Here is an interesting map that lets you see what the effect of the Katrina flood would look like if it happened in Boston.
P.S. If you want a better practice, start using the 80/20 Principle.
P.S. If you want a better practice, start using the 80/20 Principle.
Ed,The caption states that a flood like in New Orleans, “Would soak buildings from Sudbury to the North End.” That statement indicates quite clearly that the intent of the graphic is to advance the ridiculous notion that such a flood in Boston would reach 15-20 miles inland to the town of Sudbury.
That statement by itself distorts the scale of the flood because the the graphic artist didn’t rotate the flood plane to align the coasts. It would have been more accurate to state that the flood would have effected an area from Lynn to Quincy. (I’m guessing on the towns, could be Salem to Braintree for all I know.)
Wally’s right as well. The reason there are levees marked out on the New Orleans map is because New Orleans is below sea level. Boston is infirmly built on a pile of landfill that is all above sea level.
Now pass the baked beans and don’t get caught in the molasses.
I don’t think the point of the superimposed maps was to show how Boston would flood, but to give people a sense of scale. When a newspaper or magazine publishes a map of Australia superimposed on the (Lower 48) US, I don’t look at the map to decide where the Rockies of Australia are located.
That is a stupid use of a stupid map. The topography of the Boston Metroarea out to Sudbury is completely unlike that of New Orleans. You couldnever flood that area in the same way as New Orleans was flooded. It isthistype of uncritical thinking that has allowed incompetent agencies suchas the Department of Homeland Security or FEMA to develop.It was probably generated by them in the first place, to scare peoplethat can’t think.