Eartquake Hits DC

jiminphilly · Post by **jiminphilly** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 8:24 pm

So I'm going over my company-issued emergency supply checklist and it looks very similar to what you might find in a scene from the show Dexter. Circular saw? Latex gloves? Spill kits? Plastic Sheeting? Goggles?

Absent from the list:

Beer

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 8:34 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:New York could be a disaster.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/26/hu ... ?hpt=hp_t1

It's just God and G0d punishing NY for sodomy, incest and the Wall Street bailout.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 8:35 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:New York could be a disaster.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/26/hu ... ?hpt=hp_t1

whataya mean could?

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:11 pm

Mikey wrote:
bradhusker wrote:
what? you think that when the "big one" hits san fran or LA, that the buildings and skyscrapers built to code are gonna stay up?

Is that what you think? cause if thats what you really think, then you must be an ignoranus, for sure.
Hardly worth responding to this stupid dumbfuck, but I'll try.

Modern buildings don't generally fall over from earthquakes. You get hundreds of thousands of casualties from 6.5 magnitude quakes in countries like Iran and China because they have lots of buildings made from unreinforced contcrete and stone, which will just crumble in a quake. Sure there will be plenty of damage if and when the "big one" hits. Some buildings are bound to collapse, roads and bridges buckle, gas and water pipelines rupture, etc., etc. but the majority of buildings won't fall down.

There was a 9.0 quake off the coast of Japan earlier this year. Lots of damage, but I don't remember hearing about too many skyscrapers falling over. Most of the damage came from the tsunami. In the 1906 San Francisco earthquake the city was destroyed by the resulting fire.

mikey? both you and atomic punk are the trolls here, because you FAIL to even understand what I just got thru saying.

NO SHIT about modern buildings. And atomic punk talks about rollers? ARE YOU GUYS IDIOTS?

DID you understand what I said? I said "the big one" not a 6.9, not a 8.3, not a 9.7, none of those. I was talking about the "BIG ONE", the one that scientists have been talking about for decades now, the one where the land underneath those "safe" buildings will be GONE.

HEY STUPID? Tell me how the buildings will stand, when there is NO LAND underneath them? HUH moron?

DUMB FUCK, tell me how safe a skycraper is when there is no land underneath it? How is that building gonna stand?
Scientists have been fortelling "the big one" for decades now, the one where the land is actually gone from where it used to be. In my last post, I clearly mentioned "the big one", YET, you didnt understand what I was talking about. You just rambled on about me being a troll, and about rollers and modern buildings, ALL of which dont mean shit against "the big one"/

ur a troll.

R-Jack · Post by **R-Jack** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 2:29 pm

bradhusker wrote: In my last post, I clearly mentioned "the big one", YET, you didnt understand what I was talking about.

You cleary mentioned a ubiquitous quote. One that you have your own interpretation of. An interpretation that you failed to share you melt-happy dipshit.

If you don't want to go into a hissyfit over people not understanding what you are saying, try not being a stupid fuck and actually say what you mean.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 3:27 pm

R-Jack wrote:
bradhusker wrote: In my last post, I clearly mentioned "the big one", YET, you didnt understand what I was talking about.
You cleary mentioned a ubiquitous quote. One that you have your own interpretation of. An interpretation that you failed to share you melt-happy dipshit.

If you don't want to go into a hissyfit over people not understanding what you are saying, try not being a stupid fuck and actually say what you mean.

"the big one"- a 13.5 or better quake where the land underneath us just evaporates. scientists, who, btw have been discussing this for decades believe it could happen if 'spray and rumplebeast ever have sex.

so coogs, how's about you keep her away from jawguh. do it for the children.

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 5:11 pm

yes, I should have clearly explained what I meant by the "BIG ONE", obviously, mikey and atomic might have been thinking I meant "ron Jeremy's cock", when, by the "big one", I was talking about the quake that scientists have been warning about for decades.

Obviously, once we start talking about a scale of 13.5 or higher, the geography of the state of california will be altered, and Lex Luther will own the most valuable real estate in the world. Otisville?

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 5:17 pm

Except there's no evidence that there's ever been anything even approaching a 13.5.

The Big One off the Oregon Coast of January 26, 1700 was estimated to be about 9.6 -- pretty much the biggest quake they have evidence of.

Wasn't so much the shaking, it was the 95 foot tsunami that caused all the problems.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 5:58 pm

Not sure which "scientists" bradhusker has been communicating with, probably the ones that are orbiting earth as we speak in invisibility cloaked spaceships.

Most earthly scientists agree that the San Andreas fault probably is not capable of producing anything greater than 7.5 to 8 which would still cause extensive damage. But nothing close in magnitude to the recent 9.0 Tohoku quake off the coast of Japan.

13.5? We could probably all kiss our asses goodbye if that one ever happened, it would probably split the planet in half. I'd love for bradhusker to find any human scientist actually predicting this one. The largest quake ever recorded (or estimated from geological evidence) was 9.5. 13.5 would be 10,000 times the size of that one.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 6:17 pm

Mikey wrote:The largest quake ever recorded (or estimated from geological evidence) was 9.5.

Chile gets it bad.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 6:22 pm

Dinsdale wrote:
Mikey wrote:The largest quake ever recorded (or estimated from geological evidence) was 9.5.

Chile gets it bad.

Out here in the left coast wilderness we're all in the Ring of Fire, dawg.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 6:44 pm

Oregon gets it as bad as anywhere -- but usually only ever 300-500 years... been 311.5 since the last Big One.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 6:46 pm

Mikey, dins, you nimwits ever here of hyperbole?

hyperbole - noun Rhetoric. 1. obvious and intentional exaggeration. 2. an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.” ...

13.5 quake would be an example of it. I realize husker prolly jumped on it, being on my list and all, but you alleged smart folk?

guess i should have went with 87.3 on the richter scale.

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:08 pm

Mikey wrote: Most earthly scientists agree that the San Andreas fault probably is not capable of producing anything greater than 7.5 to 8 which would still cause extensive damage. But nothing close in magnitude to the recent 9.0 Tohoku quake off the coast of Japan.

You can see it from the air in certain parts of CA that looks like an empty river bottom. You can definitely see the fault line next to San Juan Bautista if you know what you're looking at.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:14 am

smackaholic wrote:Mikey, dins, you nimwits ever here of hyperbole?

hyperbole - noun Rhetoric. 1. obvious and intentional exaggeration. 2. an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.” ...

13.5 quake would be an example of it. I realize husker prolly jumped on it, being on my list and all, but you alleged smart folk?

guess i should have went with 87.3 on the richter scale.

Hyperbole? From you I might believe...maybe. Pretty sure that bradhusker is dead serious.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 2:15 am

We all say something stupid from time to time -- it's part of the Human Condition.

But every now and then,someone goes over the top, and it needs to be temporarily memorialized in a sig.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 2:46 am

I'm honored. Really, I am.

Not much left to strive for now...

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 2:54 am

jiminphilly wrote:Absent from the list:

Beer

It's perishable and bulky. Substitute high proof liquor. If you really want to be a post-apocalyptic tycoon, start stockpiling cheap 151 rum, bleach and toilet paper.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 4:29 am

Mikey wrote:13.5? We could probably all kiss our asses goodbye if that one ever happened, it would probably split the planet in half. I'd love for bradhusker to find any human scientist actually predicting this one. The largest quake ever recorded (or estimated from geological evidence) was 9.5. 13.5 would be 10,000 times the size of that one.

Considering that it would release 1000 teratons of energy, yea I think that would be more than a bit problematic. Hard to say if it would split the planet in half since nobody has ever fully stress tested the bitch. But scientists do estimate the impact that created the Chicxulub crater 65 million years ago at about 12.5 on the Richter scale. So it is more than a safe bet that we would be facing an extinction level event.

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 4:57 am

88 wrote:How many Btu's would that genrate? Inquiring minds want to know and stuff.

Hopefully you've addressed that question to Mikey as BSmacked is too much of an idiot to give you an intelligent answer.

(edit): A "scroller" if you're keeping track.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 12:05 pm

88 wrote:How many Btu's would that genrate? Inquiring minds want to know and stuff.

diesel or JP5 BTUs?

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:18 pm

mikey? am I to understand that you live out there? ur a west coaster, so to speak? GOOD, you west coast types dont believe in "the big one", you chalk it off as some type of Ron Jeremy reference. IM GLAD for you, because soon, you will come to understand what knowledgeable people have known for years, The geology of the state of California will forever be changed, and millions of people will lose their lives in a very horrific way.

NOW, I know that you west coast types dont want to hear this kind of deadly serious rhetoric, pretty much the way gays didnt want to come to terms with AIDS in the mid-eighties, and so they continued to enjoy their nightly anal sex, knowing full and well it would lead to FULL BLOWN AIDS. THE SAME DENIAL is going on all along the californian coast. AND, sometimes it takes a deadly serious intellect such as myself to sober you fruity types up.

LOOK, I could care less if you think that californians have nothing to worry about, fine, thats your perogative, just remember, that when the shit hits the fan, it was bradhusker who told ya so.

Funny, we lost a thousand people during hurricane Katrina, when the "big one" hits california?? It will make Katrina look like a lone fart in the breeze. When the "big one" hits california, it will remind you of Marlon Brando in "Appocalypse Now", when he uttered the famous line, "The horror, the horrror"....................

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 1:34 pm

88 wrote:How many Btu's would that genrate? Inquiring minds want to know and stuff.

Are you drunk, high or both?

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 3:31 pm

l to r: BSmack; 88's post

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 5:48 pm

Truman wrote:

l to r: Truman; a clue

As per our frineds of at wikipedia.

TNT equivalent is a method of quantifying the energy released in explosions. The ton (or tonne) of TNT is a unit of energy equal to 4.184 gigajoules, which is approximately the amount of energy released in the detonation of one ton of TNT. The megaton is a unit of energy equal to 4.184 petajoules.[1]

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:05 pm

BSmack wrote:

Spectacularly breathtaking. And in back-to-back posts, no less. Dare you try for the hat-trick, B?

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:40 pm

BSmack knocked himself out of the park.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:47 pm

For those not recognizing a rhetorical question,

1000 teratons = 10^15 tons (TNT equivalent)
10^15 tons x 4.184 gigajoules/ton = 4.184 x 10^15 gigajoules
4.184 x 10^15 gigajoules x 947,817.1203 Btu/gigajoule = 3,965,666.831 x 10^15 Btu = 3.966 x 10^21 Btu

So, the answer is,

3,965,666,831,000,000,000,000 Btu

give or take a few Btu

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sun Aug 28, 2011 6:49 pm

Mikey wrote:For those not recognizing a rhetorical question,

1000 teratons = 10^15 tons (TNT equivalent)
10^15 tons x 4.184 gigajoules/ton = 4.184 x 10^15 gigajoules
4.184 x 10^15 gigajoules x 947,817.1203 Btu/gigajoule = 3,965,666.831 x 10^15 Btu = 3.966 x 10^21 Btu

So, the answer is,

3,965,666,831,000,000,000,000 Btu

give or take a few Btu

I was told there would be no math.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 2:30 am

Dinsdale wrote:BSmack knocked himself out of the park.

A little birdy told me that 88's post referenced Cuda making an ass out of himself. I can't say that I am that sorry that it slipped my mind.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 2:47 am

BSmack wrote:

Little birdy, eh? Please tell me you're not this daft...

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:00 am

Truman wrote:Little birdy, eh? Please tell me you're not this daft...

I'm sorry. We're you referencing a shutyomouth post in a thread about atomic fission?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:56 am

smackaholic's backyard before the hurricane:

after:

Atomic Punk · Post by **Atomic Punk** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:02 am

[quote="MgoBlue-LightSpecial"]smackaholic's backyard before the hurricane:

My only question is why does he have a lawn mower?

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:16 am

BSmack wrote:
Truman wrote:Little birdy, eh? Please tell me you're not this daft...
I'm sorry. We're you referencing a shutyomouth post in a thread about atomic fission?

No, I was referencing your last post that was on the level of atomic punk retardation. Try to keep up, B.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:35 am

Truman wrote:
BSmack wrote:
Truman wrote:Little birdy, eh? Please tell me you're not this daft...
I'm sorry. We're you referencing a shutyomouth post in a thread about atomic fission?
No, I was referencing your last post on the level of atomic punk retardation. Try to keep up, B.

I'm having a hard time. This must be how Luther and Mace feel every day.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 12:12 pm

BSmack wrote:
Truman wrote:Little birdy, eh? Please tell me you're not this daft...
I'm sorry. We're you referencing a shutyomouth post in a thread about atomic fission?

"We're you"? Shades of smackaholic...

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:07 pm

Jsc810 wrote:Bachmann, with the explanation for the earthquake and the hurricane:

Michele Bachmann, in Florida yesterday.

"I don't know how much God has to do to get the attention of the politicians. We've had an earthquake; we've had a hurricane. He said, 'Are you going to start listening to me here?'

Listen to the American people because the American people are roaring right now. They know government is on a morbid obesity diet and we've got to rein in the spending."

Typical liberal.

Paint her as a crackpot and then just dismiss what she says. Can you prove she's wrong? Can you?

sin
poptart

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 8:33 pm

Typical liberal, make fun of michelle and sarah, meanwhile, Biden? your vice president? This piece of mental retardation makes one stupid comment after another. IN FACT, he makes so many stupid remarks, we cant keep track. BUT, go on, and pretend he is smart, it makes you look like a fool yourself.

Most liberals are exactly like this, they pretend to be so smart and sophisticated. They put on this air of intellect, BUT, deep down? They are the dumbest animals on the planet.

Good examples of this? Bill Maher, Al Franken, Al Sharpton, Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman, Ed Shultz, Maxine Waters, etc..
These liberals want you to know that they are intellectuals, OH, I forgot, Jeneane Garoffalo, another poser.

They want so desperately to come across as extremely intelligent thinkers, YET, if you listen to Al franken for more than two minutes? YOU will come to the conclusion that he needs to be committed. Same thing with Bill Maher.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 8:36 pm

Roach wrote:Is this really a nation of ignorant dumb asses?

Rhetorical question?