Sites
Those who have set up a site well ahead of time, have everything running, remote place, will be the best off. Between now and then there will be many options opening up! Think of all the small farms owned by retired folks. They need help, others join. They have the site and others have the expertise. Thousands of such small groups may form at the last minute, the last few months.
A group, like a family or extended family, should have a place to meet, so that if they get separated, or if the PS happens and they weren't all able to get together ahead of time, then they could find each other.
What about communication? Short wave radio? Is this something that can work with little power? Of course, as soon as one starts talking about short wave or another kind of thing, the danger in being discovered and raided comes up. If groups agree ahead of time the channel and general time frames, they may be able to talk to one another. What if groups agree on a code system, so that even if someone catches their channel they can't understand exactly what has been said! Not everything would need to be coded, but important things like locations could be coded. Words for supplies could be coded, so if you say how many feathers do you have, they are talking about bags of beans, or something. I guess if one doesn't stay on the line too long, then raiding groups can't locate them. Kind of like the 3 minute thing on tracing a phone call. Groups have to make up the own code ... before the PS.
Places resting on solid rock, rather than mushy watery places where liquefaction occurs, don't have much earthquake damage. The reverberations are actually most destructive. If on solid rock, the jolt from earthquake is less, as you get only the initial jolt, not many jiggles afterwards. Folks on Nob HIll in San Francisco didn't lose their houses in 1906 quake, where those on mushy soil had a pile of rubble.
Many people mention they are heading for Colorado, which is in the mountains but would take a ride over the plains, also is far enough east that hot earth would not be a problem. Mountain ranges ride over the plains next to them, sometimes, depending on what's happening with the plates. During a recent pole shift, per Velikovsky, Chief Mountain moved 100 miles or some such, over the plains. Best to be on the part that's going for a ride, not on the part that will go under, be ridden over.
I think the safest place may be about 300 miles inland from an ocean on flat land. I think the safest place in the US is east of the Rockies about 100-200 miles, North New Mexico. There is a lot of flat ground in southern NM and AZ. I imagine a lot of people will try going to four corners, but that's too obvious. Lots of chance for problems from STS folks.
Many, many folks are being called to the Colorado Springs area for the last 5 or 6 years. The particular place is at the base of a well known mountain. Why would one want to be at the base of a mountain with all those boulders and stuff coming down? Maybe they are destined to die. Look at all the people flocking to Florida.
I'm a Californian and have lived in the inland areas too. That area is very active with fault lines, and in-between 2 mountain ranges, so I am certain that that area would not be safe. Also, if the waves are large enough, what is to prevent the ocean from flooding the CA Central Valley.
Come inland more than Texas, though the western and the panhandle area may be better. I think that perhaps north-east Texas (which is hilly and inland) is worth checking out. The Texas panhandle is on what is called the "cap rock" and I don't know what that implies re earth quakes and plate movement.
Spain would be safe in Europe. The Netherlands will be under water. The new North Pole will off Brazil.
Just remember, mountains will be coming down. Hills are better than mountains, yes. Less chance to collapse. It is my understanding that you have to get away from the mountains as just as they have welled-up dramatically in the past (do to earth plates colliding), they can be expected to do the same during/after the pole shift. Also, if I heard it right, where the plates meet the ground will also get super hot. I'm concerned about all that rain, that flat ground can be vulnerable during flash floods.
I really believe that we need at least 3 alternative plans that can be chosen from in the final week. More plans, better choices. We should identify about 3 or 4 potential safe areas, research them and plan accordingly. Each of us should have a place. Problem is how to prepare a site when one is thousands of miles away from it. Well, we will most likely leave our areas to new areas within the few weeks ahead of the pole shift. Then we will contact each other and go there. A few weeks will give us time to put together a site.
Only a group could afford to set up more than one alternative site. But a group site would be dangerous. It would be overrun. How would you keep undesirables away? We should keep in mind that their would be a last days panic. But the last days will be the last week.
I plan to stay mobile as long as possible. In the months ahead of the comet becoming obvious movement may be restricted and property confiscated. I'm not so much thinking about this site or that, as about a "virtual site". A site that it is portable, can be moved, can be set up at the last minute. What is permanent is what is built afterwards, the more permanent housing, etc. Folks gather what they need ahead of time. as the moment draws near, then go to a safe AREA of the country/world. Then after the shift, they set up tents, wooden hydroponics trenches, etc., worm beds, etc.
