We have had a lot of one-in-100-year floods in the last 100 years. That's good because it means we are not due any for hundreds of years. Mind you, it can't be long before the papers are talking about one-in-1,000 year floods. Oh dear, where will it end?
I guess the media can never get it right.I was watching the news and thought how awful it would be to have all of your possessions destroyed by water and mud...how would you ever clean up?There has certaintly been a mixed bag of weather patterns lately, Victoria with the bushfires and now floods up north and Queensland just recently.Where will it all end? ♡
I would say, facetiously, to Dianne, It will all end in Tears!.
Yes meggie, tears for sure, I worry about the future weather patterns as well.Lee I hope you get some good steady rain on Friday so that your garden will be refreshed as well...and your rain water tanks will be filled.Its really coming down here at the moment, so heavy I cant see the bushland behind me...smells lovely. ♡
Bad use of English. I guess they mean the worst in the last 100 years, but you knew that eh!
I would like to know what happened to the Old South Wales.
The editor would be in hot soup by now!
caught a bit of the flooding news on BBC, and the guy being interviewed mentioned the two, seperate hundred year floods back to back.But, I don't think science actually says they are a hundred years apart, eh?Just that it would occur within a certain century.(of course, there is one other point to make, here.Science isn't any better than religion in predicting diasters.)(well, until that Last disater, when we're supposed to have some prophet dressed in burlap give us a 'head's up' as it were)
What if they are comparing two different things. The first being the current 'flood' to the 'one-in-100 year flood', and the other comparing the 'damage' that rivals the 'damage' from a flood 13 years ago. Thats how I read it anyways.
Moderation cuts in six days after posting.