1. This documentary used several pieces of evidence to support their claim that we are in a dangerous location. What were those pieces of evidence? List them.

The initial piece of evidence was that it was in a subduction zone, meaning there must of been some sort of past activity, but that wasn’t enough. 

First nation told stories about the thunderbird that struck the land, shaking the earth, but scientist didn’t believe its credibility, for it was told verbally.

Found evidence of a forest that is now a marsh. This means, that before the ocean came and created the mud banks, there used to be a spruce forest, miles away from the salty water. Above that was a layer of sand that would have rushed in all at once, and the only logical explanation, was that there must have been a major earthquake that killed the forest and brought a layer of sand with it in tsunami form

Evidence of major tsunami in japan have happened before many times. Have evidence that the trees in a land by Cascadia died at the same time as the tsunami in japan, concluding the potential magnitude of the earthquake, that happened at the same time causing Japan to suffer.

2. Using the list of evidence above, explain why one of those pieces of evidence alone is not enough, but why together they make the documentary’s argument credible.

Just one source of evidence may not be conclusive, and easy to believe. By hearing one piece of information against it, for example that we have no written proof of this happening before, viewers might turn a blind eye. By knowing that there is multiple pieces of evidence, people will be able to see the bigger picture and have more potential to believe what may be happening. The proof of the forest which is now a muddy bay, shows us a visual representation of what happened to strongly support the theory.

3. This documentary comments on the destruction a seismic event could have on Vancouver. Describe what you learned from this documentary on how Vancouver could be impacted.

In Vancouver we have and continue to build buildings to our standards of earthquake safe. We don’t yet know what would happen to the many tall building that line the streets of Vancouver. Some conclude that they would sway in the pressure, and gradually lose there structure. Some may fall down killing thousands, or they may only be effected a little. Nothing like this has happened during this century here so we don’t know exactly what might happen. Older buildings that are un-reinforced in earthquake safety are almost guaranteed to collapse in the immense pressure from the earthquake. The earthquake would last around 5 minutes severely damaging everything that is hit by it. Land slides of hills would destroy everything below and there will be many fatalities. Next a tsunami will come into the area. Since Vancouver is tucked in behind Vancouver island, the tsunami is likely not to reach us but if it did, everyone in its path would suffer.