U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-07-2012, 06:53 AM
 
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
6,294 posts, read 15,771,894 times
Reputation: 8353

Advertisements

I worry less about a big earthquake on the San Andreas fault than I do about a smaller earthquake on a fault here in the San Fernando Valley. Both the 1971 and 1994 earthquakes here occurred on blind thrust faults, dubbed "blind" because such faults don't break the surface. This means these faults exist and no one knows until a quake occurs. Thrust faults in general are bad because they have a more vertical shaking motion (up and down vs. side to side or rolling).

I'd much rather experience a 7.1 quake on a strike-slip fault, like the San Andreas (in which one plate is moving past the other laterally), than a 6.0 on a thrust fault. And in fact, I have - I was visiting a friend in Joshua Tree and was awoken by the Landers quake. In spite of the earthquake's strength, no dishes even fell out of the cabinets in the kitchen, because it was a rolling motion. Contrast that with the damage done in the Northridge earthquake in 1994.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2012, 09:28 AM
 
7,575 posts, read 3,719,649 times
Reputation: 4183
Quote:
Originally Posted by SandyCo View Post
I worry less about a big earthquake on the San Andreas fault than I do about a smaller earthquake on a fault here in the San Fernando Valley. Both the 1971 and 1994 earthquakes here occurred on blind thrust faults, dubbed "blind" because such faults don't break the surface. This means these faults exist and no one knows until a quake occurs. Thrust faults in general are bad because they have a more vertical shaking motion (up and down vs. side to side or rolling).

I'd much rather experience a 7.1 quake on a strike-slip fault, like the San Andreas (in which one plate is moving past the other laterally), than a 6.0 on a thrust fault. And in fact, I have - I was visiting a friend in Joshua Tree and was awoken by the Landers quake. In spite of the earthquake's strength, no dishes even fell out of the cabinets in the kitchen, because it was a rolling motion. Contrast that with the damage done in the Northridge earthquake in 1994.
I gotta strap my laptop down. Already lost one stupidly dropping it..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2012, 10:53 AM
 
1,058 posts, read 1,005,546 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by readymade View Post
I have also (maybe most importantly) started running. Just in case I may need to get away from something/someone in a hurry. When I started, it was shocking to me that I was out of breath before I got to the end of the block. I would be so screwed in a zombie apocalypse! Now I can MAYBE run (i.e. jog) a mile before they'd get me, heh.

Other than that, since there's not much I can do about it... I just don't dwell on it. (except for the zombie apocalypse. I have to admit... I think about that a lot)

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2012, 12:31 PM
 
Location: SoCal, Idaho
3,162 posts, read 8,851,375 times
Reputation: 1637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Pip View Post
Stats for what? You hear about crime everyday not massive earthquakes.
That's like saying "I hear about crime every day but it doesn't rain everyday so I don't own an unbrella".

You're trying to relate two completely unrelated ideas. Makes zero sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2012, 03:51 PM
 
Location: CA
1,209 posts, read 2,354,151 times
Reputation: 1240
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1200RT View Post
That's like saying "I hear about crime every day but it doesn't rain everyday so I don't own an unbrella".

You're trying to relate two completely unrelated ideas. Makes zero sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What i'm saying is, people are worrying about something that rarely happens but they don't worry about the other things that happen everyday, which is more likely to happen than a massive earthquake. Do you get it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2012, 09:05 PM
 
Location: Los Awesome, CA
8,513 posts, read 5,199,766 times
Reputation: 3306
Nope...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2012, 09:07 PM
 
5,845 posts, read 11,130,789 times
Reputation: 4499
Quote:
Originally Posted by SandyCo View Post
I worry less about a big earthquake on the San Andreas fault than I do about a smaller earthquake on a fault here in the San Fernando Valley. Both the 1971 and 1994 earthquakes here occurred on blind thrust faults, dubbed "blind" because such faults don't break the surface. This means these faults exist and no one knows until a quake occurs. Thrust faults in general are bad because they have a more vertical shaking motion (up and down vs. side to side or rolling).

I'd much rather experience a 7.1 quake on a strike-slip fault, like the San Andreas (in which one plate is moving past the other laterally), than a 6.0 on a thrust fault. And in fact, I have - I was visiting a friend in Joshua Tree and was awoken by the Landers quake. In spite of the earthquake's strength, no dishes even fell out of the cabinets in the kitchen, because it was a rolling motion. Contrast that with the damage done in the Northridge earthquake in 1994.
And the blind thrust faults basically uplifted the Puente-Whittier Hills, that separates the basin from the valleys. As well as the hills of South OC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2012, 10:09 AM
 
1,714 posts, read 3,257,641 times
Reputation: 1137
In my life so far, the only destructive SoCal quake that did significant damage was the Northridge quake--that was 20 years ago.

Since then, the media and science-people have been hyping us up for the "Big One."

I might see a couple more devastating quakes in my lifetime, but I doubt I will ever experience a California-splitting earthquake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2012, 10:59 AM
 
65 posts, read 121,401 times
Reputation: 52
I find it interesting that people freak out way more about earthquakes than they do tornadoes. I grew up in a place that wasn't even tornado-prone and twice saw/heard of local buildings leveled by them. But no one ever says, "Oh my gosh, don't move anywhere that has clouds, because ... TORNADOES!"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2012, 05:38 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
236 posts, read 728,360 times
Reputation: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by xmasevemom View Post
I find it interesting that people freak out way more about earthquakes than they do tornadoes. I grew up in a place that wasn't even tornado-prone and twice saw/heard of local buildings leveled by them. But no one ever says, "Oh my gosh, don't move anywhere that has clouds, because ... TORNADOES!"
Very true, except you do often have warnings that tornadoes are coming. I'm originally from Alabama, and the meteorologists were warning people there several days in advance of the devastating storms that hit in April 2011. There was still death and significant damage, but without warning there would have been much more. I think it is the lack of knowledge as to when an earthquake would hit that makes me feel powerless in comparison to tornadoes. Both are still bad though any way you cut it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top