The San Francisco 1989 Earthquake Essays - Loma Prieta Earthquake

The San Francisco 1989 Earthquake Essays - Loma Prieta Earthquake The San Francisco 1989 Earthquake The Loma Prieta Earthquake On Tuesday October 17, 1989 at 5:04 PM the Loma Prieta earthquake struck the San Francisco, Monterey Bay, and Silicon Valley areas. Those were no the only areas affected. Many areas up to 70 and 100 miles away could feel the tremble of the quake. The epicenter of the quake was in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The quake measured a magnitude of 7.1. The initial quake lasted 15 seconds. The USGS first thought the magnitude of the quake would be about 6.9 but it increased to 7.1. The quake destroyed many buildings and freeways. A section of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge collapsed. The power was out in many places and the telephone lines were out also. This was the first time the power had been out since the 1906 earthquake. The earthquake killed 68 people and injured 3,757 people. The cost of the quake was estimated at $6 to $7 billion dollars. The quake happened during the 1989 World Series. The San Francisco Giants were playing the Oakland Athletics. The match up was called the ?Bay Bridge? World Series. The game was postponed for a month. They were playing at Candlestick Park. Airports were closed for inspection or repairs. Ceiling Tiles and broken glass were the main reason for the airports being closed. After a while the airports reopened and some local pilots helped fly emergency supplies to airports near the seriously damaged and in need areas. Roads were jammed with cars trying to get home or trying to get out of the earthquake area. The news media were desperate to get time on a satellite to broadcast their story to the rest of the world. People say that the media made the damaged areas look worse than they really were because they only focused on the bad areas and they got cities mixed up. Most people away from the center of the quake were only inconvenienced by the quake. They only had broken windows or broken pools. The insides of these people?s houses were a wreck. These people quickly recovered from the quake. The people closer to the center of the quake were not so fortunate. Some of these people lost all their belongings including their house. These people wouldn?t get things back together for months or maybe even years. Damage and loss of life were reduced because of California?s strict building codes which required buildings to be strong enough to survive even larger quakes. Having the public educated in earthquake readiness helped a lot. The people knew how to react in a quake and how to save their own life and the lives of others. The fires that broke out after the initial quake were of even worse threat. There were at least 27 fires that broke out across the city. The citizens formed a bucket brigade to help the firefighters who were without water because of water main brakes. The fires were disastrous they burned down apartment buildings, shops and even the fire chief?s house in one city. Some people went looting in the downtown areas. The District Attorney said, ?If there is anyone arrested tonight for burglary or looting, tomorrow morning we are going to go into court and demand that there is no bail. Anyone engaged in that kind of conduct can expect maximum sentences.? Some people were arrested for looting and they were severely penalized. The earthquake didn?t only cause trouble for the San Francisco Bay area. It caused a four-foot tsunami wave in Monterey Bay as well as a huge undersea landslide. The sea level in Santa Cruz dropped three feet. The wave took 20 minuets to reach Monterey. Vice President Dan Quayle and his wife flew to San Diego to see the damage. The spent four hours there and didn?t even make contact with the may who had been awake since the quake started. The mayor called the visit a ?cheap publicity stunt? Our Vice President Al Gore did the same thing when he came to Cincinnati during our flood. Mr. Gore took his shoes and socks off and put his foot in the Ohio River. What was the point of that. Mr. Quayle said this after touring the area,

Of Discourse by Francis Bacon

Of Discourse by Francis Bacon In her book Francis Bacon: Discovery and the Art of Discourse (1974), Lisa Jardine argues that Bacons Essays fall squarely under the heading of presentation or method of discourse. They are didactic, in Agricolas sense of presenting knowledge to someone in a form in which it may be believed and assimilated. . . . Basically these essays communicate precepts for the guidance of personal conduct in public affairs, based on Bacons own political experience. In the essay titled Of Discourse, Bacon explains how a person can lead the dance without appearing to dominate a conversation. You may find it worthwhile to compare Bacons aphoristic observations with the lengthier reflections offered by Jonathan Swift in Hints Toward an Essay on Conversation and by Samuel Johnson in Conversation. Of Discourse Some in their discourse desire rather commendation of wit, in being able to hold all arguments, than of judgment, in discerning what is true; as if it were a praise to know what might be said, and not what should be thought. Some have certain common-places and themes, wherein they are good, and want variety; which kind of poverty is for the most part tedious, and, when it is once perceived, ridiculous. The honourablest part of talk is to give the occasion; and again to moderate and pass to somewhat else, for then a man leads the dance. It is good in discourse, and speech of conversation, to vary and intermingle speech of the present occasion with arguments, tales with reasons, asking of questions with telling of opinions, and jest with earnest: for it is a dull thing to tire, and as we say now, to jade any thing too far. As for jest, there be certain things which ought to be privileged from it; namely, religion, matters of state, great persons, any mans present business of importance , any case that deserveth pity; yet there be some that think their wits have been asleep, except they dart out somewhat that is piquant, and to the quick; that is a vein which would be bridled; Parce, puer, stimulis, et fortius utere loris.* And, generally, men ought to find the difference between saltness and bitterness. Certainly, he that hath a satirical vein, as he maketh others afraid of his wit, so he had need be afraid of others memory. He that questioneth much, shall learn much, and content much; but especially if he apply his questions to the skill of the persons whom he asketh; for he shall give them occasion to please themselves in speaking, and himself shall continually gather knowledge; but let his questions not be troublesome, for that is fit for a poser; and let him be sure to leave other men their turns to speak: nay, if there be any that would reign and take up all the time, let him find means to take them oft, and to bring others on, as musicians use to do with those that dance too long galliards. If you dissemble sometimes your knowledge of that you are thought to know, you shall be thought, another time, to know that you know not. Speech of a mans self ought to be seldom, and well chosen. I knew one w as want to say in scorn, He must needs be a wise man, he speaks so much of himself: and there is but one case wherein a man may commend himself with good grace, and that is in commending virtue in another, especially if it be such a virtue whereunto himself pretendeth. Speech of touch towards others should be sparingly used; for discourse ought to be as a field, without coming home to any man. I knew two noblemen, of the west part of England, whereof the one was given to scoff, but kept ever royal cheer in his house; the other would ask of those that had been at the others table, Tell truly, was there never a flout or dry blow given? To which the guest would answer, Such and such a thing passed. The lord would say, I thought he would mar a good dinner. Discretion of speech is more than eloquence; and to speak agreeable to him with whom we deal, is more than to speak in good words, or in good order. A good continued speech, without a good speech of interlocution, shows slowness; and a good reply, or second speech, without a good settled speech, showeth shallowness and weakness. As we see in beasts, that those that are weakest in the course, are yet nimblest in the turn: as it is betwixt the greyhound and the hare. To use too many circumstances, ere one come to the matter, is wearisome; to use none at all, is blunt. Â   (1625) * Spare the whip, boy, and hold tighter the reins (Ovid, Metamorphoses).