22 ms·
It looks weird to me. I think I would just sit down, but seeing what happened after maybe it's better to be on feet.
by 21 9y ago
It looks weird to me. I think I would just sit down, but seeing what happened after maybe it's better to be on feet.
- agumonkey 9y agoIt's probably even hard to sit down or get up when the ground is shaking.
- Diederich 9y agoI was pretty close to a group of low to mid 6.x earthquakes in eastern California in 1980, across a couple of days. For the strongest, I distinctly remember not being able to stand up. I tried, but kept falling down right on my ass each time. The amount of ground movement was quite surprising. This is curious since I've seen people standing (kind of) and even running (kind of) in even stronger quakes, on video, as we see here. I was in a deep canyon (with >4000 foot mountain walls around), so I'm sure the geology was interesting from an earthquake point of view. The sounds were titanic; there were enormous rocks slides all around, and the mountains largely disappeared in dust, even as you could hear intense crashing and tearing sounds echoing back and forth. If memory serves, nobody was killed, likely because of the parse population of that area, and also the stringent building codes. Also a lot of people got lucky, with so many rock slides going on.
- dicroce 9y agoA lot depends on how far you are from the epicenter and the kind of soil.
- Diederich 9y agoDefinitely. Also the steep craggy valleys no doubt affected the strength of the S-waves.
- em3rgent0rdr 9y ago"and even running" Well when you are running you are mostly in the air, so you are only influenced by the movement of the earth while your feet touch the ground (which is still obviously a little problematic).
- Diederich 9y agoThat makes perfect sense. So, the next time I need to move my body somewhere during a large earthquake, running as quickly as possible should provide the best outcome. (: