Cognitive dissonance on the part of the media. I see from your profile you are from New Jersey so I’m sure what is unfolding here is simply a side news item. It doesn’t surprise me that the NE wouldn’t give much time to those of us in Houston. It’s not in your backyard. An area larger than the size of Connecticut (initially I thought Rhode Island) with 7 million people is underwater.. No Hyperbole. If this were happening in the Boswash Corridor—wall to wall news, I’m sure. https://www.harriscountyfws.org
I lived in Houston for awhile so I am familiar with its spread out size, it’s land, its often clay like soil (absorbs a ton of water, but does not absorb water fast), its low lying areas and its waterways. So I get the size of the area Harvey has hit.
But as much of the “weather” aspect of the event is, the human calamity has not seen like Katrina - nearly 2,000 died. That’s all I am saying.
Care? I have relatives in Texas. Fortunately they are in Abiline area and San Antonio, but they have friends and extended relatives in Houston, whom we have all called out to.
My ONLY point is, to me, the “weather” aspect of the calamity seems less than the human aspect. That is not without care and concern for the human costs. It’s just what seems to me to be difference in how the weather damage of Harvey is being reported, versus just how bad things are.
Katrina was much worse, in human terms. but as bad as Katrina was I don’t think it, as a weather event, was promoted as “unprecedented”.