Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray

Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray

Not a trick question but a sensible one.

"Raymond" <raymd at (no spam) singnet.com.sg> wrote in news:g0k4el$p3h$1
at (no spam) reader01.singnet.com.sg:

Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray


Well, considering that the effects of the earthquake in Sichuan a few days
ago killed at least thirty thousand, possibly fifty thousand people, you
tell me. If that is too much to grasp, consider the 57 people killed by the
Northridge earthquake, or the 63 killed by the Loma Prieta earthquake. Or
the thousands killed by the tsunami in the Indian Ocean four years ago.
Or are you making a distinction between the danger posed by moving ground
and the dangers posed by the effects of that motion on structures,
hillsides, ocean water (tsunami), etc.?

Just out of idle curiosity, what in the name of wonder makes you think that
this is a sensible question, given the facts above (all of which made
headlines for weeks)?

The chance of you being hurt or killed by ground movement alone is
quite small, much like the mental capacity of Hatunen. If you were in
the countryside, with nothing but grassland and sky, your chance of
being hurt by a temblor is small. It is the effect of the ground
movement on structures and other landforms that pose the problem.

The chance of you being hurt or killed by ground movement alone is
quite small, much like the mental capacity of Hatunen. If you were in
the countryside, with nothing but grassland and sky, your chance of
being hurt by a temblor is small. It is the effect of the ground
movement on structures and other landforms that pose the problem.
Landslides and falling trees or rocks pose the biggest problem in the
open land. Buildings and bridges are a manmade problems that can
impose on your well being. One of the biggest problems with asking a
question in these newsgroups is the dumbshit responses from the ones
that know it all. They are legends in their own minds. Other responses
that are positive yet inquisitive will give you an insight of what is
needed when asking a question. I imagine your question might refer to
the chance of falling into a crevasse caused by a temblor. You have
that chance, but it is small..... very small. I hope this clears up
the question some. If not, feel free to ask more.

On Fri, 16 May 2008 23:50:46 +0800, "Raymond"
raymd at (no spam) singnet.com.sg> wrote:

Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray


95% or more are not dangerous.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen at (no spam) cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray

Raymond wrote:

Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray


No. However, their effects can be. Like buildings falling on top of
you, bridges collapsing, bricks falling off of building onto the
sidewalk, and tsunamis. Little things like that which may be caused by
large enough quakes. But the quake itself, nah.

Jim

Raymond wrote:

Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray


No. However, their effects can be. Like buildings falling on top of
you, bridges collapsing, bricks falling off of building onto the
sidewalk, and tsunamis. Little things like that which may be caused by
large enough quakes. But the quake itself, nah.

Jim

J. F. Cornwall wrote:
Raymond wrote:

Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray


No. However, their effects can be. Like buildings falling on top of
you, bridges collapsing, bricks falling off of building onto the
sidewalk, and tsunamis. Little things like that which may be caused by
large enough quakes. But the quake itself, nah.

Jim

On the other hand, more people died in the 1906 SF earthquake from the
resulting fire and explosions than the the actual quake or being struck
by falling objects.

On 2008-05-17 10:14:21 -1000, Jo Schaper <jo345sch765aper at (no spam) s9ocket.net> said:

On the other hand, more people died in the 1906 SF earthquake from the
resulting fire and explosions than the the actual quake or being struck
by falling objects.

Actually, that is not so. We don't really know how many died in the SF
earthquake, perhaps around 3,000, but most of them were from building
collapses (the figure was hushed up; the official number was less than
a hundred). Most of the victims were Chinese in the poorly-constructed
hotels and houses South of Market. If they died in the fire it was
because rescuers could not get to them before the flames.

J. F. Cornwall wrote:

Raymond wrote:

Not a trick question but a sensible one.
Ray


No. However, their effects can be. Like buildings falling on top of
you, bridges collapsing, bricks falling off of building onto the
sidewalk, and tsunamis. Little things like that which may be caused
by large enough quakes. But the quake itself, nah.

Jim


One caveat: in the 1811-1812 earthquakes, there were very few built
structures. People died on Mississippi from sloshing waves overcoming
boats, river banks capsizing and folks drowning, people/horses getting
mired in liquefied ground (quicksand) and toppling trees. Apparently a
number of people died in China from avalanches off mountainsides.

None of these are man-made structures.