Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Palladin

A 3.O magnitude earthquake is very small.


29 posted on 10/10/2010 5:47:08 PM PDT by namvolunteer (I can see November from my house.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: namvolunteer

Numerous small earthquakes can be a precursor to a big one.


33 posted on 10/10/2010 5:51:27 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Release Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and let him and his family get on with their lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: namvolunteer

The area produced 8.0 magnitude quakes, all occurring within a three-month period between December 1811 and February 1812. So, if it becomes active it might not be very small.


35 posted on 10/10/2010 5:55:21 PM PDT by BushCountry (I spoken many wise words in jest, but no comparison to the number of stupid words spoken in earnest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: namvolunteer

Yep, its barely measurable and certainly cannot be felt by humans unless they are right at the epicenter and it is shallow.

It would be scary though to live near the New Madrid fault, glad I live a long way from it in California.


37 posted on 10/10/2010 5:58:33 PM PDT by HerrBlucher (Defund, repeal, investigate, impeach, convict, jail, celebrate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: namvolunteer
A 3.O magnitude earthquake is very small.

You are more than correct. The maximum displacement of a 3.0 earthquake is 1 mm. I'm more that a little dubious of how they detected that 4 km down. Maybe they are referring to the surface displacement.

47 posted on 10/10/2010 6:24:52 PM PDT by InMemoriam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson