Feeling A Little Shaky

[Markintosh]

We had a little 4.1 magnitude quake in north Tahoe, which is reasonably big for these parts. It was felt from Nevada City to Reno. I actually felt it while walking outside.

It's always a relief to check USGS and find it is just a small local quake, and not the "big one" in the Bay Area. Floods, yup. Fires, yup. Earthquakes, yup. What's next? Tornado or locusts?

[Markintosh]

For the record, using the option-V checkmark symbol causes a Forum database error.

[Racer X]

Glad to hear it.

Seattle is due for "The Big One" before too long, geologically speaking. But "soon" on the geologic time table can be thousands or tens of thousands of years. On next month. :dunno:

[N-OS X-tasy!]

We had a 4.4 in SoCal Tuesday night (centered near La Verne). Felt it in San Pedro as a gentle, barely perceptible swaying. No damage caused AFAIK.

[RAMd®d]

I haven't noticed any out my way in a while.

[Markintosh]

Racer X wrote:
Glad to hear it.

Seattle is due for "The Big One" before too long, geologically speaking. But "soon" on the geologic time table can be thousands or tens of thousands of years. On next month. :dunno:

We were traveling the Oregon Coast considering places to move. In Bandon, they had big signs around time disclosing tsunami evacuation zones. For your run of the mill distant tsunamis, the evacuation zone spanned a block or two inland to an elevation of about 20 feet. But for the "Cascadia event" tsunami, the evacuation zone literally covered 90% of the town, more than a mile inland to an elevation of 80 feet.

I don't think I can convince Mrs Markintosh to move there.

[Bo]

Markintosh wrote:
[quote=Racer X]
Glad to hear it.

Seattle is due for "The Big One" before too long, geologically speaking. But "soon" on the geologic time table can be thousands or tens of thousands of years. On next month. :dunno:

We were traveling the Oregon Coast considering places to move. In Bandon, they had big signs around time disclosing tsunami evacuation zones. For your run of the mill distant tsunamis, the evacuation zone spanned a block or two inland to an elevation of about 20 feet. But for the "Cascadia event" tsunami, the evacuation zone literally covered 90% of the town, more than a mile inland to an elevation of 80 feet.

I don't think I can convince Mrs Markintosh to move there.
Was your trip through Bandon just last week? They had a 6.2 last Wednesday!

[lost in space]

For some coastal towns in earthquake/tsunami zones, there are computer models that show the path tsunamis are likely to take. Our daughter picked the location of her new apartment based on that. But then she's studying geology.

Markintosh wrote:
[quote=Racer X]
Glad to hear it.

Seattle is due for "The Big One" before too long, geologically speaking. But "soon" on the geologic time table can be thousands or tens of thousands of years. On next month. :dunno:

We were traveling the Oregon Coast considering places to move. In Bandon, they had big signs around time disclosing tsunami evacuation zones. For your run of the mill distant tsunamis, the evacuation zone spanned a block or two inland to an elevation of about 20 feet. But for the "Cascadia event" tsunami, the evacuation zone literally covered 90% of the town, more than a mile inland to an elevation of 80 feet.

I don't think I can convince Mrs Markintosh to move there.

[NewtonMP2100]

....now shake it up baby......twist and shout....

[Markintosh]

Bo wrote:

Was your trip through Bandon just last week? They had a 6.2 last Wednesday!

Yikes! No it was late June. It was somewhat of a geology field trip as much of Highway 1 is falling into the ocean, as were two of the campgrounds we stayed in. My favorite class at Humboldt State was "Assessment of Geological Hazards". There's no shortage of that on the north coast.