it is only likely to occur every 200 years
BUT that doesn't mean it couldn't occur again next week...it just suggests it is highly unlikely
It is an expression of odds
More rain fell in the catchment in this event that in the last flood 1974 but river levels were 2 meters lower This time!! ......because Wivenhoe dam did what it was designed to do....so the Gov did do their job!

All New developments have to have habitable levels above the 74 flood levels(1 in 100 year event)
However that doesn't stop some people using nonhabitable areas for habitable purposes
And they can't resume all the existing houses!
However there are examples of flood areas where development was stopped
The old Milton tennis centre was supposed to be townhouses but it was rejected by council due to flooding concerns

Sh1t happens....then you die
You cannot design for every possibility
You can only make a best guess.....a flood of this magnitude may not reoccur for 400 years or it could happen next week....it's the luck of the draw!

Keep whinging and I'll fill you in with the facts!

Edited by Rod, 19 January 2011 - 12:48 PM.

[Sarah Jayne]

[sandgroper]

They should all do what Noah did and build their new homes in the form of an ark, then they can just ride the next flood out.cheers steve.p.s with their animals to of course.

[Rod]

Mmmmm.....
That didn't work for the yacht moored in the Brisbane river
Broke it's mooring....hit a submerged pylon...and sank!!!

[gibbs]

I like this Rod dude

[Den]

Wrong...
And
Wrong...

I like a challenge

Your first statement shows a lack of understanding in event probability
This flood was a 200 year event.....it is only likely to occur every 200 years
BUT that doesn't mean it couldn't occur again next week...it just suggests it is highly unlikely
It is an expression of odds

As you have stated this situation was partly cause by people living based on a previous 100 year probability, now we have a new 200 year probability, what will they call the next new event? a 300 year probability? or a 50 year probability? You say it can happen next week but most likely wont happen for another 200years? what about new events? what you have written here means absolutely nothing and gives zero assurances other than the Qld state is aware it is a flood prone area, must be prepared for such events at any moment, has had ample time to prepare infrastructure(at least to protect Brisbane), but doesnt seem to have done so, so your arguement against me fails.

All New developments have to have habitable levels above the 74 flood levels(1 in 100 year event)
However that doesn't stop some people using nonhabitable areas for habitable purposes

Again you use the probability arguement, we have all seen the disturbing images, either land is fit for habitation or it is not, I understand its a complex issue depending on the location, so theres alot of indvidual questions, hopefully the royal commission answers them.

Cheers
Den

Edited by Den, 20 January 2011 - 11:10 AM.

[ado]

Den is kind of right. The term probability is just another example of the weasel words that get constantly thrown around in politics.

One of the unfortunate things about natural disasters is that they are usually unpredictable - which, in this scenario, makes any talk of probability of events occuring highly suspect. Have a look at chaos theory.

[Rod]

You don't know what you are talking about....
The 1/50, 1/100, 1/200 frequency is standard engineering jargon...NOT political double talk

You've totally misinterpreted it's intent.....
It is a way of describing the size of an event by an assumption based on history ....of how often it is likely to happen!

The media reports lots of things they have NO idea about and idiots repeat it out of context

Read some hydraulic engineering text books..... Then reply

Living is a risk....some people take calculated risk....some take risks due to ignorance and some are just unlucky
People have rebuilt in Newcastle after the earthquake
People have rebuilt in rural Victoria after the bush fires
People will rebuild in Queensland after this flood
Some won't.....
Most will have little choice and will be driven by economics....not logic
I truly hope you can continue to make judgement from afar and are never put in the situation where you have to make that call yourself!

Edited by Rod, 20 January 2011 - 01:04 PM.

[Den]

Rod I will try to better explain the uselessness of using probabilities in this situation,

lets just take the 1974 flood and this one, they are about 36years apart, but seperated into different probabilities of 100 and 200 years, however both floods have had similar consequences for places like Brisbane, and neither of these probabilities rule out the possibility of a new type and scale of event which could have the same or similar consquences and could arrive at any time. Timing seems unpredictable, however history shows what is predictable is that similar events will happen again. Hope this makes better sense, its the point I was trying to make previously.

