Qhimm.com Forums
Off-topic forums => Completely Unrelated => Topic started by: titeguy3 on 2011-03-11 18:25:36
-
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/11/japan.quake/index.html
Thoughts/comments/concerns?
What I'm hoping to get out of this topic is some good suggestions on how one can assist the relief efforts.
I've heard that the best thing we can do to help is donate to organizations like the Red Cross, but even that seems like so little...
-
US citizens can text REDCROSS to 90999 to donate 10 bucks to help out.
May seems like a little but if enough people donate, that turns into a lot.
Been watching the devastation on the news, shit is really fucking scary, I'm glad I live in the UK where all we really get is some occasional flooding, a few tummy rumble quakes and the odd twister that doesn't rate higher than a fart.
-
Not to be callous, but your options are either donate money, donate supplies, or go there and physically help. This is crazy though, an 8.9!!! There had been other reports of increased seismic and volcanic activity before this took place, so hopefully they were at least a little prepared for this. Not much to do when a billion gallons of water is rushing towards you faster than you can drive a vehicle though.
Donating money would likely be the most efficient way of helping. The Red Cross can use that money to buy more supplies than you could from Wal Mart with the same amount of cash. But if you want to feel as if you have actually done something, then various organizations will accept supplies. The best thing you could do is make your way over to Japan and help search for survivors, but of course thats a bit more complicated than donations.
-
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/11/japan.quake/index.html
Thoughts/comments/concerns?
My thoughts are WHERE THE HELL HAVE YOU BEEN FOR THE PAST FEW MONTHS? ;D
That said, I think the best option is to donate some figurines. I saw an article about the casualties and the damage was quite severe: some bishoujo figurines were completely dismembered.
(http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/6441/otakuearthquakevictims0k.jpg)
We must help our cousins to rebuild their collections.
-
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/11/japan.quake/index.html
Thoughts/comments/concerns?
Read about that. It sucks big time. Drowning and being hit right in the face with rushing water is possibly one of the worst deaths. :(
I hope everything gets fixed; even though right now it is unlikely to say.
-
Looking at the carnage, death toll is going to be way over 5000 I think.
-
Looking at the carnage, death toll is going to be way over 5000 I think.
The upper limit is said to be 50,000 by some of the newspapers, although it's unlikely to be that high. However, it's almost certain to be in the thousands.
-
and then you have these reactors with possible meltdown. Let's hope they cool then down and nothing else happens.
-
and then you have these reactors with possible meltdown. Let's hope they cool then down and nothing else happens.
News said they were using batteries to power the cooling thingamajigs. One would think that if a meltdown or breach of some type were to occur, it would have happened when things were at their hottest. Probably in the clear now, although they were venting radioactive gas...
-
I get emails from the US consulate still, even though I left Japan in 2009. And, they warned for Fukushima prefecture to evacuate because of the power plant...
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12720219
Explosion at the reactor...
and now a meltdown looks likely.
-
The earthquake has now been upgraded to a 9.0
Good job, earthquake; I knew you could do it! ;D
-
Magnitudes and corresponding energy (Joules and tons of TNT)
So how powerful was that earthquake? http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/faq/?faqID=33
Magnitudes and corresponding energy (Joules and tons of TNT)
Magnitude Es (from Me) Es (from Ms or Mw) Tons of TNT Nuclear Bomb Equivalence (# of bombs)
4 0.22E+11 0.63E+11 15. 0.00
5 0.71E+12 0.20E+13 475. 0.02
6 0.22E+14 0.63E+14 15023. 0.79
7 0.71E+15 0.20E+16 475063. 25.0
8 0.22E+17 0.63E+17 15022833. 790.6
9 0.71E+18 0.20E+19 475063712. 25,003.3
The quake alone was equivalent to about 25,000 Nukes or 475 Million Tons of TNT (475,000 Megatons). Not to mention the many dozens of aftershocks and the energy in the Tsunami.
-
Those poor people, let us hope there ok sad times indeed :(.
-
Magnitudes and corresponding energy (Joules and tons of TNT)
So how powerful was that earthquake? http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/faq/?faqID=33
Magnitudes and corresponding energy (Joules and tons of TNT)
Magnitude Es (from Me) Es (from Ms or Mw) Tons of TNT Nuclear Bomb Equivalence (# of bombs)
4 0.22E+11 0.63E+11 15. 0.00
5 0.71E+12 0.20E+13 475. 0.02
6 0.22E+14 0.63E+14 15023. 0.79
7 0.71E+15 0.20E+16 475063. 25.0
8 0.22E+17 0.63E+17 15022833. 790.6
9 0.71E+18 0.20E+19 475063712. 25,003.3
The quake alone was equivalent to about 25,000 Nukes or 475 Million Tons of TNT (475,000 Megatons). Not to mention the many dozens of aftershocks and the energy in the Tsunami.
Did those idiots just pick an arbitrary value for the energy of a nuclear bomb? Or pick an arbitrary bomb as the standard? They do know that the most powerful nuke ever blown up was thousands of times more powerful than the one dropped on Hiroshima, right?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Nuclear_Event_Scale
japanese reactor is now at 6, if wiki is correct.
-
Did those idiots just pick an arbitrary value for the energy of a nuclear bomb? Or pick an arbitrary bomb as the standard? They do know that the most powerful nuke ever blown up was thousands of times more powerful than the one dropped on Hiroshima, right?
"The first atomic bomb, or A-bomb, exploded on July 16, 1945, Alamogordo, N.Mex. It produced an explosion equal to that of 19,000 short tons (17,000 metric tons) of TNT."
According to the chart, it does seem they are using the 19,000 (17,000metric) tons as 1 Atomic Bomb. So instead of 25,000 Atomic Bombs, its like...500 Tsar Bombas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Nuclear_Event_Scale
japanese reactor is now at 6, if wiki is correct.
Kyshtym disaster at Mayak, Soviet Union, 29 September 1957. A failed cooling system at a military nuclear waste reprocessing facility caused a steam explosion that released 70–80 tons of highly radioactive material into the environment. Impact on local population is not fully known.
This is the wiki example of a level 6 accident. Definetly a terrible situation.
-
A terrible situation in which no-one has been subject to a dangerous amount of radiation.
Really, the way people are reacting to this is hilarious. 10,000 have died and we've ignored all of that because of an incident at a nuclear plant that has killed no-one.
It's also hilarious that every year people die in coal mining accidents and oil rig fires and gas explosions and no-one cares. It's an acceptable risk to take for us to have energy. But when something happens at a nuclear plant that hasn't actually harmed anyone, it's "OMG END OF THE WORLD WE MUST SHUT DOWN ALL NUCLEAR PLANTS RIGHT NOW ITS TOO DANGEROUS".
The double standard to which nuclear energy is held is ridiculous. It's as if people hear the word "nuclear" and their only thoughts are bombs and 50ft mutants.
-
Agreed.
One of the reasons is probably that the range of danger for a nuke plant is greater than that of coal mines and oil rigs (danger to humans at least). If a coal mine collapses 5 miles away, I surive. If a reactor melts down 5 miles away I recieve certain amount of radiation. The Reactor situation has provided a convenient way for people to avoid thinking about the deaths.
-
And in other news
(http://img852.imageshack.us/img852/9567/1300235488667.jpg)
(I didn't make it, so don't blame me for the shitty shoop)
-
A terrible situation in which no-one has been subject to a dangerous amount of radiation.
Really, the way people are reacting to this is hilarious. 10,000 have died and we've ignored all of that because of an incident at a nuclear plant that has killed no-one.
It's also hilarious that every year people die in coal mining accidents and oil rig fires and gas explosions and no-one cares. It's an acceptable risk to take for us to have energy. But when something happens at a nuclear plant that hasn't actually harmed anyone, it's "OMG END OF THE WORLD WE MUST SHUT DOWN ALL NUCLEAR PLANTS RIGHT NOW ITS TOO DANGEROUS".
The double standard to which nuclear energy is held is ridiculous. It's as if people hear the word "nuclear" and their only thoughts are bombs and 50ft mutants.
True. The sooner we go Nuclear Fusion the better, but people probably think that means some kind of crazy ass meltdown.
-
And no doubt certain groups will encourage that myth.
Can anyone tell me why it is that environmentalists are so opposed to the one financially viable non-fossil fuel?
Is it because they're not actually concerned about having the most effective forms of energy production at all, and want to force everyone to change their lifestyle even when it isn't necessary?
-
And no doubt certain groups will encourage that myth.
Can anyone tell me why it is that environmentalists are so opposed to the one financially viable non-fossil fuel?
Is it because they're not actually concerned about having the most effective forms of energy production at all, and want to force everyone to change their lifestyle even when it isn't necessary?
It's because they are idiots, and believe the minimal risk is too great. I mean, seriously, a regular coal power plant, on average, outputs more radiation than your average nuclear power plant.
-
I've been keeping up to date via Reuters: http://live.reuters.com/Event/Japan_Earthquake2
I really hope they can get the reactors under control. It seems #4 is having more trouble and it almost feels like it'll be a matter of time until we hear something is amiss with 5 and 6.
-
A terrible situation in which no-one has been subject to a dangerous amount of radiation.
Really, the way people are reacting to this is hilarious. 10,000 have died and we've ignored all of that because of an incident at a nuclear plant that has killed no-one.
Nuclear reactors are akin to airplanes. For the most part, a harmless form of travel, but when one goes down 200 people die at once. Meanwhile, 30,000 people die on American roads each year, but only a handful at a time. It's the shock value of 200 people dying at once that sticks in the minds of the average citizen...
However, I feel compelled to suggest that the situation with the Fukushima nuclear plant is still something to be taken very seriously as long as sensationalism is avoided (Which, unfortunately, the news outlets in my country love to throw in for flavor). Unlike the earthquake and tsunami, if something truly catastrophic happens at the reactor it will be something that cannot be rebuilt or grieved over. It will be a cancer that can never be brought into remission.
Personally? I'm praying for the whole lot over there. Many Japanese face terrible trials by fire, now, and they don't need a major release of radioactivity to make things worse.
-
A terrible situation in which no-one has been subject to a dangerous amount of radiation.
Really, the way people are reacting to this is hilarious. 10,000 have died and we've ignored all of that because of an incident at a nuclear plant that has killed no-one.
It's also hilarious that every year people die in coal mining accidents and oil rig fires and gas explosions and no-one cares. It's an acceptable risk to take for us to have energy. But when something happens at a nuclear plant that hasn't actually harmed anyone, it's "OMG END OF THE WORLD WE MUST SHUT DOWN ALL NUCLEAR PLANTS RIGHT NOW ITS TOO DANGEROUS".
The double standard to which nuclear energy is held is ridiculous. It's as if people hear the word "nuclear" and their only thoughts are bombs and 50ft mutants.
True. The sooner we go Nuclear Fusion the better, but people probably think that means some kind of crazy ass meltdown.
Well, I hadn’t been thinking “conspiracy”, and maybe that was naïve.
But I see your knock at environmentalists, and raise you coal-fire power as the culprits. (At least in the states.)
We aren’t as advanced as you kids over there. Only about 20% of our electricity comes from nuclear energy (I think places like France get ~78% from nuclear power).
The majority of our electricity comes from coal or gas fired power. We <3 that stuff over here, despite possible mining death tolls. I live in western PA, and it is a HUGE mining area. It’s basically one giant mining town. Any attempt to switch to a different power source meets anger here at jorb loss potential. There are billboards on our turnpikes that say “Sun sets and wind dies. Coal has powered you for 100 years.” They forget to add “coal burns up”. (srsly wtf is that? Sun sets… no kidding Sherlock, invest in a frackin’ smartgrid, to store the renewable energy. And ugh, I said “frack”. Let me get more angry – why aren’t you taxing the marcellus shale collection, PA?)
Our nuclear stations in the US are pretty old and will need to be replaced soon. It takes like, 20-30 years to build a new one, and yet no one is starting any new constructions. Nuclear energy is much cleaner than fossil fuel burning plants. So if anyone was trying to make nuke E look bad I’d point my finger elsewhere first.
While I do feel this is worth worrying about for Japan (because it’s like pouring salt in a wound, they really don’t need any more on their plate right now) I can def see your point, in relation to the US. This “spin” is probably going to be used to halt any plans to create more power plants in the US, indefinitely.
Edit: Interesting, PBS just pushed out an article (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/insidenova/2011/03/nuclear-renaissance.html) saying that in the face of global warming, people (including environmentalists) all had been looking at nuclear power as the "lesser evil". They don't think this will negatively impact our plans for further nuclear power development.
