overheard the best argument today.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

Alone

Diamond Member
Nov 19, 2006
7,490
0
0
waggy said:
no no no. women 2 is maybe 5'1 and 250 lbs. the other women was like 40 and well not something i would invite to my bed.
Click to expand...

So you're saying you'd invite the 5'1" 250lb woman to your bed? Hrm..
 
D

darkxshade

Lifer
Mar 31, 2001
13,749
6
81
sdifox said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Michigan

It's the second largest of the great lakes in volume.

Water volume 1,180 cu mi (4,900 km3)

Chicago can definitely be wiped if you triggered a tsunami in Michigan.
Click to expand...


Do we know how much water in volume got swept into Japan? I'm curious what the result is if you divide that number by 1180.

A lake is a closed body of water, nothing compared to the pacific. I would think a tsunami however created would go in all directions. So if Chicago took a hit, you would have to multiply that volume in every direction as well?
 
waggy

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Alone said:
So you're saying you'd invite the 5'1" 250lb woman to your bed? Hrm..
Click to expand...

fuck yea! just slap the fat and have my own tsunami (of fat) to ride in!

..ok.. that's a little much even for me..:'(
 
Gooberlx2

Gooberlx2

Lifer
May 4, 2001
15,381
6
91
sandorski said:
Ya, it has a lot of water, but the amount of water required to make such a large tsunami is going to dwarf it. We need a Math Geek to do some calcs.
Click to expand...

Lake Michigan dwarfs Lituya Bay, which suffered a megatsunami in 1958.

While ultimately incomparable to the potential wrath of the ocean, I think a massive object landing in the lake could probably create enough of a tsunami to wipe out Milwaukee or possibly even Chicago.

I'd still love to see the math though.

edit:
Apparently Chicago was recently wondering too. Still lacking math though. They just overlayed a red area to show 6 miles of inland devastation, since that's what happened in Japan.
 
Last edited:
T

TheTony

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2005
1,418
1
0
A tsunami is definitely far-fetched. However, I wouldn't discount the effect of an earthquake on the midwest. Outside of the West Coast, the highest earthquake risk in the continental US is along the New Madrid Fault. There are upwards of 20 reactors in the general area of this fault line, and it would not take as high of a magnitude earthquake to do more damage along this fault line, due to the underlying geology.

Not saying it's a likelihood of becoming an issue, but oversight of these facilities should be taking this into account to ensure they're prepared for the possibility.
 
sandorski

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,802
6,358
126
Gooberlx2 said:
Lake Michigan dwarfs Lituya Bay, which suffered a megatsunami in 1958.

While ultimately incomparable to the potential wrath of the ocean, I think a massive object landing in the lake could probably create enough of a tsunami to wipe out Milwaukee or possibly even Chicago.

I'd still love to see the math though.

edit:
Apparently Chicago was recently wondering too. Still lacking math though. They just overlayed a red area to show 6 miles of inland devastation, since that's what happened in Japan.
Click to expand...

Height is one factor, but another is width/depth. Interesting thing about Chicago, but it makes me wonder if they actually determined that distance Inland was possible or whether they just chose that because that's what happened in Japan?
 
M

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
It's too bad woman one has likely already spawned, and will pass on her idiocy to the next generation.
 
BurnItDwn

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,353
1,862
126
Lol that's pretty funny Waggy...
The sad thing is that a LOT of people are as dense as Woman 1, she's not alone in her extreme stupidity :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom