As a previous resident of Seattle I developed (duh!) an interest in major quake zones, since by USGS accounts
Mt Rainier is most dangerous volcano in US considering proximity of major populations areas.
I don't have at this minute access to the E. Britainnica but if memory serves me correctly Boston's earliest
history is marred by a total destruction event, having to build city from scratch. A google search of major
destructive quakes is US histroy should prove useful. More on the New Madrid quake of 1805. It was gigantic
by any scale. Good read and fun sci fi is Clarke's Richter 10, describing among other horrors, the modern
nightmare of a New Madrid quake today. In fact the Kispicotha Shawnee recorded it as "when the rivers
changed course for days, trees shook for as far as the eye could see though there was no wind..."
Something like that and you get the picture. Actually all of Chicago, Memphis, St Louis, Boston, New York, are at
extreme risk from rare events ( at least by Tokyo standards where the astute observer, I understand, can
feel a quake every hour. But I'll really give you something to worry about as I have done a whole lot of research
on it for a novel never having been published...maybe I'll find a publisher one day... Statistics can be scary
Here goes. The risk of dying from a massive tsunami hitting entire west coast of US, caused by a ~500 meter
asteroid ( not very big) is larger than dying in a Richter 7+ in L.A. But rare events occur rarely thank
heavens, but when shit happens of such a type, and it WILL, someday, then it really distorts the numbers.
PM me if you are interested in more details. I really don't consider all of this entirely off topic as we all follow
these threads for our interests and survival and I think it is NOT inconsequential to entertain thought of the risk and
sequelae of a Richter 7.5-8 hitting Tokyo. It has happened many times in their recorded history.
Sleep well
jim black |
