It's obvious some dufus at AOL had the bright idea to include Oklahoma City for personal reasons (or so it seems anyway), because of course by the same token, other cities never get hit-Salt Lake City, Nashville, Kansas City, Miami, and now Atlanta. Nevermind the fact that if you look at natural disasters, you can include all cities along the Atlantic coast from the mid-Atlantic down to Miami, then all the Gulf coast cities and then pretty much all Cali cities from the coastline to about 30 miles inland (for earthquakes-which are really predictable, right?). Granted, the weather here may be unpredictable at times but if the guy writing this piece did some research first, he would find out that Denver's weather can get just as fickle. 68 degrees one day, 34 and snow the next (it has happened before, many times). And Denver has been hit by tornadoes as well.

Way to go AOL...

A diamond in the rough I guess...

It figures the day this article comes out, we have a huge storm with hail and tornadoes. ugh

__________________
" You've Been Thunder Struck ! "

Obviously, this is a schlocky, poorly designed, and poorly researched article. First, it ranks cities from one to ten, but each one is selected based on one criterion. There's really no control or context, just an arbitrarily organized list. Second, it makes some really irresponsible claims and generalizations, i.e. "some places just don't function as cities in the modern world".

And most importantly, it's credibility is completely undone with the inclusion of Oklahoma City on many levels. Not only did it grossly exaggerate the effects of the May 3rd tornado specifically, but also made an unexplainable judgment by including it based on the relative risk of "Natural Disasters" in Oklahoma City. (To be fair, though, OKC’s weathermen have been working hard to get it included on such a list for this very reason )

In just a few minutes one can easily look at both the probability of and the damaged caused by common natural disasters in the Unite States and quickly come to the conclusion that Oklahoma may not even rank as high as 5 in it's own country based on risk due to natural disaster alone (see below).

I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Oklahoma (the entire state) was a top place in the world for severe weather. And if this was a list about weather, I probably would have no problem with it as long as it was more accurate in reporting the actual risk to property and person the weather presents. However, this is a list of "Hell's on Earth", or bad places to visit due to extreme forces that present a risk to life in those places and Oklahoma City was selected at number 5, seemingly because it is the worst place for "natural disasters" in the world. That's just ridiculous, really, especially when you consider the following:


Wikipedia stats to compare OKC's “big one” specifically referenced in the article to that of other major natural disasters in the US:

May 3 tornado: 48 Dead $1.1 Billion in damages

Hurricane katrina: 1,836 Dead $81.2 Billion Dollars

Loma Prieta Earthquake: 67 Dead $6 Billion in damages

Northridge Earthquake: 57 Dead $12.5 Damages

Some general probabilities related to the type of events above:

Chances of being hit by tornado at any given point over a period of 50 years in Midwest region of US: 1% (News from University of Missouri Extension)

Chance of magnitude 7 quake (Loma Prieta was 6.9, Northridge was 6.7) within 150 miles of San Francisco in the nest 20 years: 25% (BAY AREA / Computer puts big quake odds at 25% within 20 years)

Average probability of experiencing hurricane force winds (74 mph and above, which equals F1 tornado and higher) during a hurricane season dating back 155 years for selected cities (http://www.hgtvpro.com/hpro/nws_dstr...9604,00.html):

New Orleans 12.74 %
Jacksonville 6.88 %
Miami 15.77 %
New York 4.36 %
West Palm Beach 15.87 %

----

So, it's easy to see that Oklahoma City is at least no worse at risk from natural disaster than many major population centers in the United States, let alone the world. Frequency and scope must be considered, but there is nothing to support that Oklahoma City's natural disaster risk is the worst in the world, let alone that the risk that does exist makes it more dangerous or a worse place to visit than Baghdad, Dhaka, Yakutsk, Mogadishu, and Chernobyl.

The inclusion of Oklahoma City in the context of this list based on the criteria presented was clearly not based on any kind of objective reasoning or extensive research. It may be that the author or authors have an irrational fear of inclement weather that created a bias against the consideration other natural disasters or simply didn't state their criteria correctly or accurately. Either way, the result is bizarre at best and completely irresponsible at worst.

BDP,

Please, please send your above post to the putz's at AskMen.com - Free Men's Online Magazine & aol travel site.

If we don't speak up, no one will ever believe otherwise.

