miltiades wrote:I wondered indeed if Paphitis was little Yiorgos's offspring but rejected the thought remembering how sensible , cute and polite little Yiorgos was , a complete contrast to the one calling himself Paphitis wouldn't you say O ?
As far as the level of safety that a tree can offer someone in the event of an earthquake , I would say 100 %protection provided the tree was mature and deep rooted and stood away from a building hovering above. So an investment on a tree house is prudent I would suggest !
Well look ye here:
treehugger wrote:Bamboo Houses Stand up to Earthquakes
It is called the "poor people's timber" and even in China it is not accepted as a modern building material. But bamboo, like lumber, makes a light, flexible house that is much better than "modern" materials at surviving earthquakes. Now International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR) is actively promoting it as a replacement.
"So far, massive construction or reconstruction means concrete structures in China, and bamboo is little known for this [building on a large scale],” says Shayam Paudel, INBAR’s director of bamboo housing programs, in the Christian Science Monitor. Unlike the "Tofu" concrete structures that collapsed and killed thousands of kids in substandard buildings, bamboo makes a much simpler structure.
You are warned to seek open ground during an Earthquake, since people are mostly crushed by falling objects, but unless the ground opened up directly beneath a tree, their flexibility would mean they were more likely to withstand the shaking then rigid structures.
.... now there's a lesson for all of us Milty