Edited by Den, 20 January 2011 - 01:08 PM.

[Rod]

Mate....Sorry
You don't understand the concept and it's very unlikely that I will be able to give you the required education via this forum
Believe me....it's a standard engineering method of measurement for these types of events
A 1:200 event is bigger than a 1:100 year event and as silly as it sounds you could have 2 events of the same magnitude in the same year .... There is no guarantee a 1:100 year event will only happen ever 100 years!

I do feel however that I'm talking French to a Chinaman!
Best of Luck!

Edited by Rod, 20 January 2011 - 01:57 PM.

[MUZZYBEAR]

is not the flooding that happened simply just the currents in the ocean changing, they had drought, america had rain, they had La Nino we had El Nino effect(something like that) well now our own fello aussies have the La Nina one and that causes storms, rain, in tern flooding, yes the government knew that the wheather was changing, the government would have known, so some of the public should have easily known.
but this happens like every 6-9 years roughly, the last really big result was 35 years ago or near enough according to news, which means that we have had 3-4 of these significant wheather changes and no huge out come.
so in the 35 year period i garantee that not even us """smart""" West aussies knew what was going to happen, so how could they. plus in that time alot of people would have been born into that area so there for they were not around the first time around when this happened, so there for they had no idea, it was there HOME!!!

if we live in armadale like i bassically do should i move cause i know that ill prob get robbed atleast once, maybe murdered??? no im 20 and have lived around there my whole life, so its my HOME. people in the bush should just abanden there homes should they if a fire comes,,, no its your home, you have worked your whole life for it, and its not your fault a fire comes. its not their fault a flood came, i hope that many rebuild there, cause thats where many of them would have grown up, or raised their children, and its all they know, its their home(or now home town, cause of the lack of a house).

sorry for rambling on, bit tired, and that original post is completely wrong and shouldnt have ever been posted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ado]

You don't know what you are talking about....

Hey mate,

Actually I do understand probabilty. You're not the only educated chap around.

I was referring to when the media constantly throw around the term probability - not the concept itself. I believe that was Den's point.

I'd be very interested to see the report of the climate scientist where your numbers come from.

Probability in engineering is often quite a different animal to probability in biology and other natural sciences.


Anyway not really interested in an argument. My heart goes out the those all over the country who have suffered from this last bout of natural disasters and I wish them all wisdom and blessings in planning for the future.

Cheers Ado

[Rod]

No argument Ado!

I'm right!!!

Calculating what nature will do is NOT an exact science
there is a lot of educated assumptions
But you have to start somewhere!

Re comment regarding the original
Post from Muzzybear....I think it is healthy for people to say what they really think.....not just say what they think will be popular

We may think we can control/predict mother nature....but we can't
All we can do is deal with the consequences!

[ado]

No argument Ado!

I'm right!!!

Of course you are.

Calculating what nature will do is NOT an exact science
there is a lot of educated assumptions
But you have to start somewhere!

I know, I do it for a job.

We may think we can control/predict mother nature....but we can't
All we can do is deal with the consequences!

Yep, that's the point. Our predictions of old mother nature are usually pretty useless.

Great that everyone is in agreement.

Edited by ado, 20 January 2011 - 03:18 PM.

[Den]

Yep, that's the point. Our predictions of old mother nature are usually pretty useless.

Great that everyone is in agreement.

Agreed

Rod I believe if you understood the arguement you would be able to make a real point, or at least explain what you mean instead of taking cheap shots. As we have demonstrated the use of probability seems to be a pretty useless tool for this situation, hence my original point remains intact that it is a useless and misleading media statement - which you disagreed with and called wrong.

I know its trying times for many, please forgive my cerebral approach.

[gibbs]

What outcome are you trying to get out of all this Den?