|
|
#12
11-14-2005, 06:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 7.3 Magnitude Earthquake hits Japanese coast
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think it was a smart choice to base our entire world's infrastructure and way of life on a completely unsustainable natural resource. Or maybe they didn't know any better. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] You mean like trees? [/ QUOTE ] trees are considerably more sustainable than fossil fuels 
|
|
#13
11-14-2005, 06:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 7.3 Magnitude Earthquake hits Japanese coast
What's next?
|
|
#14
11-14-2005, 06:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 7.3 Magnitude Earthquake hits Japanese coast
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] just about as bad as they get [/ QUOTE ] Not really- 7.3 is reasonably large, but no where near the size of the earthquake that caused the tsunami last year (9.1). [/ QUOTE ] 7.3 is a monster man. The San Fransisco 89 quake was I believe 6.9. And the increase in numerical value is an exponential increase. 7.3 is bad. Plus it's not the number, but the proximity to the epicenter that is the huge determinant. I'd rather be 1 mile from 9.1 than right by a 7.3.
|
|
#16
11-14-2005, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 7.3 Magnitude Earthquake hits Japanese coast
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] just about as bad as they get [/ QUOTE ] Not really- 7.3 is reasonably large, but no where near the size of the earthquake that caused the tsunami last year (9.1). [/ QUOTE ] 7.3 is a monster man. The San Fransisco 89 quake was I believe 6.9. And the increase in numerical value is an exponential increase. 7.3 is bad. Plus it's not the number, but the proximity to the epicenter that is the huge determinant. I'd rather be 1 mile from 9.1 than right by a 7.3. [/ QUOTE ] Bold mine. This is what I was referring to when I said it was reasonably large, but no where near as large as the 9.1 (!!) from last year. It is a major quake, but not a monster one (or 'Great', as the scale goes).
|
|
#18
11-14-2005, 06:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 7.3 Magnitude Earthquake hits Japanese coast
One story so far, from the company that sent me the flash (*they finally got the story up).
It was 300 Miles off the coast of Honshu. There's notices of tsunamis and stuff already out in Japan all up and down that coast It occurred at 1:38 Pacific web page
|
|
#19
11-14-2005, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 7.3 Magnitude Earthquake hits Japanese coast
Mother Nature heard Bush was coming.
|
|
#20
11-14-2005, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 7.3 Magnitude Earthquake hits Japanese coast
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] just about as bad as they get [/ QUOTE ] Not really- 7.3 is reasonably large, but no where near the size of the earthquake that caused the tsunami last year (9.1). [/ QUOTE ] 7.3 is a monster man. The San Fransisco 89 quake was I believe 6.9. And the increase in numerical value is an exponential increase. 7.3 is bad. Plus it's not the number, but the proximity to the epicenter that is the huge determinant. I'd rather be 1 mile from 9.1 than right by a 7.3. [/ QUOTE ] Bold mine. This is what I was referring to when I said it was reasonably large, but no where near as large as the 9.1 (!!) from last year. It is a major quake, but not a monster one (or 'Great', as the scale goes). [/ QUOTE ] I don't care what you say, any quake near/over 7 is quite large. Sure there are more powerful ones, but they are not very frequent.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