I guess time will tell.
-
Opine, you live in Western PA? How interesting, I live in Western PA (Go to school in Erie, family based in Butler). Yes we eat, breathe, drink, and shit coal around here. It would take quite a revolution in thinking around here to stop using coal - it simply won't happen unless we run out of it or theres a federal mandate of some type.
-
Would like to post that... http://www.mofunzone.com/online_games/tsunami_fighter.shtml It isn't a really good game, but read the description.
-
My room and office were trashed.
Building next to my room (9th floor):
(http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/196329_10150104609171470_612431469_6864185_347544_n.jpg?dl=1)
My office:
(http://hphotos-snc6.fbcdn.net/172418_10150106708251470_612431469_6882380_4868634_o.jpg)
My $3,000 Yamaha MOTIF XF8 was thrown off its stand and laying on the floor. PC monitor scratched beyond repair.
My office continues shaking even now as I type this reply.
Radiation has several of my coworkers and myself feeling dizzy/sick, but the levels are not high enough to cause real damage.
Convenience stores are empty, and the streets at night are darker and more barren than ever, as many have evacuated.
And just because my week wasn’t quite bad enough, my girlfriend left me. I mean, why not, right?
But I am among the lucky.
Nowhere in my story did I mention how I drowned in freezing cold water, got smashed by debris, or burned to death while trapped.
None of my friends or family got hit too hard, and my radiation poisoning is only temporary.
We will just see how long that lasts, given the upcoming 8.X to hit Tokyo fairly soon.
L. Spiro
-
Hope anything worse won't happen......
**L. Spiro's name ringed a bell, and I could find a bit more from somewhere else.....
-
Opine, you live in Western PA? How interesting, I live in Western PA (Go to school in Erie, family based in Butler). Yes we eat, breathe, drink, and sh*t coal around here. It would take quite a revolution in thinking around here to stop using coal - it simply won't happen unless we run out of it or theres a federal mandate of some type.
Well, hello fellow PAer :) I probably live ~45 mins from your family. I'm close to downtown Pgh.
My room and office were trashed.
I'm glad to hear that you and your friends and family are okay. What a devastating situation.
(And sorry to hear about your mean girlfriend on top of everything else!)
-
throughout the pacific plate or ring of fire their have been earthquakes on every side of the plate, haiti was southwest of the plate, new zealand was southeast of the plate and japan was northwest of the plate. so now theirs only the united states west coast which is on the northwest of the plate. scientist predict californias fault line is going to rupture in the next 30 years. its going to happen. even though it is impossible to predict earthquakes they suspect this is true. tomorrow theirs going to be a supermoon. some scientist think the supermoon along with the sun and their gravitational pull is going to trigger natural disaster on the planet. moving plates. if im right contact me cuz im filthy
-
What perspective are you thinking of when you say Haiti and the USA is west of the Pacific Plate and New Zealand is East? lol Just thought it was funny because you had some other post saying (go left, or right from the camera's perspective) in your background project. It is as if you see a mirrored version of reality (unless I'm the one with mirror vision!)
Human suffering aside, (and please no one interpret this the wrong way) I'd say its about time for a Global-Scale disaster. Apparently something, massive volcanic eruption, massive earthquake, massive mega hurricane, plague, flood, drought, etc. happen at somewhat regular intervals on this planet. Its naive to think that somehow as humans we can just dodge these events. "There is a flood/volcano/hurricane coming, what do we do?" you can't stop it, thats for sure. Re-rack the billiard balls and start again - Hopefully with less greed, evil, torture, and war.
-
Apparently something, massive volcanic eruption, massive earthquake, massive mega hurricane, plague, flood, drought, etc. happen at somewhat regular intervals on this planet.
No they don't. They happen randomly at very irregular intervals. It is highly unlikely that any cataclysmic event (I assume you're talking about "killing the dinosaurs" kind of disasters) will happen within the next million years. Or within the next ten million years. It's not like the gods are sitting up on Mt. Olympus saying "OK, it has been 65 million years since the last mass extinction; the next one is due on Thursday. Make sure it isn't late; these things have to happen exactly so often!".
Even if you're only talking about disasters comparable to the bubonic plague or Spanish flu, they're still very irregular and very unpredictable. The next one could happen next week or in a thousand years. It's random, so it's not like we're "due" to have one.
-
I'm not talkin about absolute destruction, I'm talking about things that pose a threat to civilizations. I'm thinking bell curve. Something of the scale of Plague or Spanish flu occurs x number of times per 1000 years (so not regular intervals, but things happen every so often and you can average the number of events over time). Yeah sure you can't say that a meteor will destroy the earth in exactly 1,000,000 years...but we know that certain events have happened before, when they happened before, and can estimate that events of that type occur, on average, every x number of years. When I say, "We're about due for..." I mean, this is something that I think should happen to man if we continue as we have for the past 100 years, not "It's 5 o'clock March 20, 2011, time for that volcano to erupt."
-
throughout the pacific plate or ring of fire their have been earthquakes on every side of the plate, haiti was southwest of the plate, new zealand was southeast of the plate and japan was northwest of the plate. so now theirs only the united states west coast which is on the northwest of the plate. scientist predict californias fault line is going to rupture in the next 30 years. its going to happen. even though it is impossible to predict earthquakes they suspect this is true. tomorrow theirs going to be a supermoon. some scientist think the supermoon along with the sun and their gravitational pull is going to trigger natural disaster on the planet. moving plates. if im right contact me cuz im filthy
oh correction, japan *eastside of the plate" but yeah thats my theory
-
Historically speaking, large earthquakes come in pairs with the second one typically (but not always) being a magnitude lower.
The 9.3 Indonesian earthquake was followed 3 months later by an 8.7 (which shook my office in Bangkok).
In November 2006 an 8.3 earthquake in the Kuril Islands, followed 2 months later by an 8.1.
An expert was able to give more examples than I can in a video I can’t find right now.
They are called doublets, and the expert I saw on video mentioned some that occurred 2 years apart.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m483323n3684h50v/
The “big one” is expected to be closer to Tokyo, and is expected within the next 2 years. I personally expect it within the next 7 months.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/03/110315-japan-earthquake-tsunami-big-one-science/
Scientists tend to agree that the Sendai earthquake will be linked to more large earthquakes in the same area in the near future.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928043.000-the-megaquake-connection-are-huge-earthquakes-linked.html
L. Spiro
-
Actually planes are more unsafe than cars. I know you have been led to believe otherwise but aviation uses hours and distance you travel and not the journey number. By journey number this is the death toll:
Deaths per billion journeys
Bus: 4.3
Rail: 20
Van: 20
Car: 40
Foot: 40
Water: 90
Air: 117
Bicycle: 170
Motorcycle: 1640
You are 3X more likely to die on plane.
<< reply to guy on other page.
-
Enlightening information. Damn the propaganda!
I have to wonder though, these are death tolls? What about injuries? Probably 99% of plane crash victims die, but vehicular injuries surely dwarf most of the other categories. It says you are as likely to die while on foot as you are when in a car; where do these people walk? Is a walking journey from my couch to the bathroom? If a ferry for 20 minutes or go jet skiing for 4 hours, are they each worth one journey? Sorry, I don't expect answers to these, just thinking through type.
-
Well, there are a ton of things to consider even with these stats. But the claim that planes are safest form of transport is the biggest pile of baloney I have ever heard (and a lie that is often told is a lie that is often believed). Any case, as you say, injury is probably more likely in car. If you are in a plane during a serious problem, chances are you are going to die, whereas in car you may well survive with just cuts and bruises. All luck of the draw.
It will also depend on country, some countries (the usual useless ones) have very poor air safety records.
Not surprisingly, air insurers go by death-by-journey stat. It never ceases to amaze me how people make their own stats up to portray what they want to portray and it gives stats a bad name. If you go out and collect proper data and fair stats, they are valuable resource. But if you want to show something you want to, you can just warp the data to fit the pattern you want. That is exactly what the aviation industry has done. I mean what ridiculous notion, that you judge safety by hours or distance travelled, when most accidents on plane happen on take off and landing. They are saying "Because the plane travelled thousands of Kilometres, that little unfortunate accident at the end where it crashed and burned doesn't really alter the stat of how safe the plane is"
My neighbourhood is the safest place in britain because I don't include all the robberies and muggings. I only count crime that resulted in the criminal going jail for at least 5 years.
Yipee.
