Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Its 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.




>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.


In 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.


What impact do you think complete liquefaction will have on people and buildings?


Widespread death and destruction. Seriously, other than the houses on Cooper Mountain, I don't seriously expect anything to still be standing in the Tualatin Basin when the big one hits.


Has there been another earthquake where a populated area sat on geography similar to the Tualatin Basin?





Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: