119 replies to this topic

[Den]

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

its just a discussion, I like many others have a questioning mind, if the media covered it properly with some professional journalism then I probably wouldnt have started this discussion.

Now I ask you the same question? why do you keep coming here? so far all Ive seen you do is personally attack me or encourage others to do so, most of your posts are so crude and childish they have to be deleted or cencored by the mods.

Gibbs your just another oppressive figure here trying to intimidate and silence people who have a different view to yours and at the same time you delude yourself thinking your one of the good guys.

Cheers
Den

[Rod]

There is no argument....

It is NOT a useless tool......it is the basis for a mathematical calculation.....obviously a concept you don't understand
That's ok....just accept you don't understand!

Yes I take cheap shots....because I can!

Wivenhoe dam was designed and built after 1974 flood for water storage AND Flood mitigation to look after a 1:100 year event
But in fact we had much larger event... A 1:200 year event and it did it's job +
Yes it flooded but final levels were about 2 meters LOWER than 1974

We can all be brilliant in hindsight....we can all point to poor decisions once you know the outcome

Sure they should have let more water out earlier....but that wasn't politically acceptable....people would have been flooded(earlier than they were as it turns out)
If it had kept raining in Wivenhoe catchment on Wednesday they would have kept the floodgates open and the flood would have been much worse.....it stopped raining and they closed some of the gates reducing calculated levels by a couple of meters

Yes the media have no concept of what they are saying
Yes most of the general public do not understand it either

But it doesn't make it wrong

If you have all the answers....pick next weeks lotto numbers!

Edited by Rod, 20 January 2011 - 04:59 PM.

[Neakit]

Quick question. How is this a bigger event if the area that has been flooded is smaller and the volume of water fallen is smaller?

[Rod]

More water fell in this event!
At one point there was enough water falling in the catchment to fill the dam from 0 to 100% ....every day!

But Wivenhoe has capacity to store a significant amount of run-off
You may have seen reports of the dam being 200% full
The first 100% is for drinking water the 2nd flood mitigation

Controlling floods is about timing......better to let water out over several days....let it all out at once and you cause flooding

The Dam did what it was designed to do.....if there was no dam....there would
have been no control and the flood would have been much worse than 1974!

Does that explain?

[gibbs]

Den, a questioning mind is a good mind, however you come across as the sociapathic, unreasonable kind. Not to mention extremely paranoid.

You carry on media this, media that yet day after day you read the newspaper and watch 3 or 4 different news programs that feed you facts they "want" you to hear. Facts that make you think what a terrible world we live in because thats all they show. You are know better then them for picking holes in their work, you're just playing into their hands.

Oppressive ha. Den you would have to be the most oppressive person on all the forums i have ever been on. You argue every point until your the only one left standing. Not once have i ever seen you say "yeah you have a good point, maybe i should change mypoint of view". Instead you fight to the bitter end and never take on anything anyone says.

I actually find you an interesting person on this forum, i always read your topics mainly to see how much of twit you have made yourself out to be yet again, but i can't help but think that if you put your mind to something more positive you would have quite a big following and people would respect you for it, instead majority of people think you are a complete knob. You have copped more insults in this one thread then most of would cop in 20 years and you have had more people disagree with you than anyone i have ever seen.

most of your posts are so crude and childish they have to be deleted or cencored by the mods.

I dont think i have ever had a post deleted and rarely have them modified. If that's your biggest concern then relax, again your concerns are energy pointlessly wasted.

I am one of the good guys you say????? Hell no!

[Neakit]

More rain fell in the catchment in this event that in the last flood 1974 but river levels were 2 meters lower This time!!

Hey Rod you might wanna stop going back and forth with the facts, It seems your just wanting to have a go at den. Im finding your consistency lacking.

[Rod]

Hey Neakit

I believe I have provided the facts.... And they have been consistent

To me....what is lacking is the consistency of readers to understand the engineering concepts

If you interpret my posts as having a go a Den.... Nothing I can (or want to) do about that
Surely Den didn't expect no comment from Queenslanders especially when he either didn't have the facts or had misinterpreted them
But it seems he is not Alone on that issue

Happy to debate information provided
Please explain what you believe has been inconsistent facts and I'll do my best to put you straight

[Neakit]

Hey if you can't keep your story straight thats not my problem. I have provided the quote that shows you have made 2 conflictng statements

[ado]

Rod,

You might be suprised to know that probability is not actually a engineering concept at all (I assume your background is in hydraulic engineering) but it's a mathematical branch known as probalitity theory.
It might also suprise you that many other discplines actually understand and use this concept too (not just engineers) including biological scientists like myself.

You might recall that one of Den's gripes that you took issue with was the fact that the media regularly throws around phrases like "1 in 200 year threat" (try type that into google)

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

Yep, that was Den's point. The way the media throws around these numbers without any understanding of the concept or the fact that these probablities are only useful in Risk Assessment, is both stupid and dangerous.

