Jump to content

LemurMarble

Member
  • Posts

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by LemurMarble

  1. not true. dumb fuck. many of east coast areas did not get seimic codes untill the mid ninties. west coast areas around 1975 . so do the math . a less active fault like such as the one near dc is going to have less semic safe structures than say la or sf..

    ever hear of parkfield ca??

    a mag 6.0 or higher on average every 22 years last was a 6.0 in 2004.. also home of one of the most active areas of the san andres fault.

    seimic codes in alaska are tougher than the east coast.. ie anchorage quake of 64

    town built on silt ... so on and so fourth

     

     

    http://mceer.buffalo.edu/infoservice/reference_services/NYSzoneMap.asp

     

    I said to some degree and Im asking this cause Im in the east coast and wanted to see if people knew more on the subject. Thanks but it would be better if you can do it without starting beef for no reason.

     

     

    Also, with todays technology some buildings are built with the purpose of not being able to witstand earthquakes. Just because it can meet requirements to not be destroyed after an earthquake doesnt mean it will. But whatever Ima go ask somewhere else

  2. umm not even close jack ass.. why would the east coast have earth quake safe buildings when they are rare.. just like cali having shelters for tornados... get the picture

     

    Cause buildings are suppose to have some sort of earthquake proof in the design but on what degree is different on the building. That shit isnt the same for tornados but you dont know shit on the subject and talk like you do.

  3. Are the buildings in NYC built to be resistant to earthquakes? would be dumb not to just cause earthquakes are rare

     

     

     

    Wtf your problem? "Nature" no shit but it never happens in the east coast are you from cali or something retard

×
×
  • Create New...