AbbyNucksFan Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Forget what the major earthquake that killed us all of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Sacred geometry? What's next, rain dances and praying to the volcano gods? Maybe some voodoo for good measure? How about a Tiki God? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 There have been 41 major quakes/tsunamis the past 10,000 years in the Pacific Northwest. About 240 years between cycles - it's been 315 years since the last major one - they say this next one will reach 9.2 on the Richter scale. As they say, it's not a matter of "if" it's a matter of "when". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 curious - but for us wouldn't victoria eat hell of a lot of the the tsunami? about far into the lower mainland would the tsunami actually effect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 There have been 41 major quakes/tsunamis the past 10,000 years in the Pacific Northwest. About 240 years between cycles - it's been 315 years since the last major one - they say this next one will reach 9.2 on the Richter scale. As they say, it's not a matter of "if" it's a matter of "when". For the most part Californians are taught how to handle Earthquakes, because they are frequent there, especially due to the San Andreas fault this guy says is overrated. I don't call the several 6-8's they've had since 1900 to be something to scoff at, those caused chaos, especially the early 1900s SF quake. I was in California, in the Bay Area, for the Loma Prieta in '89. It was a meager 6.9 or something but was enough to knock some buildings down and cause plenty of fires and explosions, along with numerous freeway collapses and a nearly destroyed Bay Bridge (SF-Oakland). The Northridge quake down south, I think a few years later, pummeled a handful of freeways, including a very busy interchange, collapsing them. He's right about the northwest not being prepared, they aren't taught much about quakes, and no one on the west coast since I lived there had been trained on how to deal with a tsunami. Sufficed to say SF is screwed with a tsunami even a fraction of the size described, along with low lying areas in the region like Half Moon Bay, Santa Cruz, Monterey, and Crescent City/Eureka/Arcata up north. But I mean, chances are much higher of another Loma Prieta along the San Andreas fault than the massive one he predicts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummer4now Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 curious - but for us wouldn't victoria eat hell of a lot of the the tsunami? about far into the lower mainland would the tsunami actually effect? I am pretty sure Richmond would practically be underwater and so would Delta and tsawwassen. The whole ferry terminal would disappear as it's just strip of man-made land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Surprised no one has put this here... http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 curious - but for us wouldn't victoria eat hell of a lot of the the tsunami? about far into the lower mainland would the tsunami actually effect? There's two varying schools of thought on that. The old and prevailing theory was that the west coast of vancouver Island would eat the Tsunami waves reducing the swells that would hit the mainland But after 2004 scientists and hydrologists realized that the very action of wrapping around an island would compound and increase the wave height. What happened in Thailand to a few islands is that the waves wrapped the islands and met on the other side and actually nearly doubled in size when the two walls of water met each other. So what should have been safe land was actually hit from behind by an unexpected wall of water. As for how far inland it would travel, again two schools of thought. 1 says it will stop att he mainland as vancouver has some hilly terrain The other is the more logical one that sees the wave hitting the fraser and travelling and spreading inland as it did in numerous places in Japan. Basically using the river as a lubricant to travel inland and as the fraser valley flattens out who knows really but I'd say Abby/Langley wouldn't be out of the question if the wave heights they predict do indeed hit in the 15 to 20 foot marks Again speculatory as nobody knows but to the best of my knowledge and everything I've read and watched that is a scarily possible scenario Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 05/29/15 never forget RIP to all.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.