I guess I'll cut to the chase, relative to local geology, does living on a "rock" matter?
For context, I live in the Seattle area and during the Nisqually earthquake, we saw that some areas didn't feel much in the way of anything, the reasoning given at the time was they were essentially on "exposed rock" in a sea of glacier debris. This seemed to be backed up by the shake maps, showing that the valleys and deltas took the brunt but places that were scraped clean by glaciers did fine. Is there any scientific weight to this observation?
ifred2 karma
Hey guys!
I guess I'll cut to the chase, relative to local geology, does living on a "rock" matter?
For context, I live in the Seattle area and during the Nisqually earthquake, we saw that some areas didn't feel much in the way of anything, the reasoning given at the time was they were essentially on "exposed rock" in a sea of glacier debris. This seemed to be backed up by the shake maps, showing that the valleys and deltas took the brunt but places that were scraped clean by glaciers did fine. Is there any scientific weight to this observation?
View HistoryShare Link