http://www.boston.com/bigpictu…..quake.html

The original 7.1 quake certainly didn't help but it was the closeness to the city  both in depth and location that magnified this one. One geologist has suggested that hard volcanic rocks beneath the mostly alluvial plains that Ch Ch sits on, may have 'focussed' the shock waves back like a concave mirror.

Both Michael and I live in an area that is prone to earthquakes, we get several a year. In 1931, right here where we live there was a very severe shake and it flattened the area with a loss of 246 lives. We get several jolts a year that rattle the crockery but generally they are of manageable strength.

I am often asked by friends in the UK how I can live in a country that is prone to earthquakes … a good question? Without fail my reply is simple, how can they live in a country that for nearly fifty years has been prone to terrorist attack, first from the Irish and now by Muslim fanatics. I have asked how often my friends think about that when they visit London and see the armed anti terrorist squad at stations and airports?

We don't have that but on occasions we get a nasty jolt that usually lasts for less than thirty seconds and rattles a few nerves. Out of the two I think I prefer the earthquakes. Terrorists are doing there best to kill, whilst shakes are just nature rolling over in bed.

No where in the world is totally immune to disasters, be they floods, tempest or quake.  As I recently pointed out some friends on American forum I frequent, the New Madrid fault which runs through the Mississippi area which once caused the river to run backwards and rattled the Liberty Bell! There is also a pre-historic fault in the steppes of Russia which welled up magma to cover an area the size of Spain, no doubt with attendant shakes. 65 million years ago an asteroid crashed into the gulf of Mexico and changed the world's climate, (to the detriment of the dinosaurs!). Life is a risk!