4 ms·
This shouldn't be in the article. It's unscientific, non-technically, and pretty much meaningless.
by 99_00 5y ago
This shouldn't be in the article. It's unscientific, non-technically, and pretty much meaningless.
- jschwartzi 5y agoI'm not sure I would call statements by a FEMA director "unscientific."
- 99_00 5y agoYou aren't actually making a point. Are you saying that ""Our operating assumption is that everything west of Interstate 5 will be toast" has scientific value? Are you saying that because of someone's tittle they are incapable of saying something hyperbolic? Do you disagree with my word use? What is a better word?
- jakeva 5y agoNeither are you
- jschwartzi 5y agoI was actually making the point that the FEMA Director for the Pacific Northwest probably knows a lot more about the scenario in question, and that his statement may be grounded very deeply in fact such that it's not hyperbolic at all.
- bawolff 5y agoReally? I don't know if the statement is backed up by science, but its a falsifiable empirical prediction. It is entirely within the realm of science to make predictions that certain geographic regions will have significant structural and human damage in the event of some hypothetical natural disaster.
- 99_00 5y ago>It is entirely within the realm of science to make predictions that certain geographic regions will have significant structural and human damage in the event of some hypothetical natural disaster. I agree. But that's not the same as saying it's "toast".
- bawolff 5y agoIts a colloquialism for destroyed. Would you object if he said "utterly destroyed" instead? It means the same thing. Maybe you think its inappropriately informal, but that is a stylistic concern, not a science concern.
- 99_00 5y ago>Its a colloquialism for destroyed That's debatable. It can mean anything from doomed to in trouble. IDIOMS FOR TOAST be toast, Slang. to be doomed, ruined, or in trouble: >Would you object if he said "utterly destroyed" instead? Yes I would object. Does it mean everything west of I5 is going to fall into the ocean? All human structures are going to be levelled? Only structures over 2 stories not made out of wood will be levelled? Or just that everything west of I5 will have more damage than everything east. And I doubt that EVERYTHING east of I5 is going to share the same fate. The I5 is a human made road, not a geographic feature. It doesn't control earthquake outcomes.
- irrational 5y agoIn Oregon, the land to the west of I-5 is clay silt from the Missoula Floods that came down the Columbia Gorge 13,000 - 15,000 years ago. The clay silt is expected to completely liquefy in the event of a major earthquake.
- 99_00 5y agoWhat impact do you think complete liquefaction will have on people and buildings?
- interestica 5y agoIt's not a science paper. It's in the New Yorker. It's supposed to be interesting. It also features great lines such as: "Oh, shit, Goldfinger thought, although not in dread, at first: in amazement. " "As Goldfinger put it, “In the late eighties and early nineties, the paradigm shifted to ‘uh-oh.’ ”" "...magnitude 5.0, magnitude 4.0, magnitude why are the neighbors moving their sofa at midnight"
- 99_00 5y agoIt is quoted on wikipedia. An online encyclopedia.