Ian, to some degree, you are right. There is an atmosphere of weirdness to the whole thread, but there is also a strong element of reality. This type of event has been seen in countless real-world happenings, and it pays to be prepared.
You say that it is best to leave the environ, but you don't mention how or counter any of the reasons given for staying put. You say it is "logical" but you don't state just how you came to this conclusion.
Leaving the AO didn't do much good for the folks facing Rita just a few weeks ago. Conversely, staying didn't do much good for the people in NO when Katrina paid a visit. In both instances, the common factor was a lack of preparation and a desire to see reality for something other than what it was.
In the Rita incident, we saw thousands of people fleeing the area, causing terrible logjams on the highways. Who thought to take a back road? Who had spare gas on board so they could refuel after idling for three hours? Who had plenty of time, warning, info to fortifiy the house and sit the storm out? I would bet that at least 25% of the people fleeing wouldn't have had to go anywhere if they had just strengthened the house and stocked up on supplies.
What you have is a failure to plan.
New Orleans faced a similar storm and 90% of the population wanted to stay put. They didn't put aside food and water, or some defensive weapons. The just sat down.
Another excellent example of a failure to plan.
Where is your "logical" solution coming from? On what is it based? According to everything I'm hearing and reading, logic would seem to dictate that you stay where you are, where you have plenty of food and water and weaponry, and know the terrain.
When Reason Fails.....