Planet X Town Hall

Yowbarb - SURVIVING the CHANGES => Survival Shelter and Location Ideas => Topic started by: Jimfarmer on October 09, 2010, 06:11:43 PM

Title: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on October 09, 2010, 06:11:43 PM
I started a thread with this title in a topic elsewhere, but I didn't realize that it is accessible only to moderators there.  So, I will copy the items from there to here so that everyone can read them.  I'll do one item every 2 or 3 days.  Here goes:
=================================================================

From Sept 26 by me:
 Here are two resources that I found today:
1) http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/ (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/)  gives maps of US states showing locations of earthquakes from 1990 to 2006, terrain, and major cities.  (1 map per state)  Hopefully the gov't of other countries produce similar maps.

2) http://geology.com/state-map/ (http://geology.com/state-map/) gives maps of US states showing terrain and rivers, county names, major roads and cities, elevations, and lakes and rivers.  (5 maps per state)  County boundaries are shown on all maps.  That page has a link to a "World Maps" section.

I have some ideas about other info that could be posted in this topic also, such as criteria for choosing a location.  (Isolation, weather before and after the pole shift, distance from oceans and lakes, elevation, etc.)
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: HoneyBee2012 on October 10, 2010, 08:40:05 AM
Hey,

Thanks for posting those websites.  They provide a wealth of information concerning  terrain and rivers, county names, major roads and cities, elevations, and lakes and rivers and also the seismic areas of the world and our country.  You mentioned criteria for chosing a location before the pole shift and would be interested in your views concerning a most important topic.  If that "I am America map" is pertinent, I am up the creek as I am coastal.  Any current information regarding this would be great.  Thank you! ;D
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on October 10, 2010, 09:52:42 AM
Yo HoneyBee,

You said "... I am up the creek as I am coastal".  Yes, I think so.
Here are references from a posting on August 17, 2010 in topic "Intro Board" :
Google this: "maps of earth changes in 2012" to see several versions of changes in coast lines.
Read about specific locations in https://www.zetatalk.com/info/tinfo242.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/info/tinfo242.htm) .

But, forewarned is forearmed, so just think ahead.  And, read the items that I am posting in the "Ascension" thread.
(More coming soon)
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on October 11, 2010, 10:17:19 AM
Re. selecting a favorable location, here is the 7-step plan of the Zetas at https://www.zetatalk.com/newsletr/issue203.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/newsletr/issue203.htm) :

[start quote]
7 Steps

    Those who first learn of the pending pole shift and the presence of Planet X in the inner solar system are often at a loss on where to start. They know global catastrophes will happen, and preparations should be made, but where to start? The ZetaTalk website is vast. Recently, in anticipation of an uptick in Earth changes with many newcomers to the subject suddenly becoming aware for the first time, the Zetas provided some advice.

    ZetaTalk Advice 9/11/2010: Step 1 is to research your location in the Safe Locations information on the ZetaTalk website. In this you should examine not only your country, your state or province, or your city but also any nearby. Your specific town may not be covered but the whole river valley may be predicted to flood and to flood permanently. This would be a clue that your specific town will be likewise affected. We cannot and have not addressed every spot on Earth, due to time and energy constraints.

    Step 2 is to research your location from the standpoint of the climate that will exist after the pole shift. This is quickly ascertained by looking at the New Geology map. This is a free map which can be cut out and taped together and will give a general idea of the latitude to expect. If your chosen location is where one of the new poles will be, this is a clue that you need to rethink or plan a migration route. This is likewise the case if your chosen location will be on land that will sink below the waves entirely, such as India or western Australia.

(https://www.zetatalk.com/poleshft/pgeon.gif)

    ZetaTalk Advice 9/11/2010: Step 3 is to research your elevation above sea level. A handy and free tool is Google Earth which can be downloaded into a PC and will show the exact elevation of any spot the cursor passes over. Google Maps is a modified version that allows a color coded map based on elevation. Our advice to be 100 miles from a coastline and 200 feet above sea level to avoid the coastal tidal waves during the pole shift should be applied. You can determine your current elevation and whether your location will be 675 feet above sea level where the water will rise within 2 years after the pole shift. A rough guide in this matter is the map Nancy created.

(https://www.zetatalk.com/poleshft/pmelt.gif)

    ZetaTalk Advice 9/11/2010: Step 4 is to determine if you are in one of those regions which will rise or fall. India and western Australia will be below the waves as of the time of the pole shift, and being pushed down before the pole shift. Japan gains 150 feet, New Zealand gains 500 feet and eastern Australia benefits also, Spain loses 50 feet, western UK loses 150 feet, New England gains 450 feet due to the Seaway rip, Florida loses 150 feet, and Vancouver gains 100 feet.

(https://www.zetatalk.com/ning/11sp010.jpg)

    ZetaTalk Advice 9/11/2010: Step 5 is to research the effect of swollen rivers which will likely be in a backwash during the pole shift. We have stated that all rivers will be over their banks, so the worst possible scenario should be assumed. What will happen if the river cannot drain? Despite having a good sea level elevation, any land that does not have an advantage of being at least 200 feet in elevation over a major river bottom in the vicinity is likely to be flooded. A backwash from the main river in your vicinity should be assumed, so that creeks will not drain, for instance. Water on the move tears and bites and scours, and will undercut the soil under buildings so they will tilt and tumble. Being on solid rock that will not melt in this scenario is advised. Tidal bore along cliffs facing the ocean can likewise have water climbing up, or funneled up by ravines which will direct water all the way to Guadalajara from the Pacific, for example. Think this through, for your location, and be on the safe side.

    Step 6 is to examine your volcanic or geographic risk due to mountain building. We have advised a 100 mile radius from all volcanoes that have been active within the last 10,000 years, and that Yellowstone will not become a super volcano. You can determine if the new westerly winds will blow volcanic ash in your direction. Consider that what was formerly north will now be west or east. Fire storms, though extremely rare, almost always occur near erupting volcanoes during the hour of the pole shift. We have advised that if in areas subject to mountain building that old rock not shattered is a good guide to what will survive, and newly fractured rock is a clue that more of the same might be expected. Older mountains as the Alps and Appalachians are considered safe, where the Sierras and Andes are building.

(https://www.zetatalk.com/poleshft/pdese.gif)

    ZetaTalk Advice 9/11/2010: Step 7 is to ascertain if you need a migration route. It is possible to survive the pole shift by avoiding tidal waves and staying outside of structures that will crush you, but to be in a position to be flooded within 2 years after the pole shift. Siberia is a case in point. Here the land is so low in elevation that vast swaths of land will be flooded, and survivors must plan to migrate on foot or via boat. Survivors near the new N Pole off the Bulge of Brazil might consider migrating toward the Andes and their familiar tropical warmth. Such migration, and your target location, can be plotted. Migration routes can be expected to be crowded, so should be avoided as a location for survival camps in general.
[end quote]


I reckon that this procedure is still not complete, but it is a good start.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on October 31, 2010, 06:12:02 PM
Here is some analysis of the temperature factor.  It is not complete yet; I have not been able to get the Zetas to specify the positions of the continents after the pole shift with sufficient accuracy to allow identification of tropic and temperate regions completely.  I am still working on it!

So, here is part A -- current situation:
==============================================================

Favorable Locations: The Temperature Factor.

We seek locations having fertile land, permanent potable water, adequate sunshine and rainfall for a variety of crops, and lack of extremes of weather, both before and after the pole shift.

The climate of a location is affected by its latitude, terrain, and elevation, as well as nearby water bodies and their currents.  Rainfall is then determined by those factors as well as the prevailing winds and seasonal or longer-term effects (e.g, El Nino).  (http://www.mvla.net/teachers/TeriF/Earth%20Science/Pages/FactorsthatAffectClimateTutorial.aspx (http://www.mvla.net/teachers/TeriF/Earth%20Science/Pages/FactorsthatAffectClimateTutorial.aspx)  and  http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_factors_that_determine_climate (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_factors_that_determine_climate))

At sea level and on islands, the local climate is stongly affected by the nearby ocean currents.  But, the Zetas recommend to be at least 675 feet (206 meters) above sea level and 100 miles (161 kilometers) inland in order to be beyond the reach of 1) tsunamis and 2) rising sea levels.     (http://poleshift.ning.com/profiles/blogs/determine-your-safe-locations (http://poleshift.ning.com/profiles/blogs/determine-your-safe-locations))

The only geographical situation that provides a comfortable temperature with little diurnal or seasonal variation is to be at about 3000 feet (914 meters.) elevation at the equator (or nearby) -- but not in a very dry region nor further than 600 miles (965 kilometers) downwind from an ocean, approximately.

Example: At Puyo, Ecuador at 3117 feet (950 meters) elevation and 1.3 degrees south latitude, the highest monthy average temperature is 69 degrees Fahrenheit (21 degrees Celsius) and the lowest monthly average is 66 degrees Fahrenheit (19 degrees Celsius), giving a difference of 3 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius). Diurnal range for 10/10/2010 was 22 degrees Fahrenheit (12 degrees Celsius) -- 53~75 degrees Fahrenheit (12~24 degrees Celsius).  That compares well to the differences between highest monthly average of daily high temperatures and lowest monthly average of daily low temperatures of 20 degrees Fahrenheit (11 degrees Celsius) at Guayaquil, Ecuador (elevation 30 feet -- 9 meters) and 24 degrees Fahrenheit (14 degrees Celsius) at Cuenca, Ecuador (elevation 8291 feet -- 2527 meters).

From there, you can have a comfortable average temperature but with greater variation by going down in elevation and up in latitude.  To make the analysis easy, let's consider the tropics as limits of latitude, so that reasonable comfort can be maintained with only fans, small heaters or stoves, and ordinary clothing, rather than requiring complete heating and cooling systems.

Example: AT Mazatlan, on the west coast of Mexico, at 16 feet (4 meters) elevation and 23.1 degrees north latitude, the highest monthly average temperature is 84 degrees Fahrenheit (28 degrees Celsius) and the lowest monthly average temperature is 69 degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees Celsius), giving a difference of 15 degrees Fahrenheit (8 degrees Celsius).  The difference there between the highest monthly average of daily high temperatures and the lowest monthly average of daily low temperatures is 34 degrees Fahrenheit (19 degrees Celsius).  The diurnal range for 10/10/2010 was 11 degrees Fahrenheit (6 degrees Celsius).

The Internet site http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/outreach/lesson_plans/Teacher%20Background%20Information-%20Earth%27s%20Climate.pdf (http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/outreach/lesson_plans/Teacher%20Background%20Information-%20Earth%27s%20Climate.pdf)
 shows that the north and south isotherms of 18 degrees Celsius (64 degrees Fahrenheit) for the average coolest month are not straight lines, but they cross the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn several times.  So do the isotherms of 70 degrees Fahrenheit (21 degrees Celsius) for the average temperature in January.

(This information is consistent with personal experience of living in Colombia, Australia, and Fiji for several years each.)

The Internet site http://www.stat.ufl.edu/~mripol/3024/Notes&Handouts/MultReg-TempvsLatElev.pdf  (http://www.stat.ufl.edu/~mripol/3024/Notes&Handouts/MultReg-TempvsLatElev.pdf) shows a statistical curve-fit of average annual temperature (in degrees Fahrenheit) to latitude and elevation (in feet) that accounts for 99% of the total variance of the data set.  The result is:
   temp = 109 - 1.83 lat - 0.00185 elev
The scattergrams show a nicely linear relationship of temperature to latitude; but a definite nonlinear effect of elevation on temperature at elevations above 2000 feet is evident.  Although it appears that the inclusion of a term for elevation squared would have improved the fit of the equation, a more complicated equation that did include elevation squared did not produce significant improvement.

The Internet site http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap16/geo_clim.html  (http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap16/geo_clim.html) investigates temperatures (in Celsius)  versus latitude, elevation, rainfall, and downwind distance from the ocean (in kilometers).  Using annual temperature range as the difference between the hottest and coldest months, taking monthly mean temperatures in each case, two of the results are the following.
1) The contour of annual range of temperature of 8 degrees Celsius (14 degrees Fahrenheit) in South America runs close to the tropic of Capricorn -- except in the coastal desert of Chile, where it curves southward.
2) A good fit to the data set is obtained by the equation
   AnnualTempRange = 0.13*Latitude*Distance^0.2
where "*" indicates multiplication and "^" indicates exponentiation.
Average daily temperature range did not correlate well with any of those independent variables, except for a slight statistical inverse relationship to rainfall.

So, the generalized relationship between latitude and elevation at locations having favorable temperature ranges is a straight line from 23 degrees north or south latitude and 0 elevation to 0 degrees latitude and 3000 feet (914 meters) elevation.  The equations for those lines, valid within the tropics and for elevations up to 3000 feet (914 meters),  are:
   elevation = 3000*(1-0.0435*latitude) in feet
   elevation = 914*(1-0.0435*latitude)  in meters
   latitude = 0.00767*(3000-elevation)   for elevation in feet
   latitude = 0.0252*(914-elevation)   for elevation in meters
It should be remembered, though, that local geography can render a location unfavorable even though it satisfies the general relationship between latitude and elevation.

Temperature and rainfall averages for thousands of cities and towns all around the world can be obtained at http://www.weatherbase.com (http://www.weatherbase.com) .

====================================================================================================
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on October 31, 2010, 07:03:00 PM
Here is as much of the Temperature Factor, part B (after the pole shift) as I have gathered together so far.  More will come if the Zetas answer my questions -- which Nancy has refused to allow so far.

==================================================================

We seek locations in the tropics, or at least with latitudes less than, say, 45 degrees, after the pole shift so that temperature ranges will not be problematic.

The Zeta's map that shows the new equator and the new poles is this:
(https://www.zetatalk.com/poleshft/pgeon.gif)
However, the problem with that map is that the positions of the continents are not shown in the relative locations that they will be after the pole shift;  it is just a map of the current globe turned sideways and the new equator and poles drawn in.  Unfortunately, some of the tectonic plates will move so much that the total expansion in the Atlantic and corresponding compression in the Pacific and Indian Ocean is 5050 miles  (8126 kilometers), according to my calculations using the Zeta's data.  Here is my diagram of that situation:
(http://poleshift.ning.com/forum/attachment/download?id=3863141%3AUploadedFile%3A220124)

Here is how I calculated the values:
The Zeta's map shows the new equator passing through or close to the South Pole, and so, being a great circle, it must pass through or close to the North Pole also.  The map also shows the new equator passing the following locations.
1) Passing thru the Bering Straight and touching the eastern tip of the largest island there (Big Diomede).  The location there is 170 degrees west old longitude and 63 degrees north old latitude.
2) Grazing the northeast tip of South Island of New Zealand.  The location there is 174 degrees east old longitude and 41 degrees south old latitude.
3) Passing over the western tip of Africa, at a position that appears to be at 14, 15, or 16 degrees east old longitude.

So, on the Pacific side, the distances between the points in the Bering Straight and in New Zealand is 16 degrees longitude and 104 degrees latitude.  Then, simple interpolation puts the location where the new equator crosses the old equator at 180 degrees east/west old longitude.  Therefore, the new equator is approximately coincident to old longitude 180 degrees east/west, but it is tilted somewhat to the east in the old northern hemisphere and to the west in the old southern hemisphere.

On the Atlantic side, 180 degrees from 180 degrees east/west is 0 degrees east/west, which is 14 to 16 degrees west of the apparent position on the Zeta's map.  That discrepency could be related to  the tilt of the new equator relative to the longitude lines, and/or to the shifting of the continents that will occur -- see below.

The poles are always 90 degrees up and down from the equator, and since the new equator passes near to the old poles, the new poles should be near to the old equator.  The Zetas have specified the exact locations of the new poles.  This statement is from https://www.zetatalk.com/ning/17jy2010.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/ning/17jy2010.htm) :
"Under our direction Nancy has ascertained via Google Earth that the new N Pole will be at the current lat/long of 5°S and 29°W and the new S Pole will be the current lat/long of 10°N and 78°E. These points are not on opposites of the globe from one another today. The Pacific compresses, the Atlantic widens, the S America Plate crunches through much of what is now the Caribbean Plate, and all this and more reform the globe somewhat so that geographical points are not relative to other geographical points as they are today. However, as a general guide to determine your new latitude, using these points and the map of the new geography and our statements on where the new Equator will ride should help you determine with more accuracy your new climate."

Thus, the new axis of the Earth (the diameter thru the poles) will be tilted by 5 to 10 degrees with respect to the old equator, and the alignment is slightly bent with respect to an old diameter line, perhaps by 10-5 = 5 degrees.

The circumference of the earth at the equator is 24901.55 miles (40075.16 kilometers)


OK then,  since we don't know which tectonic plates will move by how much, the best that we can do at the moment is just to estimate new latitudes on land masses by measuring from either where the new equator passes over or near to existing land, or from the positions of the new poles on or near to existing land; BUT only within the same tectonic plate as the starting point on the new equator or the new pole because most or all of the relative movements between continents will occur at the plate boundaries.

What we get from that method, by looking at the Zeta's map, is that the warm-to-hot regions of the Earth after the pole shift will be, in order of confidence:
1) Antarctica,
2) western Africa,
3) New Zealand,
4) Hawaii,
5) Alaska and perhaps some of western Canada,
6) eastern Siberia,
7) west coast  of South America (50 degrees south of the new north pole).

Measurements from the new south pole are not possible because of the drastic changes in positions of the tectonic plates that will occur in that region.
================================================================
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on November 03, 2010, 03:05:48 PM
From my message of  November 1:  "More will come if the Zetas answer my questions -- which Nancy has refused to allow so far."

OK; the Zeta's emissary Nancy finally admitted that my analysis was correct.
From http://poleshift.ning.com/forum/topics/zetatalk-chat-for-november-6?id=3863141%3ATopic%3A220744&page=4#comments (http://poleshift.ning.com/forum/topics/zetatalk-chat-for-november-6?id=3863141%3ATopic%3A220744&page=4#comments) :
[start quote]
You are correct, James, that the New Geography map in the Pole Shift section does not show much in the way of the crunching of the Caribbean and Indonesia region, the shortening of the Indo-Australia Plate due to the plunge under the Himalyas, the compression of the Pacific or spread of the Atlantic. BUT the gentleman who drew the new geography on the old map DID try to take those factors into consideration.
https://www.zetatalk.com/teams/tteam332.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/teams/tteam332.htm)
For instance Step 14, post pole shift.
https://www.zetatalk.com/teams/poleshft/mikeg014.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/teams/poleshft/mikeg014.htm)

And I am looking forward to a NEW result that can be used here on the ning to show people where their current geography will be. Given that the Zetas have given the location, on the current globe, of the Lat/Long for the new poles, how about some of the graphically talented folks here drawing up a new globe???
[end quote]

Well, she did not say that she will request numerical data from the Zetas, so we will see if any comes forth.  In the meantime, this is what I had suggested to be done:  "With that data, someone having appropriate software that can represent the Earth as a three-dimensional object can then trace the plate boundaries, mark them as surface units, move them by the specified amounts to produce the modified object, and then generate maps with new latitude and longitude lines.  I suggest that Mollweide projection (elliptical equal area) with the new equator horizontal and centered vertically would be the most useful. (Two maps would be nice -- one with Central America in the vertical center line and the other with the new antipode of Central America in the vertical center line.)  Who could do that?"

Could any of our members here (PX Town Hall) help/do that?

Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: CINERUSS on December 03, 2010, 12:52:17 PM
In light of what may be coming on the earth, can anyone share where the safest place would be to be geographically speaking?  Is there a map of locations.  I know this is all based on what may be affecting the earth in the coming months / years but any help would be greatly appreciated
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on December 03, 2010, 05:38:08 PM
OK, found these links, not sure if these are the same as what Jim has.

http://poleshift.ning.com/profiles/blogs/determine-your-safe-locations

https://www.zetatalk.com/info/tinfo242.htm
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: CINERUSS on December 03, 2010, 06:15:59 PM
Hi Jim,

The users in this forum stated you knew of safe place to locate geographically.  Could you tell us where this is in the forum?  The Zeta site is thorough but practically every place you check, it is not safe.  There is no breakdown on their site about the safe areas.  Any suggestions?

Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on December 03, 2010, 06:27:29 PM
1.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on December 03, 2010, 06:28:14 PM
2
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on December 03, 2010, 06:28:57 PM
3
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on December 03, 2010, 10:10:19 PM
Do you have high ground there, underground shelter areas? Those would be worth investigating for your community.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on December 03, 2010, 11:19:31 PM
On the higher ground you have perhaps there are some caves also for protection, You will need to ensure you provision the higher grounds as when things begin to escalate there may bot be enough time to do so.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on December 04, 2010, 02:29:21 PM
"The users in this forum stated you knew of safe place to locate geographically."
Well, yes and no.  No place will be free of severe earthquakes, at least, I understand.

The best places that I have identified so far, at least  for my preferences (which exclude Africa and Mongolia, for socio-politico reasons),  are:  Tasmania, Australia, around Mount Roland, SE Montana and adjoining counties in North Dakota and South Dakota, specifically in or adjoining Custer National Forest, and Porcupine Flats or thereabouts, which in the eastern foothills of the Rocky Mountains in Alberta, Canada.

Here is the summary of an analysis that I wrote in December of 2008.  I would do it somewhat differently now, but the results are still valid, I think.

[start quote]
...to establish ...survival shelters.  Criteria for camp locations include: 1) high inland plateau, 2) on a low hillside at least 6 feet above floodable plain but below the summit, 3) near a source of unpollutable water, 4) remote rural area, 5) not visible from any mapped road, 6) does not experience extreme weather, and 7) not within 200 miles of any known major geologic fault or caldera.

Three locations have been identified, one each in South Dakota USA, Alberta Canada, and Tasmania Australia.  The latter two are not strictly on large plateaus, however, so perhaps more suitable specific spots could be identified upon closer inspection of the terrain in those areas.

Candidate locations

Custer National Forest in north-west South Dakota is the best location in the USA that I have found so far.   The surrounding region includes parts of North Dakota and Montana also.  That area should be high enough to avoid the incursion of ocean water that is expected to flood the Mississippi and Midwest regions.

Alberta, Canada, should be less susceptible to earth perturbations and might therefore be safer.  Winters in Canada are very cold now, but the weather there will become warmer if the poles shift as predicted by ZetaTalk.  (Saskatoon is generally too low and flat, but some good spots might be found near the Cypress Hills in the southwest section.)  The specific location in Alberta is called Porcupine Flats.

Tasmania’s climate is classified as temperate maritime now, and “Tasmania can expect to be some 1,000 feet higher than present, though the polar melt will return that gain by almost 700 feet. The climate will change to be more tropical, lined up closer to the new equator, so vegetative growth on the island will eventually be more lush after some decades.”  The specific location there is called Mount Roland.

Summary of the analysis

Three factors were considered for each location, and the locations were ranked for each factor.  Those factors, in order of importance, are:  Tectonic, Isolation, and Temperature.  Unfortunately, the confidence of the ranking varies inversely to the importance; that is, the ranking for the most important factor is the least confident, and the ranking for the least important factor has the most confidence.  These are the results:
     Factor      Importance         Confidence             Ranking
   Tectonic           Highest                   Low                  (1) Tasmania   (2) Alberta   (3) South Dakota
   Isolation           Medium                   Moderate       (1) South Dakota   (2) Alberta   (3) Tasmania
   Temperature   Least                   High               (1) Tasmania   (2) South Dakota   (3) Alberta

To combine the rankings, the sum of three ranks for each location, is:
   (1) 5 for Tasmania,  (2) 6 for South Dakota, and  (3) 7 for Alberta.

To take importance into account, relative weights are assigned to factors as follows:
   0.5 for Tectonic, 0.3 for Isolation, and 0.2 for Temperature.
Then, each rank number is divided by the importance weight of the corresponding factor.  The results are:
   (1) 17 for Tasmania,  (2) 19 for South Dakota, and  (3) 26 for Alberta.

Conclusions:
The order of preference is  (1) Tasmania,  (2) South Dakota,  and (3) Alberta.
That ordering is close and of only moderate confidence.
[end quote]

The spacing in the table might be messed up in this copy.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Montanabarb on December 04, 2010, 04:03:42 PM
Jim, I assume that by concluding that southeast Montana is a safe area (as opposed the the rest of the State), you feel that the Yellowstone Caldera will not be a factor any time in the near future (next several hundred years.)  According to the recent National Geographic article, and accompanying map, during the last three eruptions by Yellowstone an area east of a line drawn from the Caldera northeast about five or six hundred miles to the vicinity of Sheridan County, Montana, and southern Saskatchewan, then southeast to Kansas, Nebraska and the Gulf of Mexico, was covered by many feet of volcanic ash.  In all three cases (eruptions) the area west/northwest of that line received little to no fallout due to prevailing winds.  There is a good deal of conjecture on whether or not Yellowstone is preparing for an eruption any time soon. But nearly everyone who knows anything about the Yellowstone Caldera feels that if it blows, we're toast anyway (here in Montana), simply from the impact of the explosion.

BTW, the Zetas seem to think that we Montanans who live near the Rocky Mountain Front should move farther inland at least temporarily, during the pole flip (because of the tectonic plates.)
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on December 05, 2010, 02:53:42 AM
Hi Montanabarb.  ;You said  "Jim, I assume that by concluding that southeast Montana is a safe area (as opposed the the rest of the State), you feel that the Yellowstone Caldera will not be a factor any time in the near future (next several hundred years.) "

This from https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm) :

"We have indicated in the past that Yellowstone would not be exempt from erupting during the pole shift, and this still stands. But the eruption will not be what many fear. It has evidence of being a super volcano at a time when the world was in complete global turmoil, not due to a pole shifts but due to impacts and being careened out of its orbit and closer to the Sun. The injury to the crust so deep it almost reached the core. So clearly that was an exceptional situation, not this situation. What should be born in mind is that this is a subduction area, with layers of the North American Plate pushing all the way to the Continental Divide. Even though Yellowstone lies in an area which is a hot spot, there’s enough crust flakes overlapping that it is not just a direct siphon of lava to go kaboom in an explosion. But it will cause ash for some 100 miles in all direction, bad enough that life may be snuffed in those areas. So we would recommend anyone wanting to survive the shift itself, not to be close to Yellowstone but to allow a 100 miles buffer, more miles would be better."
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Ga_boy on December 05, 2010, 06:48:38 AM
My biggest issue would be...asteroids..comets and meteors from space. There is no telling how long we would be in a shooting gallery even after it has passed due to gravitational forces of our own and other bodies. Asteroids dont have to impact the earth to cause devastation, look what happened to norther Russia in the early 1900's , that one exploded in the air destroyed everything "The Tunguska event" destroyed trees and everything in a 830 sq mi area. The funny thing with history is it always repeats it self.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Bill on December 05, 2010, 07:27:26 AM
If Marduk returns to the original battle site.  The hammered bracelet, or asteroid belt. Certainly it will dislodge thousands of asteroids, these objects will be a danger for a very long time. A shelter that can withstand the pressure of an air burst nuke is highly recommended.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on December 05, 2010, 07:36:09 AM
This is from Amy Evans and relates to the astroid scenario.

"That Unacknowledged Asteroid
Imagine if you had spotted an asteroid or comet hurtling toward Earth. Or that you became aware of such via the Interweb. It would be very useful to calculate how the collision will affect you, where you are.

In case that unlikely scenario arises, here’s some software that promises to calculate the harm you face.
http://www.purdue.edu/impactearth/
Lest you be unsatisfied with a simulation of a massive rock barreling down on us, the Web site also provides data on the aftermath, including the size of the crater, the extent of the fireball, and even the height of the tsunami wave, should the object crash into the ocean."
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on December 05, 2010, 10:29:04 AM

This is from Amy Evans AND ALEX and relates to the astroid scenario.

"That Unacknowledged Asteroid
Imagine if you had spotted an asteroid or comet hurtling toward Earth. Or that you became aware of such via the Interweb. It would be very useful to calculate how the collision will affect you, where you are.

In case that unlikely scenario arises, here’s some software that promises to calculate the harm you face.
http://www.purdue.edu/impactearth/ (http://www.purdue.edu/impactearth/)
Lest you be unsatisfied with a simulation of a massive rock barreling down on us, the Web site also provides data on the aftermath, including the size of the crater, the extent of the fireball, and even the height of the tsunami wave, should the object crash into the ocean."
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Montanabarb on December 05, 2010, 11:01:46 AM
Hi Montanabarb.  ;You said  "Jim, I assume that by concluding that southeast Montana is a safe area (as opposed the the rest of the State), you feel that the Yellowstone Caldera will not be a factor any time in the near future (next several hundred years.) "

This from https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm) :

"We have indicated in the past that Yellowstone would not be exempt from erupting during the pole shift, and this still stands. But the eruption will not be what many fear. It has evidence of being a super volcano at a time when the world was in complete global turmoil, not due to a pole shifts but due to impacts and being careened out of its orbit and closer to the Sun. The injury to the crust so deep it almost reached the core. So clearly that was an exceptional situation, not this situation. What should be born in mind is that this is a subduction area, with layers of the North American Plate pushing all the way to the Continental Divide. Even though Yellowstone lies in an area which is a hot spot, there’s enough crust flakes overlapping that it is not just a direct siphon of lava to go kaboom in an explosion. But it will cause ash for some 100 miles in all direction, bad enough that life may be snuffed in those areas. So we would recommend anyone wanting to survive the shift itself, not to be close to Yellowstone but to allow a 100 miles buffer, more miles would be better."

Thanks for that, Jim.  Good information. We are about 120 miles north of the the northern edge of the Caldera, just beyond the line shown in the National Geographic.  This info makes complete sense, and somewhat eases my mind, although we live in a geothermal zone (several businesses have geothermal heat.) The area suffered a major earthquake in 1935 but we have no intention of relocating.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: 1969quartz0 on December 05, 2010, 02:19:19 PM
Jim what do you think about Billings Montana? My little brother lives there, he just moved into his house a week ago it is on a mountain he had to drill 390' to get water it is not really SE Montana.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on December 05, 2010, 03:24:29 PM
Hi Nathan,  you said "Jim what do you think about Billings Montana?"

Tectonic factor:  good, but a bit too close to Yellowstone, perhaps.  See "Seismicity of Montana 1990-2006 at http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/montana/seismicity.php (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/montana/seismicity.php).

Isolation factor:  not good in or near to the city, but perhaps OK with a hideout in the hills.  But, stay away from the main mountain range (see the seismicity map).

Temperature:  well, OK after the pole shift; what about warmth in winter?

Anyway, Billings MT should certainly be much better than most other cities, so I would not decline an offer to go there myself.

Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on March 23, 2011, 06:35:21 AM
I figure many of you know all about this. Sort of new to me.
Potentially dangerous Karst area - looks like the western half of Ohio.

- Yowbarb
...
https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=21.15
Re: Midwestern US Meetings
« Reply #15 on: March 22, 2011, 02:10:20 PM
 
http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Portals/10/pdf/karstmap.pdf   pdf image of Karst in Ohio
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: augonit on March 23, 2011, 07:06:42 AM
Yeah, I grew up in Ohio and never heard about that karst stuff.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on March 23, 2011, 07:42:12 PM
Yeah, I grew up in Ohio and never heard about that karst stuff.

I had heard about it...geology in high school then one earth science class when I went back to college again...
I never thought about it in terms of a survival location...
Posted it because a person would have to be aware about karst topography and the fact something could cave in...There is a lot of it in Missouri too...
Will try to post something more complete.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on April 09, 2011, 04:21:46 PM
From the Zetas at https://www.zetatalk.com/ning/09ap2011.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/ning/09ap2011.htm) :
Here is another view of the position of the poles and the equator after the pole shift, except that "The exact position of the continents is not in complete accordance with their post poleshift alignment, however, but to detail these changes would be getting into the 8 of 10 scenarios prior to the time when we are ready to discuss these scenarios."  [my emphasis]

ihttps://www.zetatalk.com/newsletr/image018.jpg

This was in response to the question "Could you please ask the Zetas about the new map of the poles with the equator on about 10 degrees west and the new pole on 29 degrees west this would create a needed widening of the Atlantic by 70 degrees".  That almost agrees with my calculations, which produced a widening of 73 degrees on the old equator.  (My figure should be more accurate because I took more data into account in order to calculate the position of the intersection of the new and old equators in the Pacific.)
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: bk on May 17, 2011, 11:57:15 PM
Jim, When you have a moment look at these address in google earth for me.

White Crest Way, Pickens, SC

Cherokee Hills Dr, pickens, SC

3156 Table Rock Rd, Pickens, SC 29671

If I am reading that correctly the elevation is over 1000 feet which is a lot higher than Myrtle Beach.

What kind of temps or how close to poles or equator would this area be?

From the looks of the maps I have seen this could be the new Beach front.

Thanks, Bob
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on May 18, 2011, 08:49:57 PM
Jim, When you have a moment look at these address in google earth for me.

White Crest Way, Pickens, SC

Cherokee Hills Dr, pickens, SC

3156 Table Rock Rd, Pickens, SC 29671

If I am reading that correctly the elevation is over 1000 feet which is a lot higher than Myrtle Beach.

What kind of temps or how close to poles or equator would this area be?

From the looks of the maps I have seen this could be the new Beach front.

Thanks, Bob


Well, bk Jim will have a more complete answer, just wanted to say Pickens SC is over 1,000 feet and is at least on the eastern side of  SC near the border.
Not sure yet about name of the rivers around there...
Currently not flooded,
http://weatherforyou.com/wxinfo/hw3/hw3.php?forecast=riversnearby&place=pickens+country+club&state=sc&zipcode=&country=us&county=45077&zone=SCZ005

Yowbarb

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickens,_SC
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: bk on May 18, 2011, 11:36:20 PM
Only about 9 to 12 miles from these mountains as  the crow fly's about half of that.

Pinnacle Mountain

Elevation: 1040 m / 3415 ft

Sassafras Mountain

Elevation: 1085 m / 3560 ft

Within miles of parks and 60 miles from Smokey Mountains

Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on May 19, 2011, 09:55:47 AM

Hi BK,
"Jim, When you have a moment look at these address in google earth for me.
White Crest Way, Pickens, SC
Cherokee Hills Dr, pickens, SC
3156 Table Rock Rd, Pickens, SC 29671"

Unfortunately, I had to cancel my fast Internet access, do can't do Google Earth now.

But, some info about Pickens, SC:
Population 3,036.
Altitude 967 feet (sufficient by about 300 feet).
Not near to any Internet highways (nearest is at Greenville -- about 30 miles away)
Seismicity map of SC at http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/south_carolina/seismicity.php (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/south_carolina/seismicity.php)  shows only 3 small quakes in that general region of the state in 1993~2006 interval.
Hilly country with several low mountains nearby.
10 miles to lake Keowee.  Water should not be a problem.
New latitude after the pole shift should be about 45 degrees North.  ( As cold as Montana is now)

Generally, I like it, except for the temperature after the pole shift.

Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on May 19, 2011, 09:58:48 AM
wikipedia says Pickens is over one thousand feet...

Elevation
 
1,093 ft (333 m)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickens,_SC
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on May 19, 2011, 08:30:42 PM
Jim btw sorry if the data I posted is wrong wikipedia is my only source on that - over 1,000 ft for Pickens.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on May 19, 2011, 11:19:49 PM
Jim, Thanks for the info my main concern was the temp after the pole shift.
I would hate to wake up and find myself in the south pole.

Jim had posted some maps about that... where the new poles would be, etc.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on May 21, 2011, 07:35:16 AM
This from an e-mail that came to me today:

[start excerpts]
moving to a rural area won’t take away all of the problems associated with surviving short, medium, and long term breakdowns in civil order after a disaster. When you move from a populated area to a rural area, you simply exchange one set of challenges and problems for another set.

You’ll have people on both sides of the issue…one saying that farm life is too hard and another saying that city life is too complicated and fast paced…and they’re both right. Both populated and rural areas have benefits and drawbacks both in normal times and after disasters. You’ve just got to figure out what works best for your particular situation and go with it knowing that while there is a “best” solution for you, there’s not a “perfect” solution.

...
And, if you want help figuring out how to create a survival plan designed to take the reality of your current situation into account (instead of an ideal situation that may not be in place by the time disaster strikes), I want to encourage you to check out the Survive In Place Urban Survival Course at http://SurviveInPlace.com (http://SurviveInPlace.com) as well as http://UrbanSurvivalPlayingCards.com (http://UrbanSurvivalPlayingCards.com).
[end excerpts]
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: dougluvn on May 21, 2011, 10:58:17 AM

Planning for the event is important. That involves a plan for what you will do in the time right after the event  but you also need a plan for after the dust settles.  How will you feed yourself, that food you stock piled will only last so long you can't store enough.  You can't store enough water.  The longer your pile will last, the better but what is your "long term sustainability plan"  I am referring to farming, animal husbandry, clothing. 

So moving a way from the cities in the after time to a rural area is not a bad idea.  Think of this as a 2ND dark age in that we will travel the lands and see the tomb stones to the civilization that was.  Just as they did during the dark ages, people  looked upon the aquaducts the Romans build and wonder how they did it.  We (as a people) will have to relearn alto of things that people 100 years ago took at common knowledge.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on June 20, 2011, 07:16:57 PM
OK folks, let's all meet at Dinosaur National Monument.  We can squat there when the government collapses.

"Dinosaur National Monument is located in northwest Colorado and northeast Utah, straddling the border of these states. About two-thirds of the park is in Colorado. Dinosaur N.M. is 210,000 acres in size."

Dinosaur National Monument:
http://geology.about.com/od/geology_co/ig/COgallery/dinosaur-national-monument-CO.htm (http://geology.about.com/od/geology_co/ig/COgallery/dinosaur-national-monument-CO.htm)
"The Green River (upper and lower left) meets the Yampa River (right center) in deeply incised canyons in this remote federal parkland in northwestern Colorado."
(http://0.tqn.com/d/geology/1/7/8/h/1/dinosaur-national-monument-CO.jpg)

The headquarters is in the small town of Dinosaur, Colorado, on US Highway 40, a few miles south of the parkland border.
------
Dinosaur National Monument
4545 E Hwy. 40
Dinosaur, CO 81610
------
http://www.nps.gov/dino/index.htm (http://www.nps.gov/dino/index.htm)
Phone: 970-374-3000

The Canyon Area Visitor Center is located 2 miles east of Dinosaur town.

Here are some info and data about the region.  I'll post more as/if time permits.

*  Location: north-west corner of Colorado and north-east corner of Utah.
*  Isolated; sparse population; no Interstate highway nearby.
*  Inland basin of ancient lake, now at moderately high altitude (approximately 6000 feet).
*  At least two mountain ranges between there and the oceans, both east and west.
*  Terrain has hills, flat sections, and canyons.
*  Two rivers pass through (Green and Yampa).
*  Cool temperate climate now; arid. (Below see monthly average temperatures and rainfalls)
*  Latitude after the pole shift will be about 20 degrees.
*  No military bases nearby (200+ miles).
*  The small town of Dinosaur is south of Dinosaur Monument; population 304, elevation 5,922 feet.
*  Counties:  Uintah in Utah and Moffat in Colorado.
*  Uintah county population is 32,588.  Idustries: natural gas, tourism, livestock, forage.
*  Uintah county seat is Vernal; 34 miles from Dinosaur town; population 9,089, elevation 5,328 feet.
*  Moffat county population is 13,980. Industries: oil and  natural gas, livestock, tourism.
*  Moffat county seat is Craig;  141 miles from Dinosaur town; population is 9,251,  elevation is 6,198 feet.
*  Seismicity is slight.  Seismicity maps for 1990~2006:
(http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/utah/images/seismicity.gif)
(http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/colorado/images/seismicity.gif)

Now, notice that in the Mountain time zone, the southern states are in drought, while the northern states are flooded.   In between them, we find north-west Colorado.  Here is how the weather there has been recently:
-  At Dinosaur:  data after March 2011 is missing.  Rainfall for prior months was normal.
-  At Vernal:  continues to be normal, with normal variation.
-  At Craig: Usually about 1.0 to 1.8 inches of rainfall every month, varying slightly by season.  Was normal thru March 2011, then April and May each had 3.0 inches of rain.  Temperatures holding normal, approximately.
From the Dinosaur N.M. Internet site: "June 6, 2011 Update: Flooding on the Yampa River has required monument
staff to close the Deerlodge Park Campground until further notice. ... Dinosaur's rivers — the Green and the Yampa — are expected to reach record or near record levels in the Spring of 2011 due to the heavy snowpack and wet spring. Some areas within the watershed received over 150% of the average annual snowfall."

* Driving distance from Denver to Dinosaur town: 296 miles.  Route crosses over the Rocky mountains.
* Driving distance from Salt Lake City to Dinosaur town: 205 miles.  Route crosses over Wasatch mountains.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on July 09, 2011, 09:37:46 PM
A brief extract from the "Shape of Things to Come" report by Clif High of the Web Bot site, dated 7/1/2011 and named DataAnalysis21.pdf (copyrighted).

"Two new phenomena, the really really big sinkhole, and the sudden new lakes, caused by new ground water that has to go somewhere.  [(new) inland sea)] involving parts of Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Colorado.  the [weeping mountains] aspect/attribute set that now is gaining such huge levels of support within the Terra entity. "

Now, this opens up some more candidate locations and puts some constraints on others.

1)  Regarding SE Montana and adjoining counties in North Dakota and South Dakota: be sure to be in the hills, high above the creek bed, and not on a downslope.

2)  Regarding NW Colorado (Dinosaur National Monument): shift to the Uintah Mountains in Utah.  Move to Vernal, Utah (population 8339, elevaion 5322 feet), and reconnoiter from there.

3)  Relocate to the La Sal mountains in Utah. That region is very isolated and nearly unihabitable, but it should become a series of islands in the inland sea.  Move to La Sal, Utah (population 340, elevation 7025 feet), or 18 miles to the NW to Moab, Utah (population 5148, elevation 4025 feet),  and reconnoiter from there.  My parents lived in Moab for a few years after retirement, and they liked it.

4)  Regarding Durango, Colorado:  be sure to be high above the bed of the river that runs through the town, and not on a downslope.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on July 10, 2011, 07:58:35 AM
Here is a copy of a relevant message that was posted in another topic:

"where do you recommend? "

A)  Worldwide:  Tasmania, Australia, above 700 feet elevation.
B)  USA,  for isolation and relative safety from earth changes:
B1)  SE Montana and adjoining counties in North Dakota and South Dakota; in the hills at a creek or shallow well; at least 30 feet above valley floor.
       Disadvantages:  cold winter before the pole shift (warm afterwards); maybe too isolated for most people.
B2)  NW Colorado.  See https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=1118.msg34443;topicseen#msg34443.
       Disadvantages:  cold winter and arid climate before the pole shift (nice afterwards); the Green River will flood immensely when the Flaming Gorge dam breaks upstream.
B3)  Durango, Colorado, at least 30 feet above the bank of the river that runs through the town.
      Disadvantages:  not so isolated (military underground bases not far away); somewhat too high elevation (6500 feet).

Would a detailed evaluation and comparison of these and other candidate sites be useful?  (I am not volunteering to do the whole job.)
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on July 19, 2011, 07:31:25 PM
I just clicked on the Dinosaur Monument website & funny thing. The bones exhibit is closed for remodeling until October 2011 . Hmmmm .... Sure is a whole bunch of museum remodeling going on planet wide. The Vatican Library, The EPA library, Dinosaur Park ....
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on July 28, 2011, 07:31:18 PM
From https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=2407.msg38157#msg38157 (https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=2407.msg38157#msg38157) :
"I also would like to know of where to head for a safe zone."

See recent messages in this topic.

Do you have to live in a town?
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Plantman40 on July 29, 2011, 10:43:05 AM
Now, I'm thinking North Dakota or South Dakota. Any feedback will be appreciated. It's coming down to the wire and I'm still guessing.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on July 29, 2011, 11:06:26 AM
I'm thinking North Dakota or South Dakota. Any feedback will be appreciated.

That would be my first choice for isolation and distance from volcanoes and water bodies.  Only slight seismicity. and none in the corners nearest to Montana.  Squat in the Custer National Forest. or lease a property in the hills.

 How about this one?
(http://photos3.zillow.com/is/image/i0/i5/i6366/IS1hfhr2232fqn7.jpg?op_sharpen=1&qlt=90&hei=234&wid=316)
For Sale:$5,000. 
Description
200 ACRES - EKALAKA 200 ac divided into 23 parcels from 5 ac to 19 ac. Custer National Forest in full view. Paved landing strip 8 mi away. Poss homesites. Great hunting & scenery in sparsely populated Big Sky Country. $5,000 per ac Realtor owned
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on July 29, 2011, 12:22:06 PM
I'm thinking North Dakota or South Dakota. Any feedback will be appreciated.

That would be my first choice for isolation and distance from volcanoes and water bodies.  Only slight seismicity. and none in the corners nearest to Montana.  Squat in the Custer National Forest. or lease a property in the hills.

 How about this one?
(http://photos3.zillow.com/is/image/i0/i5/i6366/IS1hfhr2232fqn7.jpg?op_sharpen=1&qlt=90&hei=234&wid=316)
For Sale:$5,000. 
Description
200 ACRES - EKALAKA 200 ac divided into 23 parcels from 5 ac to 19 ac. Custer National Forest in full view. Paved landing strip 8 mi away. Poss homesites. Great hunting & scenery in sparsely populated Big Sky Country. $5,000 per ac Realtor owned

Wow Jim if that is far enough away from Yellowstone that might be an  idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekalaka,_Montana  EKALAKA, MT

Elevation    3,425 ft (1,044 m)

Thank you for sharing this idea and this ad,
YB
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Montanabarb on July 29, 2011, 02:05:58 PM
Now, I'm thinking North Dakota or South Dakota. Any feedback will be appreciated. It's coming down to the wire and I'm still guessing.

Plantman, I live in north central Montana (in MT all my life.) I hadn't visited the southeastern part of MT for a long time, but in May we drove to Kansas for a graduation, through Ekalaka, MT,  Rapid City, SD, and northern Nebraska.  The most beautiful and seemingly appropriate place for survival that we saw was the Black Hills region of northwestern South Dakota.  It's unbelievably rugged-- and therefore easy to fortify. We saw lots of properties for sale but didn't investigate.  Just south of the Black Hills (contiguous) are the Wind Cave and Jewel Cave National parks (or Monuments or whatever.)  These are huge, extensive caverns managed by the National Park Service.  There are hundreds of thousands of acres of National Forest (publicly owned) lands in the whole three state ( ND, SD, MT) region.

The other place in the south central area of Montana (100 miles or so as the crow flies from the Black Hills) that I find the most beautiful and inviting are the Judith Mountains in Central Montana, east of Lewistown.  It is a pristine jewel of an area, occupied by big ranches, a few smaller homesites, and not many people.  If you have watched "Last American Cowboy" on the Discovery Channel, one of the featured ranches is in that area--Stanford.  (Another ranch in the series is just west of where we live.)

I wish you all the best in your search.

Barb Richard (MT Barb)
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on July 29, 2011, 06:08:24 PM
"Wow Jim if that is far enough away from Yellowstone that might be an  idea. "

Yes it is.  The Zetas say that Yellowstone will flow, not blow, so 100 miles distance should suffice.  See https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm) .
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Plantman40 on July 30, 2011, 07:33:45 AM
Barb, Thank you for the information. I question yellowstone but there are so many questions. I know I'm not the only one.
            Take care.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Plantman40 on July 30, 2011, 07:37:49 AM
I'm thinking North Dakota or South Dakota. Any feedback will be appreciated.

That would be my first choice for isolation and distance from volcanoes and water bodies.  Only slight seismicity. and none in the corners nearest to Montana.  Squat in the Custer National Forest. or lease a property in the hills.

 How about this one?
(http://photos3.zillow.com/is/image/i0/i5/i6366/IS1hfhr2232fqn7.jpg?op_sharpen=1&qlt=90&hei=234&wid=316)
For Sale:$5,000. 
Description
200 ACRES - EKALAKA 200 ac divided into 23 parcels from 5 ac to 19 ac. Custer National Forest in full view. Paved landing strip 8 mi away. Poss homesites. Great hunting & scenery in sparsely populated Big Sky Country. $5,000 per ac Realtor owned

Wow Jim if that is far enough away from Yellowstone that might be an  idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekalaka,_Montana  EKALAKA, MT

Elevation    3,425 ft (1,044 m)

Thank you for sharing this idea and this ad,
YB
Thank you Jim.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Montanabarb on July 30, 2011, 07:48:19 AM
"Wow Jim if that is far enough away from Yellowstone that might be an  idea. "

Yes it is.  The Zetas say that Yellowstone will flow, not blow, so 100 miles distance should suffice.  See https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm) .

Dutchsinse has stated in passing that he also does not believe Yellowstone will blow (no reason given why he feels that way.) Right now I'd be more worried about the supervolcano in Southern California (just a few miles north of the new steam vents. Called Mono or something.)
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: noproblemo2 on July 30, 2011, 08:30:47 AM
"Wow Jim if that is far enough away from Yellowstone that might be an  idea. "

Yes it is.  The Zetas say that Yellowstone will flow, not blow, so 100 miles distance should suffice.  See https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/index/zeta52.htm) .

Dutchsinse has stated in passing that he also does not believe Yellowstone will blow (no reason given why he feels that way.) Right now I'd be more worried about the supervolcano in Southern California (just a few miles north of the new steam vents. Called Mono or something.)
The CA one I am concerned with considering on the show Tuesday he predicted an 8.0 or higher  for the area in 30-60 days !!!
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: augonit on July 30, 2011, 01:11:15 PM
Didn't know about a supervolcano in Southern CA.  How many more super volcanoes do we have in the US, (besides Yellowstone)?
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Montanabarb on July 30, 2011, 01:24:57 PM
Didn't know about a supervolcano in Southern CA.  How many more super volcanoes do we have in the US, (besides Yellowstone)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Valley_caldera

This is very near where the steam vents are appearing. I don't know how many others there might be in the US.  Crater Lake and Lake Tahoe are probably in there somewhere.
 
MJoy mentioned living near one in northern Germany.
 
OOPS! My bad! Update:  Long Valley is not "very near" where the steam vents are appearing.  It's over 200 miles.  However, considering the caldera's size and history, it's still too close for comfort (Says she, who lives 100 miles from Yellowstone. ::) :D

Update 2:  Here I am again! I need to keep my map handy. I was right the first time. Of the six plumes Dutch reported, only three were as far as 200 miles from Mono Lake/Long Valley Caldera.  The fifth one was directly adjacent to the caldera and the other two were close, in Nevada.  It's a bit scary that these vents are located up to two hundred miles apart, and as frequent as six in one day! If you look at the map of the caldera (in Wikipedia) it makes Yellowstone look small.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: augonit on July 30, 2011, 05:24:37 PM
I think I had a triple number heat index in my house yesterday since the A/C went ca-put.  It was 86 in my house at one point, and I didn't check after that.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on July 31, 2011, 07:33:21 PM
Here is another recommendation:
Relocate to the La Sal mountains in Utah. That region is very isolated and sparsely inhabited.  It should become a series of islands if the inland sea comes down from the North or up from the South.  Move to La Sal, Utah (population 340, elevation 7025 feet), or 18 miles to the NW to Moab, Utah (population 5148, elevation 4025 feet), and reconnoiter from there.  My parents lived in Moab for a few years after retirement, and they liked it.

From  http://cpluhna.nau.edu/Places/lasalmts.htm (http://cpluhna.nau.edu/Places/lasalmts.htm)  on 10/jul/11 
[start extract]
La Sal Mountains, Utah
(http://cpluhna.nau.edu/images/lasalmtns_sm.jpg)
Mt. Peale and Mt. Mellenthin tower above Geyser basin. Photo © 1977 Ray Wheeler.

The La Sal Mountains are located on the eastern border of Utah, about 15 miles east of Moab [map]. Rising over 7000 feet above the surrounding redrock canyons and mesas, the La Sals include the highest peak on the Colorado Plateau, 12,721 foot Mt. Peale, and several other lower but prominent peaks. The range occupies a relatively small area, running just 15 miles north to south and 6 miles across. The La Sals are administered by the U.S.D.A. as the Manti-Lasal National Forest.