Damage is done I fear - a rebuttal blip at the end of the page doesn't ever help.. but still, they need to know how inaccurate their irresponsible 'journalism' really is.

__________________
" You've Been Thunder Struck ! "

Whatever. Someone who put this thing together had a personal vendetta.

__________________
Still corrupting young minds

That's like arguing with Mens Health that you didn't get a huge chest in just 5 minutes a week. I'm pretty sure these guys could give a rats ass - they're too busy coming up with the next list because, as you know, these lists are so hot right now, not unlike Hansel.

That's it I'm moving............

I'd be curious to see if this guy has ties to Seattle.

You know, it strikes me as odd that OKC has never been on any of Discovery Channel's "Mega Natural Disasters" shows! This guy is just looking for attention & every one of us are giving it to him! But with good intent. I won't let anyone bash my city like this. I especially loved the part about high winds knocking our buildings down.

The part about the blizzards was the best. I rarely leave the house anymore for fear of them.

I love this:

We Are All Going To Die » The Lost Ogle

My favorite:

Uh! Yea. The May 3rd Tornado has been on plenty. I just saw a repeat recently of one of the mega-disasters and there we were proudly. This was like the "Top Ten" Mega Natural Disasters, or something to that effect.

EDIT: Speaking of "TOP TEN," looks like either folks' comment's got to the original "list" poster, or someone higher-up actually read the list and realized how absurd our inclusion was. In any event, as of now, we've been bumped from the list. I guess one of them mega-cyclones came up and swept us away and off the list entirely. It's now a officially a Top NINE places to not visit!

Now it really screams Seattle conspiracy to me!

Relax!! We no longer are on the list. Just checked.

Thats it, our NBA team....The Oklahoma City Blizzards!

Is still included on the original story at askmen.com site.

[url="http://www.askmen.com/fashion/travel_top_ten_200/226b_travel_top_ten.html[/URL]

Sorry, I can't seem to get the link to work on the last post.

Post by askmen.com on the original article.

So the logical next question is why choose tornadoes as the natural disaster of choice when earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, drought, etc. are far more devastating and general across an area?

Let the cries of Seattle conspiracy continue to ring out!

Im sorry, but i am having a hard time getting over this. This James Bassill response is unacceptable! Can the city do something to sue these people over something like this? They just can not get away trying to ruin our city like this. Does anybody else feel this way, or do i need to just calm down and take it with a grain of salt? We don't have to be on the best 10 places to visit, but this is absurd.

Kudos to AOL for taking the time to read the crap that was given to them by AskMen.com, realize its stupidity - and remove Oklahoma City from such a bizarre list. Too bad the idiot from AskMen can't see the problem and chose to defend it.

How about a whole shaker?

In a situation like this, it's best to let sleeping dogs lie. It could even turn out positive in our favor, if we allow it to do so.

Truth be told, my only beef with our inclusion on this list is that they are, in essence, comparing us to places that in many instances are completely void of humanity. Our inclusion really sticks out like a sore thumb here because it is so completely off-base from where the rest of the list is trying to go.

If they wanted to put together a list that says "Top Ten Worst Weather Cities in the U.S." - then hey, we gotta take our lumps where and when we get 'em.

I say let the CVB and City spin docs work their magic and have this work in our favor. Send Mr. Clarke (the author) a packet of promo materials and sponsored airline tickets, plus hotel fare and tickets to other area attractions, bring him on down and let's show him a good ole time!

I will also have to say that some of the comments on the AskMen board pretty much fulfilled the stereotype of our being illiterate, redneck hicks, which did little to nothing to enhance our image.

Oh, let's just let it be. The journalist is obviously a moron. Better to rise above it and continue to look at the positive side of things.

Just for the record, from AskMen.com......

"Nick Clarke is a full-time writer who lives and works in Marbella, Spain. He specializes in lifestyle publications, and has a passion for travel, food, design, and luxury. Check out his luxury lifestyle blog at www.gilt-edged.com"

His blog is no longer active, but the WHOIS details show he is in Spain. No wonder.

Administrative Contact:
Clarke, Nick nicholasclarke44@hotmail.com
Gilt-Edged
Casa Waterfalls, Calle Palmera
URB Elviria, Santa Maria Golf
Marbella, Malaga 29600
Spain
952 833 450

Very much agreed.

The editor's response is unacceptable, IMO, but I'm very glad AOL took it down.