It is NOT a useless tool......it is the basis for a mathematical calculation.....obviously a concept you don't understand

No one said probability theory is a useless tool. And it's not the basis for a mathematical calculation. Quoting the values without any understanding of the concept is useless (see google search results from above)

Please explain what you believe has been inconsistent facts and I'll do my best to put you straight

I'm still interested in seeing the report from the climate scientist who stated that this is a 1 in 200 year event. Not saying it's not true, just interested in seeing the paper.

I think most of us over in the West are definitely interested in hearing the thoughts/opinions of a Queenslander regarding these floods. And we welcome any facts that you can provide. All adds to useful discussion.

[Rod]

Hey if you can't keep your story straight thats not my problem. I have provided the quote that shows you have made 2 conflictng statements

Your statement indicates you don't understand what I said
I will try to explain...again

they are NOT conflicting comments....

The rain that fell was a 1:200 year event(engineering terminology).....

More rain fell in 2011 than in 1974.....but the river level did not get as high this time....FACT!!
Have a look at levels on Regatta Hotel next time you are in Brisbane!


Ok you say it's a conflicting statement....but it isn't...

WHY?

Something happened between 1974 and 2011 to change the outcome....

What was it??

THEY...THE GOVERNMENT BUILT A F#~£|€? BIG DAM called Wivenhoe!.....this reduced the amount of water that flowed into the Brisbane River and reduced the potential flood level by 2m+ by storing the additional water and letting it out over several days AFTER THE RAIN HAD STOPPED
The flood was reduced in level....but it lasted longer

Perhaps that is a hard concept to understand.....??

I can't explain it any simpler....and I'm getting sick of repeating myself
If you still can't work it out....tough....you never will!


Goggle "1:100 year event hydraulic engineering" and see what you get!

Perhaps others may explain it better!

[Rod]

I'm not an hydraulic engineer....but I employ a few

It's not a theory....it is the basis for all hydraulic calculations relavent to storm water discharge
And Den DID say it was a "useless tool"

This is about hydraulic engineering....not climate
It is about how much water fell..... over what area..... in what time

Each variable can have an effect on the outcome

It is apparently....if you can believe the media....THE greatest natural disaster in Australias history since European settlement....

I understand Den's arguement....but Please understand what I'm saying

IT COULD HAVE BEEN A LOT WORSE.(in Brisbane)....without Wivenhoe

I think the problem is floods not only occurred in Brisbane but right through Western Queensland
Nearly every major Town in Western Queensland flooded ......impossible to move all these stupid people to higher ground....without stopping the Mining Industry!

Edited by Rod, 21 January 2011 - 03:01 PM.

[gibbs]

Rod, what you are saying is completely easy to understand and you are making perfect sense, you are just explaining to the wrong people. Not all West Aussies are like this, they are bad ambassadors for the state

[ado]

No problems mate. I understand your point. It makes sense what you say about the dam, and I think most people would understand that.

Kind of irrelevant, but as I said probablility has nothing to do with hydraulic calculations per se. It's used by hydrologists and pretty much all other engineers and scientists. Each discpline might have their own terminology, but probablilty theory remains as mathematical concept regardless who uses it. Yep, it's a theory, just like number theory. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.

And you will find that Den said that using probability is a useless tool IN THIS SITUATION. And he is right. It might not be useless for you guys to use it in your daily job (far from it I suspect) and it will be very useful for the risk assessment and planning of the QLD government, but for the media to throw around the phrase as if they know what they are on about is completely useless.

Hopefully it never does get a lot worse.

[Barf]

I was at south perth foreshore last night and with the rains they had in Queensland I reckon Perth would be in a similar situation


http://www.abc.net.a...beforeafter.htm

[dave06]

LMAO,
Den I love reading your posts, for as long as you're on this forum I'm never bored!

Cheers Dave

[gibbs]

Im pretty disappointed in Den. We have had major quakes in NZ and Japan and Den has kept quite. Who cares but it's there fault for biulding on major fault lines anyway......hey Den?

[tha_krust]

its like in america..its called tornado alley for a reason...how come they know that then build houses out of wood????? dumbasses

[Rod]

Nothing wrong with timber houses....

I believe their strategy in tornado alley is to have basements.....

Shelter in the basement....if the house gets blown away....build another one

I'd suggest that even if you built houses out of reinforced concrete....they would still be blown apart or you would be sucked out through window opening

There is no where on Earth....or construction technique that will beat nature......it is a matter of economics and risk verses reward

If you bought a house on the Brisbane River in 1974 just after the flood.....and sold it in 2011 just before the recent flood you would be very very wealthy.....does that make you a genius? Or just Lucky?

Edited by Rod, 02 April 2011 - 06:55 PM.

[tha_krust]

If you bought a house on the Brisbane River in 1974 just after the flood.....and sold it in 2011 just before the recent flood you would be very very wealthy.....does that make you a genius? Or just Lucky?

it would have to be luck because queenslanders.....i'll keep that to myself

[Rod]

Good on ya sport....

I could never make such a sweeping statement about West Australians.....

Individuals.......tend to display their intellect by their statements....not by their postcode...

Ps...Hope you get some Good rain soon...not floods...... just Good rain!

Edited by Rod, 03 April 2011 - 08:17 PM.