The La Sals are composed of granitic rock, uncommon on the Colorado Plateau. The range is a classic laccolith poking up above the surrounding thick sequences of ancient sedimentary rocks. Biotic communities in the mountains range from widely scattered stands of ponderosa pine, up through quaking aspen forests and subalpine grasslands, into spruce and fir forests (as in photo above), and finally alpine tundra. The range is one of only three areas on the Colorado Plateau where one can see alpine tundra communities.

The Manti-Lasal is the largest coal producing National Forest in the nation as well as a source of timber products, other minerals, oil and gas as well as non-commercial products like Christmas trees, posts and poles, firewood, seeds, and edible plants.

Livestock grazing occurs throughout much of the La Sal high country. The range's rich grass-forb meadows serve as forage for cattle during the summer months. In recent years many of the forest's Engelmann spruce stands have suffered severe spruce beetle infestation and damage. Intensive off-road vehicle use has also created management problems for the forest.
[end extract]
Note:  "laccolith": (n.) A mass of igneous rock intruded between layers of sedimentary rock, resulting in uplift.

From  http://www.adventuredrop.com/4532_Manti-La-Sal-National-Forest.html (http://www.adventuredrop.com/4532_Manti-La-Sal-National-Forest.html)  on 10/jul/11:

[start extract]
About Manti-La Sal National Forest:

The 1,413,111-acre Manti-La Sal National Forest is located in southeastern Utah. It is managed for multiple uses such as range, timber, minerals, water, wildlife, and recreation. The Forest is divided into three land areas: the Manti Division, the La Sal Division at Moab, and the La Sal Division at Monticello.

The Manti Division is part of the remnant Wasatch Plateau (5,000 to 10,000 foot elevation) exhibiting high elevation lakes, diverse vegetation, near vertical escarpments, and areas of scenic and geologic interest.

On the La Sal Division-Moab, mountain peaks (12,000 foot elevation), canyons, and forest add climatic and scenic contrast to the hot red-rock landscape of Arches (5,000 foot elevation) and Canyonlands National Parks.

The La Sal Division-Monticello offers timbered slopes to provide a welcome middle ground and background contrast to the sand and heat of Canyonlands National Park, Natural Bridges National Monument, and the surrounding desert. Pictographs, petroglyphs, and stone dwellings are evidence of past civilizations.

Private and state lands exist within the Forest boundaries and may be closed to public use. Please refer to maps and information on land ownership, which may be obtained from the Ranger District offices.

HISTORY

The mountain and desert landscapes of the Manti-La Sal National Forest hold secrets of people who came before us. For nearly 10,000 years, the Forest was home to native cultures--people who archaeologists call Paleo-Indians, Desert Archaic, Fremont, and Anasazi. Paleo-Indians and Desert Archaic people were semi-nomadic hunters and gatherers living on wild foods. About 1,500 years ago, prehistoric farmers settled in the lower elevations of the Forest. They grew corn, beans and squash and left rock art on the cliffs and food stored in small granaries built into the cliff walls.

Throughout the Forest are homesteads built by Mormon settlers, remains of cattle and sheep ranching, mining activity, and trails developed for the extraction of gold, silver, radium, uranium.

Prehistoric and historic artifacts collected from sites in the Forest can be seen in outstanding displays located in various communities and on the Forest.

* Edge of Cedars Museum and State Park in Blanding
* College of Eastern Utah Prehistoric Museum in Price
* The Great Basin Environmental Education Center on the Ephraim Canyon Road Forest Highway 8
* Stuart Guard Station on State Road 31
* Several historic sites can also be visited along the Huntington and Eccles Canyons National Scenic Byway State Roads 31 and 264
[end extract]

Descriptions and pictures of eight lakes in the La Sal mountains are provided at http://www.discovermoab.com/fishing.htm (http://www.discovermoab.com/fishing.htm)


From http://www.go-utah.com/La-Sal-Mountains/ (http://www.go-utah.com/La-Sal-Mountains/)  on 10/jul/11:

[start extract]
The La Sal Mountains are Utah's second highest mountain range. They rise impressively above the red rock canyon country of southeastern Utah. The range contains 6 peaks that rise above 12,000 feet, the tallest being Mount Peale at 12,721 feet. Covered with thick aspen and fir forests and dotted with mountain lakes, the La Sals are a cool oasis within the often difficult environment of the surrounding desert.

Numerous trails in the La Sals provide good hiking, biking and horseback riding routes from late spring to mid-autumn. In winter, the same trails are put to use by cross-country skiers and snowmobilers. The beauty of the La Sals can also be enjoyed by simply driving the La Sal Mountain Scenic Route.

The La Sal Mountains are located on the eastern border of Utah, about 15 miles east of Moab. They occupy a relatively small area, running just 15 miles north to south and 6 miles across. They are most easily accessed from the west on the La Sal Mountain Loop Road that begins south of Moab.
[end extract]


From http://www.atvtrails.org/Lasal.html (http://www.atvtrails.org/Lasal.html)  on 10/jul/11 :
"The mountains receive much more precipitation than the lower elevations and as a result you are likely to see many range animals grazing"
"The La Sal Mountains are vastly different from what most people think of when they think of the Moab area"
The site has several photos of the mountains.

History of La Sal mountains:
http://www.onlineutah.com/lasalmountainshistory.shtml (http://www.onlineutah.com/lasalmountainshistory.shtml)

A gallery of photos is at
http://www.summitpost.org/la-sal-mountains/images/p-190208 (http://www.summitpost.org/la-sal-mountains/images/p-190208)

Some nice photos:
(http://www.summitpost.org/images/medium/50222.jpg)
(http://www.summitpost.org/images/medium/46407.jpg)
(http://www.summitpost.org/images/medium/681693.jpg)

(More information coming later)
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on August 01, 2011, 06:57:54 PM
Further information about the La Sal mountains in Utah.

Monthly average rainfall and average daily maximum and minimum temperatures at La Sal, Utah, are displayed at:
http://www.weather.com/weather/wxclimatology/monthly/graph/84530 (http://www.weather.com/weather/wxclimatology/monthly/graph/84530)
Lowest Maximum temperature: 37 degF (January).  Highest maximum temperature: 87 degF (July).
Rainfall: annual average is 13.34 inches; some every month; least is 0.68 in June; most is 1.92 in October. ,
See also http://www.city-data.com/city/La-Sal-Utah.html (http://www.city-data.com/city/La-Sal-Utah.html) for graphs of humidity, snowfall, sunshine, wind speed, and cloudy days.

Current weather at La Sal, Utah, is displayed at:
http://www.wunderground.com/US/UT/La_Sal.html (http://www.wunderground.com/US/UT/La_Sal.html)

From http://utahavalanchecenter.org/clone_la_sal_summary_snow_weather_and_avalanches (http://utahavalanchecenter.org/clone_la_sal_summary_snow_weather_and_avalanches)
[start excerpt]
La Sal Summary - Snow, Weather and Avalanches
 
The La Sal Avalanche Center based out of Moab, Utah has been operating since 1988 providing avalanche and mountain weather bulletins for SE Utah.  The LSAC forecasts for the La Sal Mountains SE of Moab and also the Abajo (also known as the Blue) Mountains about an hour south of Moab near the town of Monticello. The La Sal Mountains are the second highest mountain range in the state of Utah with more than 10 named peaks exceeding 12,000 feet. Both the Abajo and La Sal Mountains rise several thousand feet above the Colorado Plateau forming "Island Ranges" that are exposed severe storms and winds from all directions of the compass.
 
Temperatures are cold during SE Utah winters with alpine desert conditions and low relative humidity. For these reasons the La Sal and Abajo Mountains are classic continental peaks. Strong temperature gradients, typically lead to the development of a weak "Colorado Snowpack".  Large climax avalanches are the norm for at least one cycle each winter.  The 2010-2011 winter was no exception.
[end excerpt]

From http://www.go-utah.com/La-Sal-Mountains/Weather/ (http://www.go-utah.com/La-Sal-Mountains/Weather/) :
"The La Sals are normally snowed in from November to April. Trails and roads are usually dry by June. Summer temperatures are pleasant during the day but frequently near freezing at night. Early summer brings wildflowers and autumn fantastic colors."

Elevations, sizes and locations of lakes in the La Sal mountains:
Ken's Lake   5,050 feet   82 acres   Coordinates: 38°28’54.16”N  109°25’47.70”W
Hidden Lake  8,400 feet    3 acres   Coordinates: 38°34’33”N  109°11’15”W
Oowah Lake   8,800 feet    4 acres   Coordinates: 38°32’00.93”N  109°19’23.17”W
Don's Lake   8,800 feet    3 acres   Coordinates: 38°33’44”N  109°11’15”W
Warner Lake  9,200 feet    5 acres   Coordinates: 38°30’53.02”N  109°16’46.57”W 
Dark Canyon Lake  10,000 feet  5 acres   Coordinates: 38°27’23.02”N  109°11’47.8”W
Medicine Lake   10,000 feet   2 acres   Coordinates: 38°24’55.4”N  109°14’52.9”W
Blue Lake   10,100 feet    4 acres   Coordinates: 38°28’20.9”N  109°12’21.0”W

Current weather at Warner Lake, Utah, is displayed at:
http://www.findlocalweather.com/pinpoint/us/ut/warner+lake/current483129.html (http://www.findlocalweather.com/pinpoint/us/ut/warner+lake/current483129.html)
I could not find monthly averages for Warner Lake.

A good topo/terrain map is at http://www.trails.com/topomap.aspx?trailid=HGS385-041 (http://www.trails.com/topomap.aspx?trailid=HGS385-041)

From https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=1102.msg37349#msg37349  on 19/july/2011:
[start quote]
For those folks on a tight budget. Here's another avenue to pursue. I don't know the laws in the other surrounding states but here's how we do it in Az.

I go to the BLM office here in Kingman Az. (This can be done online as well) Fill out the "Location Notice for Lode Mining Claim" 2 pgs. paperwork. 2nd page is a map to fill out.

