ElectionsVote

(By Chris Sharp) It is Oct. 1, 2016 again. I am innocently listening to the radio when I hear that local geologists and the California Earthquake authority are saying that the odds of having a major earthquake of 7 Richter Scale points or greater on the San Andreas Fault has suddenly increased.  Drastically.

That is, over the next four days, the odds of having the long projected “Big One” on California’s San Andreas Fault  goes from being one in 6,000 to only one in one hundred.

So I ask myself, what do I do now for the next four days?

Worry?

And I think that’s what I will do – worry.  Because I have received no instructions to do anything else but worry.

Yes, and this is not the first time that the San Andreas Fault was announced as taking on such much greater risk.  It is because of the rhythm of the sifting tremors in the lower parts of the fault that makes it – every month or so from two to about four days – more unstable until it naturally settles into the new arrangement of the new underground movement.

As I understand it, the San Andreas fault is moving a little bit every month, pulling the western part of California away from the eastern part.  And so in a million years or so Los Angeles will crash into the coast of China, just as similar fault activity moved India from the Antarctic and crashed it into the western side of China.  This is why I think we all better start learning to speak Chinese

But with all that, what is the use of warning us about the increased odds of a major earthquake if we do not have any modeling for how to react to the news?

Read more here: A Sharp View: After an “earthquake” warning, what on “earth” do we do?