-
Lol, yeah to everything you said. I've had to take several Statistics courses and several Research/Experimental courses, and it truly is outrageous the ways in which data can be manipulated. Unfortunately, this realization defeats the purpose of looking to data to answer questions to begin with - at least in cases where some form of personal gain is involved. Here we have a dependent variable of "safety", but safety, in this case, has been defined as Not Dying.
-
Basically for events where we have a wide range of unique situations with unique variables, the averages mean nothing, something, or everything depending on which of these situations you are in. The averages certainly mean something to those of us flying from NY to LA, as you mentioned, or those driving to the grocery store and back. The averages mean little or nothing when you are driving through the cliffs of India with no guardrails in the middle of the summer heat. Indeed, the above circumstances could be a major contributory factor to the statistics in question (40 deaths per billion total, but 30 of them are in the cliffs of India during the summer) in which case those engaging in 'average' type trips are even safer than the statistics would seem to indicate. In order to have truly reliable and valid statistics (at least for issues involving billions of trips, millions of deaths, dozens of types of transportation, thousands of variables), the data would have to be dissected and analyzed to the point of impracticality. And even then, to echo the words of a wise seer "It's not like the gods are sitting up on Mt. Olympus saying "OK, it has been 65 million years since the last mass extinction; the next one is due on Thursday. Make sure it isn't late; these things have to happen exactly so often!", but let's not forget the words of another prophet "...but we know that certain events have happened before, when they happened before, and can estimate that events of that type occur, on average, every x number of years."
-
Well, you're really quick :P I was reading your PM and you just posted in here... How could you manipulate these stats, this is simple : tell 'em.........
-
Actually planes are more unsafe than cars. I know you have been led to believe otherwise but aviation uses hours and distance you travel and not the journey number. By journey number this is the death toll:
Deaths per billion journeys
Bus: 4.3
Rail: 20
Van: 20
Car: 40
Foot: 40
Water: 90
Air: 117
Bicycle: 170
Motorcycle: 1640
You are 3X more likely to die on plane.
<< reply to guy on other page.
My alias is not "guy", it is Kemlin. Here are the statistics I used to formulate my opinion:
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
The number of driving fatalities on American roads, each year, since 1994. About 30,000 a year. Meanwhile, here is a quote stating the number of aviation deaths for the years 2006-2007:
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/ntsb_fatalities_aviation_decrease_199023-1.html
About 600 a year on average, and unless I am mistaken, I somewhat doubt this number has equaled the number of deaths from vehicular accidents in years prior or since.
I imagine you were attempting to argue that, overall, cars are safer than flying. I will grant you this point, and I never suggested otherwise. However, it is also totally alien to the point I was attempting to make: The occurrence of a major incident (The plane going down) far outweighs the importance from a series of minor incidents (Car wrecks). The focus, ideally, would be on what kills more people overall and the causes of the accidents leading to those deaths. Instead, sensationalism and rarity of the incident trumps the reality.
-
What!? My ultimate Tsunami plan failed! How could this be! I planned to kill Qhimm by this method, then take over the forum Muhahaha...But alas thats what I get for ordering parts from Wallmart to build a "rift generator" :(
Back to the old drawing board...
Cupcake you-be-nice.
I apologize for him Kudi he has been off his med's for days. For anyone keeping track this thread is now Airplanes vs People.
-
Oh geez you didn't need to change the name of this thread LOL. I was kidding.
-
I couldn't help myself :P
(http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/3281/peoplevsplanes.png)
I would pay to see a show like that.
-
I think we can all agree that the real threat is snakes on a plane.
Now let’s talk about earthquakes or make a new thread for flaming each other.
L. Spiro
-
I think we can all agree that the real threat is snakes on a plane.
Now let’s talk about earthquakes or make a new thread for flaming each other.
L. Spiro
Taken care of. Are we really defacing a thread about a current world tragedy? Tsk Tsk Tsk.
-
Historically speaking, large earthquakes come in pairs with the second one typically (but not always) being a magnitude lower.
Looks like you were right.
http://www.npr.org/2011/04/07/135206877/major-earthquake-hits-off-japans-coast?sc=fb&cc=fp
I hope you're okay.
-
My room shook violently enough that I evacuated it, but nothing was knocked off shelves or my refrigerator.
Undoubtedly more will follow, closer to Tokyo.
L. Spiro