Than I take this paperwork to the county recorders office & along with $16 (not a misprint) I claim 20 ac of land for the purpose of "exploration" .... You now have the right to reside on this land so long as you can provide evidence of your work. This work needs to show you have spent $150 a year on the exploration. 1 tank of gas in a 4X4 should cover this requirement. WHA - LA... wave the magic wand & POOOF survival land for the cost of a round of beers at the 19th hole !!!! Hope this helps my good folks!!!
[end quote]
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Tamieok on August 05, 2011, 09:47:54 AM
Hello Folks,

I am a former Moab resident.  Grew up there and spent just about every vacation there afterwards, have been all over those Mnts  The La Sals are beautiful with abundant natural resources and wildlife.  Gets lots of snow in the winter but after the shift who knows.  The lakes are small and stocked with fish by the fish & game people, alot of them can only be reached via 4x4 or hiking.  Ken's lake is actually in Spanish Valley about 8 mi south of Moab and it is a reservoir, created from Mill Creek that runs out of the LaSals.  The Mnts are all 14-teeners, Moabs' elevation is about 4500'.  Pardox Valley Colo is on the south side of the range and that valley is gorgeous, very green and has a good water supply, on from Paradox is Uray and Teluride. We are currently in NW AZ and thought about going home to Moab, but the economy there is not condusive to keeping us supported, we may be rethinking our bug out locale.  I'll keep an eye on this board and will help as much as I can, have relatives in Moab and only 6 hrs away so is easy to visit if need be.  Let me know how I can help, maybe it's time to go home!

Good luck to all,

Leah & Tamie
Sedona,  AZ
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 05, 2011, 02:21:26 PM
Barb, Thank you for the information. I question yellowstone but there are so many questions. I know I'm not the only one.
            Take care.

Hello again. Yes it is difficult to know exactly what will happen. To me it is reassuring when Jim says that area is far enough away.
Best O' Luck
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on August 05, 2011, 04:08:07 PM
Hi Tamieok,

Thanks for the personal report about the La Sal mountains,  You said "The La Sals are beautiful with abundant natural resources and wildlife.  Gets lots of snow in the winter but after the shift who knows."

I expect a good climate there after the pole shift.  Latitude will be about 20 degrees North.
See https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=1425.msg16889#msg16889 (https://planetxtownhall.com/index.php?topic=1425.msg16889#msg16889)
The Zetas say that the Mexican state of Chihuahua will become lush (https://www.zetatalk.com/info/tinfx272.htm (https://www.zetatalk.com/info/tinfx272.htm)).  Unfortunately, they do not comment on the climate after the pole shift in the US states, at least for those that I have checked.  But the prevailing winds will be coming from Canada, which will be towards the new West, and bring moisture from the flooded area there.  (As I understand the situation so far -- my confidence is only moderate.)

Now, have you visited the section of the Manti-La Sal National Forest that is east of Monticello in the Abajo Mountains?  If so, how does it look?

Do you have any leads to available properties around  there in the mountains?

Thanks again.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Tamieok on August 05, 2011, 10:39:17 PM
The Mnts you call the Abajo we call the Blues and I don't know anything about them, apparently I was not overly impressed with them or I'd have checked them out.  My sister lived in Moab for quite a while too and has no knowledge of them either. Monticello and Blanding are small towns in that area and my recolection of them was not overly impressive, small Mormon towns with closed attitudes.  Might I suggest that you check out Paradox, Nucla or Natarita, all just east of the LaSal Mnts on the Colorado side.  Real Estate is bound to be cheaper and all are lovely little towns without the Mormon influence.  If you're Mormon I apologize......Great fishing there as well, lakes streams and a large reservoir called Merimonte, BIG fish!  Real Estate prices in Moab and Wilson Mesa are high, it's a tourist town.  Not much real estate in the LaSals, Wilson Mesa is off the Loop Rd on the way up and there are ranches up there, prices are probably high.  The little town of LaSal is 22 miles south of Moab on Hwy 163, more a wide spot than a town but they recently opened a copper mine there so you may be able to find housing now.  There is a guy located in LaSal that has a company that provides survival food and housing, has a big website.  You should be able to google Lasal & survival and find him.  He might be more helpful to you than I about the current conditions in the surrounding area.  If you get the chance you should go and check the area out, there's alot to see and do there.   FYI, the dinasaurs died in DNM for a reason, the area is desolate & hot.  I've been to both Vernal & Craig and think you'd be happier farther south.  If you decide to check out the Sedona, AZ area let me know.
Good Luck
Leah 
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 05, 2011, 11:47:27 PM
A "BIG" concern for me is the oncoming ice age. I'm not real fond of shoveling snow 8 months out of a year. I like the GoldyLocks zone of northern Az. Not to hot, not to cold. If you research land prices in & around north eastern Mohave county, near Peach Springs, Az. You'll see land prices well under $1000 / ac. Possibly tax lien sales & private owner carry sales as well. Loads of Juniper forest land with rolling hills & well depths at 700' . Altitude is 4000' & up. As stated in Hopi prophecy this is where the heart of the planet is. Just south of the Colorado River. Good luck finding your corner of the world ....
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on August 06, 2011, 08:59:48 AM
Hi again Tanieok,

You said " FYI, the dinasaurs died in DNM for a reason, the area is desolate & hot.  I've been to both Vernal & Craig and think you'd be happier farther south."

To clarify for other readers:  DMN is Dinosaur National Monument in NW Colorado and NE Utah.  The nearest towns are Vernal in Utah and Craig in Colorado.  I recommended that place a few weeks ago, but now I would prefer the La Sal mountains in Utah; it is more isolated, has less seismicity, has more water, is forested,  has wildlife, and is close to lower elevations should the need to adjust quickly arise.

The Dinos there died millions of years ago when the climate was different.  From http://www.usparkinfo.com/dinosaur.html (http://www.usparkinfo.com/dinosaur.html): "Why are there so many bones in one place? The rock around them is made up of sand and gravel, just like the sand and gravel you might see along a large river. Such a river flowed through this area 150 million of years ago, and many dinosaurs lived near it. Now and then some of them died near the river. During rainy seasons, the river overflowed its banks--just as many rivers do now--and picked up some of the dead dinosaurs lying nearby. A few of those bodies were whole, but many had probably decayed or been eaten by other animals, so that just the bones were left. The bones and bodies were carried by the river and deposited in the main channel. The current buried them with sand and gravel. The place that is now the Quarry was at one time a river channel."
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on August 06, 2011, 07:53:33 PM
The Dinosaur comment was made in jest..
Ahhh ...  sorry.  I wondered ...

Now, you said "There is a guy located in LaSal that has a company that provides survival food and housing, has a big website. "

This must be the one,  at http://www.alpinesurvival.com/ (http://www.alpinesurvival.com/)
From  http://www.alpinesurvival.com/Alpine-Group-and-Associates.html (http://www.alpinesurvival.com/Alpine-Group-and-Associates.html)
[start excerpt]
Alpine Group & Associates, LLC
LaSal Mountain Utah Ranches
PO Box 161, LaSal, UT 84530
Call - 435.686.2263

Ready Reserve Foods Emergency Survival supplies  Your Christian Family company where Personal Security and Freedom remain firmly based in our legendary heritage. And that heritage is dedicated to serving the most demanding needs anywhere on earth. Ranging from a rugged family outing, to Mt. Everest and Antarctica expeditions, to trans-Oceanic yacht races, to helping you family determine your needs for emergency disaster recovery supplies.
        We are also an industry leader in emergency survival preparedness for natural disasters like hurricane, earthquake, flood, tornado, drought, economic collapse, Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks, nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare representing and providing American Made Products as much as possible.

Ready Reserve Foods Emergency Survival supplies  We offer quality nutrition in a wide variety of exciting Freeze-Dried and Dehydrated Foods. Our reputation for nutrition is surpassed only by our distinction for outstanding taste. Our Foods products are world renowned for their superior quality, high nutrition, and traditional great taste.

We also offer Kohler Generators, RV Solar and Wind Power, Gasmasks, NBC gear, Natural Disaster and Nuclear Bomb Shelters, Medical Kits, Tactical Military and Police Equipment, Bullet Proof Personal Critical Emergency Survival Supplies. Sunshine Silver Eagles Silver bullion.

Ready Reserve Foods Emergency Survival supplies  Alpine Group strongly believes that Martial Law must be implemented eventually, where needed, because of the increase in terrorist threats, a startling increase in diseases, natural disasters, volcano activity, ice storms crippling America's ability to provide and deliver emergency supplies ranging from medicine to food.
        We have OPEC uncertainties, a critically unstable stock market, increasing U.S. currency devaluation, inflation, employment uncertainties, and the increasing probability of bank failures sending a loud signal that we have already entered into an exponential state of national disaster.   Get prepared - So Get Prepared!
[end excerpt]

I reckon this should interest many of our Town Hall members.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on August 06, 2011, 09:05:19 PM
Hi again Tamieok,
Quote
Might I suggest that you check out Paradox, Nucla or Natarita, all just east of the LaSal Mnts on the Colorado side.

I see Nucla and Natarita on the map, but not Paradox -- yet the name is familiar, but it is not in the list of towns in Colorado in the Road Atlas that I have.  Wikipedia has it: "Paradox is an unincorporated town and a U.S. Post Office located in Montrose County, Colorado, United States. The Paradox Post Office has the ZIP Code 81429. ...
Paradox is located in Paradox Valley at 38°22′06″N 108°57′45″W (38.368310,-108.962574)."

On my Road Atlas map, I see that the town of Bedrock, Colorado, is the nearest to La Sal, Utah.  Bedrock is on the Dolores River, which I have looked at before.

I'll keep investigating.  Paradox sounds good so far.

I found the address of the copper mine near to La Sal.  No Internet site is given.
Lisbon Valley Mining Co LLC
920 S County Road # 313
La Sal, UT 84530
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Tamieok on August 06, 2011, 09:48:22 PM
Hi Jim,
You're right, Paradox is the valley,we just refer to the area as Paradox.  When last I was in the area Bedrock consisted of a general store, circa 1850's, great place!  I hope you can take the time to visit the area, I'm sure you'll find it to be a lovely location with great possibilities!

Have a good evening.
Leah
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 10, 2011, 10:06:47 PM
A "BIG" concern for me is the oncoming ice age. I'm not real fond of shoveling snow 8 months out of a year. I like the Goldy Locks zone of northern Az. Not to hot, not to cold. If you research land prices in & around north eastern Mohave county, near Peach Springs, Az. You'll see land prices well under $1000 / ac. Possibly tax lien sales & private owner carry sales as well. Loads of Juniper forest land with rolling hills & well depths at 700' . Altitude is 4000' & up. As stated in Hopi prophecy this is where the heart of the planet is. Just south of the Colorado River. Good luck finding your corner of the world ....

Wow! Thanks for your post,
Yowbarb
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 10, 2011, 11:01:13 PM
A "BIG" concern for me is the oncoming ice age. I'm not real fond of shoveling snow 8 months out of a year. I like the GoldyLocks zone of northern Az. Not to hot, not to cold. If you research land prices in & around north eastern Mohave county, near Peach Springs, Az. You'll see land prices well under $1000 / ac. Possibly tax lien sales & private owner carry sales as well. Loads of Juniper forest land with rolling hills & well depths at 700' . Altitude is 4000' & up. As stated in Hopi prophecy this is where the heart of the planet is. Just south of the Colorado River. Good luck finding your corner of the world ....

