Living in an Earthquake Zone...

[GoodOlBoy]

I gather the jet stream will likely hit no further south than San Francisco.

Yeah...."For those who come to San Francisco, be sure to wear some flowers in your hair" (and one of these on your face ). http://www.google.com/products/catalog?rlz=1T4GGLJ_enUS315US315&q=mask+respirator&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=16817195921849517599&sa=X&ei=ndSATfj3B4iNtgfNhcgh&ved=0CDcQ8wIwAw#


GOB

[Faux Pas]

Please explain how a barely active volcano 950km away - across an ocean no less - could kill me. Take into account here that the town I live in is quite a way from the coast and a damn sight more than a few meters above sea level. I'll concede that as almost nothing is impossible, it could happen but I'm guessing that the probability of you getting pregnant is higher.

More of the same and firmly entrenched in denial. Thanks for proving my point.

If you go back and ready your first reply to me you said, and I paraphrase here, "it's rare that people take into account earthquakes when they choose to live somewhere there and to do so would be paranoid" and "if it's your time to go, it's your time to go and there's nothing you can do about it".

And you say I insulted you by questioning the "it's fate and there's nothing you can do about it" mentality? Or is it that I think it's bizarre that people choose to live in potentially devastating earthquake prone areas when they have a choice to live elsewhere? To you these are insults?

Whereas indirectly being called "paranoid" isn't an insult, right?

Being called paranoid is an insult? That's a new one but, if you were insulted I apologize. Every one of your replies to my posts including the first one is a classic example of a condescending, backhanded insulting reply. I can only guess the reason is was because it was from me. dogspot stated essentially the same thing I did and you respected that. 

It's not bizarre SJ to choose to live in an area where the quality of is what one seeks without the paranoia of what natural disaster is prone to the area. There are other priorities in life.

Perhaps you should get out that dictionary of yours and look up the definition of that.

Actually no, it may surprise you to learn that some places really are are more susceptible than others.

Yeah, right. 

Ah, there you go with the insults again. 

It is quite telling from your reaction when someone disagrees with you. You immediately get defensive and condescending. Take that anyway you like. I'm not here to make you feel good about yourself. You asked a question and I gave you an answer from one who is there. You at the same time wish to ignore the fact that the boat you are in isn't much different from mine or the people in Japan. Your chances of dying in an earthquake are slimmer than mine but your chances of a volcanic death, a rockslide or and avalanche is much greater. It's tit for tat in the grand scheme of things. Yet you persist you are on the high ground because you live in a less earthquake prone area. Enjoy your ignorance.
 

The thing that Dogspot showed in his reply is that he'd used his brain, considered his options and weighed the risk and the benefits and decided that for him the benefits outweighed the risk. On the other hand, your mindless, "if it's your time to go there's nothing you can do about it" quip was quite the opposite.

Short of committing suicide, nobody choses how or when they will die. Someone relocating or not moving away from earthquake prone areas doesn't mean they are endangering themselves or there families. There is nothing bizarre about it. The chances they will be injured or die from an earthquake are as remote as you dying from that volcano or the fault line that is in Norway. You are in denial

[SFandEE]

Along that line--it is possible to over react to hyperbole and find yourself in a worst situation or have other random bad luck.

Someone moves from California to somewhere you think is safe.  Then that person dies in a random car accident the next day.  Good move?

Could be argued that getting out of a car and not driving would be one of the safest things you can do.  Will that's big city living.

The illusion of America's freedom to move society is also a bit funny to me.  Sometimes people get stuck where they are and have to make the best of it where they stand.  Earthquakes are real, will and do happen, but not terrifying on a daily basis.

[GQBlues]

Probabilities and the odds.....and putting things in proper context...

2 most recent 'large' earthquake to happen in Socal are the 1992 Landers (7.3 rs) and 1994 Northridge ( 6.8 rs) earthquakes...fatalities and injuries resulting from the Northridge quake, a major metropolitan city in the San Fernando Valley: 57 deaths & 9,000 injured.

http://www.vibrationdata.com/earthquakes/northridge.htm

Landers: a relatively desolate area compared to Northridge: 3 deaths (2 died from heart attack as a result, 1 because of falling debris) & 400 injuries...  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Landers_earthquake

That's a total of 60 deaths combined as a result of earthquake in the past 19 years...

Conversely...

9 folks died every hour in the UK because of the cold last year...( Winter worries: More than 300,000 UK pensioners have died of cold related illnesses since 1997) (insert your Obama/Pelosi healthcare reform joke here...)

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1332343/Nine-pensioners-died-cold-hour-winter-prices-soar.html#ixzz1Gn03FdJV
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1332343/Nine-pensioners-died-cold-hour-winter-prices-soar.html

15,000 died in the span of 2 weeks in France - 40,000 total in all of Europe - the last time they were hit with a heat wave in '03...(insert your Obama/Pelosi healthcare reform joke here...)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_European_heat_wave

...and on and on..

[GoodOlBoy]

Radiation detectors at Dallas-Fort Worth and Chicago O’Hare airports were triggered when passengers from flights that started in Tokyo passed through customs.......

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/tokyo-passengers-trigger-u-s-airport-detectors-n-y-post-says.html

Also.....the Nuclear Regulatory Committee (NRC) said although radioactive isotopes from the crippled Japanese nuclear power plant will be blowing toward California as soon as Friday....

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/03/17/epa-health-risk-radiation-heading-california/

[tfcrew]

Radiation detectors at Dallas-Fort Worth and Chicago O’Hare airports were triggered when passengers from flights that started in Tokyo passed through customs.......

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/tokyo-passengers-trigger-u-s-airport-detectors-n-y-post-says.html

 

 

U.S. security officials were also quick to point out that hazardous levels of radiation had not been detected.  They say the detection of small amounts of radiation is not unusual and could be caused by a number of things, including medical equipment, ceramic tile, and even kitty litter.

Kitty litter?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/18/idUS158664922020110318

[Aloe]

I find myself saying "if it's your time to go, then that's just it, and there is nothing that can be done about it, so just don't worry about it"  only in situations where i am completely out of control (plane shaking badly, or riding in a car with a blind person at the wheel, something like that ), then i am nice and calm and collected, so that's definitely gotta be a coping mechanism.
Now, if i was given a chance to move to, say, California, and live there nicely, i don't see why not. Disasters are possible, but honestly i don't think it will happen to me. That approach can undoubtedly be classified as head in the sand, but i just don't believe that anything bad (from natural disasters) can happen to me. Sounds silly saying it, but that's how i feel I feel i am much more likely to be killed or die in a car crash than in an earthquake, so i'd rather worry about immediate real dangers (so not go into bad areas and drive carefully), than about phantom dangers that i do not believe can affect me.
That being said, i'm sure such an approach comes from having way too little information about the said disasters. If i was a seismologist, or anything else that has to do with the disasters as a career, i'd definitely be a LOT more concious. I remember seeing that documentary about supervolcanoes, and that if just one of them blows, our entire planet is doomed (nuclear winter, all plants die, all animals die, all humans die), and that a supervolcano is LONG overdue to blow, that is a troublesome thought But i think humans will destroy each other and cease to exist within the next 200 years (unless there comes a dramatic change, which i doubt), hopefully the planet will survive in the process, although unlikely.