I did a Yahoo driving directions and found Peach Springs is approximately ENE of Flagstaff AZ by about an hour and 45 minutes. 
I assume by Goldilocks, you mean habitable zone...
 :)
Yowbarb

Goldilocks zone  (habitable zone)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitable_zone
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 11, 2011, 09:14:09 AM
Peach Springs Az is ENE of Kingman Az.

Moenkopi Az (HopiLand) is ENE of Flagstaff

Hope this helps.

Sidenote : If you want a crystal clear sky view of the area down to some fine details go to weather dot com & type in Peach Springs Az or Moenkopi Az on weather's map page & then click on satellite from road view. The picture is better closer up than google earth. Check it out. This is how I have found all my gold mines 1st rather than having to drive or walk aimlessly through the mountains. Hope this helps your research.

Off topic side note. Peach Springs Az "IS" the site that Disney chose for the cartoon movie Cars. The love scene between the race car & Sally the Porsche at the end of the movie is a real place. You can drive your car there. It's just past Peach Springs on Rt 66 as you leave town ascending up the hill .... The overlook there is a priceless Kodak moment. Very few folks see this area of the canyon. 
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: errrv on August 11, 2011, 09:21:33 AM
Anybody familiar with Comb Ridge near Blanding & Bluff UT? The cold springs cliff dwelling is there, along with monarch cave?
Erv
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 11, 2011, 09:42:55 AM
Peach Springs Az is ENE of Kingman Az.

Moenkopi Az (HopiLand) is ENE of Flagstaff

Hope this helps.

Sidenote : If you want a crystal clear sky view of the area down to some fine details go to weather dot com & type in Peach Springs Az or Moenkopi Az on weather's map page & then click on satellite from road view. The picture is better closer up than google earth. Check it out. This is how I have found all my gold mines 1st rather than having to drive or walk aimlessly through the mountains. Hope this helps your research.

Off topic side note. Peach Springs Az "IS" the site that Disney chose for the cartoon movie Cars. The love scene between the race car & Sally the Porsche at the end of the movie is a real place. You can drive your car there. It's just past Peach Springs on Rt 66 as you leave town ascending up the hill .... The overlook there is a priceless Kodak moment. Very few folks see this area of the canyon.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 11, 2011, 09:47:49 AM
Anybody familiar with Comb Ridge near Blanding & Bluff UT? The cold springs cliff dwelling is there, along with monarch cave?
Erv

I have been in those areas, with family we would always go to UT NM CO.
Not sure if been right there but was at a campground near red rock structures... so beautiful. I think it was an unimproved camp site in the 1950s early 1960s...

Image is from the net Comb Ridge
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 11, 2011, 09:54:15 AM
http://www.landwatch.com/San-Juan-County-Utah-Land-for-sale/pid/220760417

Blanding, Bluff ads -  not saying it is best site just what I found so far.
YB
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 11, 2011, 10:05:53 AM

Posted also in my Topic, Survival Land, internet survival site board..
EBay Land for sale page... click on the various links, states etc.
Yowbarb
1:02 PM EDT today:


This page has UTAH land. http://realestate.shop.ebay.com/Real-Estate-/10542/i.html?_nkw=land&_dmpt=Land&_fln=1&_ssov=1&_trksid=p3286.c0.m282&State%252FProvince=Utah

(Ebay Land listings, choose state, price etc.)
http://realestate.shop.ebay.com/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p5197.m570.l1313&_nkw=land&_sacat=10542
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: errrv on August 11, 2011, 10:09:33 AM
Thanks Barb. I stumbled onto pictures of comb ridge & have seen several of the sites in my dreams. I'm going to look into it further.
Erv
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: augonit on August 12, 2011, 08:04:59 AM
A "BIG" concern for me is the oncoming ice age. I'm not real fond of shoveling snow 8 months out of a year. I like the GoldyLocks zone of northern Az. Not to hot, not to cold. If you research land prices in & around north eastern Mohave county, near Peach Springs, Az. You'll see land prices well under $1000 / ac. Possibly tax lien sales & private owner carry sales as well. Loads of Juniper forest land with rolling hills & well depths at 700' . Altitude is 4000' & up. As stated in Hopi prophecy this is where the heart of the planet is. Just south of the Colorado River. Good luck finding your corner of the world ....

A while back I researched where the ice got to in my area.  Luckily it never reached as far down as I am now, nor in my back up location.  I'm banking on it still won't get down here.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 12, 2011, 09:01:40 AM
This is the kind of view you will see as you leave Peach Springs Az. going east on Rt 66 to Seligman, Flagstaff, etc. I can see why Disney chose this view for the love scene between Sally & Lighting McQueen in the movie Cars.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 12, 2011, 09:08:49 AM
This is just outside town. Diamond Canyon area. Near Peach Springs, Az.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 12, 2011, 09:40:55 AM
Terrypat, this is an absolutely gorgeous and appealing area.
I wonder how much underground water there is available for wells.
Thanks for sharing info,
Yowbarb
PS sent you a PM but read the Topic - my reply and see if that's OK with you too.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 12, 2011, 10:14:32 AM
Barb ,

Super simple in the desert. Plants get there moisture from the air until the tap root finds water in the earth mother. Find the biggest group
of green patch in the desert & water is closest to the surface there. In modern times the cattle ranchers out here, (Supai, Hualapai, Hopi, Navajo,)
have wells already in place from centuries ago. Follow the herd ....
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 17, 2011, 10:03:16 AM
I have not been to this very special place. You are very fortunate to have experienced this area. I was in Sedona on July 4th weekend
& Sedona is similar in that it is surrounded by a rim country. I can only imagine what our ancients might have experienced when these places
were 1st inhabited. This area of Northern Az gives that feeling of jumping up on grandma's lap to be told a story just having quiet time. Barb, I
feel as though I'm going through a sort of spiritual puberty.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on August 17, 2011, 10:20:10 AM
I have not been to this very special place. You are very fortunate to have experienced this area. I was in Sedona on July 4th weekend
& Sedona is similar in that it is surrounded by a rim country. I can only imagine what our ancients might have experienced when these places
were 1st inhabited. This area of Northern Az gives that feeling of jumping up on grandma's lap to be told a story just having quiet time. Barb, I
feel as though I'm going through a sort of spiritual puberty.

Yes Canyon de Chelly was wonderful...
I don't think we ever made it up to Sedona but maybe since we went up to the Grand Canyon a couple times. We stayed on Old Route 66 most of the time but once or twice we went to  Lake Havasu and then back down to the main hwy again.
I know I was on the Apache Res. once on the way from Colorado back to my bro's place in Tucson so we might have gone through some of those areas...
Anyway its good you posted some ideas about getting land in northern AZ.
I wish we could have stayed longer an Apache couple invited us to go to Pow Wow with them the next day there was some major rock band playing too... but we had to hit the road. Well I am rambling...
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on August 19, 2011, 02:55:46 PM
I continue to rank the La Sal mountains in south-east Utah as first choice of favorable locations.  An 8-page pdf brochure titled "Southern Utah's High Country", from the US Department of Agriculture, is available at http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/maps/brochures/southern_utah.pdf (http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/maps/brochures/southern_utah.pdf) .  It has many pretty pictures but few facts.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 19, 2011, 03:17:52 PM
I continue to rank the La Sal mountains in south-east Utah as first choice of favorable locations.  An 8-page pdf brochure titled "Southern Utah's High Country", from the US Department of Agriculture, is available at http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/maps/brochures/southern_utah.pdf (http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/maps/brochures/southern_utah.pdf) .  It has many pretty pictures but few facts.

I firmly believe the 4 corners area is the heart & lungs of the earth mother.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Jimfarmer on August 26, 2011, 09:45:54 AM
Quote
Found this video about good places to survive. Would be nice if we could take it a little further like he suggests..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VzYMVmk2ms&feature=related

His criteria of frost line, rainfall, and population density eliminate all of USA  except parts of the southern states.  Unfortunately, consideration of impending earth changes, including latitudes after the pole shift, eliminate all of that area.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 27, 2011, 01:04:06 PM
I just bought this mountain last week & went up there this a.m. Here's some shots of the area. Elevation at the top of the mountain is 6200'
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 27, 2011, 01:08:25 PM
That's interesting.  I always thought the rainforests were the lungs of the earth, I never knew where the heart was.  I guess I just thought it was the core.

What sealed the deal on my view was looking at the above picture & seeing arteries in the canyon walls.
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: terrypat on August 27, 2011, 09:12:19 PM
Breathtaking views, CONGRATS !!!!!!!

Yeah Susan we were in the nose bleed section today .....
Title: Re: Favorable locations
Post by: Yowbarb on January 16, 2012, 01:53:08 PM
Yes, I know, I am well aware of the problems of our location, but unable to do anything about it at this time.  I am a senior and I can only go to be with my daughter and hope they figure it out. I have no desire to strike out alone and go through the shift with no one. They invested a lot of money and time into this location since they both needed to work, and they were operating on a limited budget which did not permit purchasing a second location far enough away to meet the criteria.  So they purchased this place on ten acres, secluded, pond and creek, on a well with a large shop, and as high up as they could find at the time they were purchasing.  They say we may need to bug out from there and go east, but hope they will be in a protected pocket and survive where they are.  Only God knows for sure.

Well we wish you all the best of luck.
There are a few things a group could do, to try make their location safer.
Stability: Steel cables, set down into concrete should hold the structure in place.
Perhaps a glass fiber resin reinforced concrete geodesic dome could be erected over the house. (I am assuming they have
a regular house.) ?
We cannot be so sure what will happen, but there are a lot of people who believe that for a short time we will have tremendous high winds all over the world. Most structures cannot stand up to that. Boulders placed up next to the house; steel posts, stones, steel cables, layers of reinforced concrete; buried reinforced steel containers with rebar on all sides and a t square reinforcement inside... these things might make a structure safer.
(http://eichlervision.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/mini-posts-drilled.jpg)

Not finding very good illustrations, not an engineer, but you get the general idea.
Re Flameproofing. Any surface on the outside of a structure which is wood could burn.
sitting in the middle of a wooded area or even near woods or grasslands. More concrete on the outside of a structure would help.
There is flame retardant in the form of sprays.  Stone tiles won't burn like wood roofing. Rocks on top would help.
Iceplants planted around structures help keep back the fires...Gravel, cleared areas...
Just some ideas.

- Yowbarb