What percentage (%) of buildings were destroyed by fire during the 1906 San Francisco
earthquake?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

To tackle this question, we start by identifying the exact prompt and listing all candidate percentages.
Option 1: 90. This would imply fires destroyed the vast majority of structures, nearly all of them, which is higher than most historical estimates. While fires were extensive, 90% is generally considered an overstatement.
Option 2: 10. Suggests fires caused only a small fraction of destruction, which contradicts the well-documented role of post-quake fires in the overall damage and is therefore unlikely.
Option 3: 25. Indicates a moderate level of fire damage, yet historical records consistently emphasize that fires followed the earthquake and contributed substantially to the destruction, more than a quarter.
Option 4: 50. Reflects a middle-ground estimate, acknowledging fires as a major factor but not necessarily accounting for the total devastation attributed to them; however, many sources place the fire damage well above half of the losses.
Option 5: 75. This option aligns with common historical summaries that fires accounted for the majority of the destruction, though exact percentages can vary by source; it captures the dominant impact of the fires following the quake.

Now, comparing the options critically:
- The 90% claim (Option 1) is an overestimate for most assessments and ignores the portion of destruction from other causes such as ground shaking and collapsed structures.
- The 10% claim (Option 2) undervalues the impact of fires and contradicts the central narrative of the disaster sequence.
- The 25% claim (Option 3) still understates the fires’ role given how extensively fires spread through the city blocks after the earthquake.
- The 50% claim (Option 4) falls short of many historical summaries that emphasize fires as the primary driver of loss, though not entirely implausible in some reconstructions; it risks underrepresenting the fires' contribution.
- The 75% claim (Option 5) best captures the dominant role of fires in the overall devastation, reflecting multiple historical sources that describe fires consuming the majority of the city—while still acknowledging some destruction from shaking itself.

In summary, option 5 presents the estimate that best matches widely cited historical accounts of the 1906 San Francisco disaster, where post-quake fires were responsible for the substantial majority of the destruction. The other options either exaggerate, minimize, or split the cause in a way that conflicts with the established sequence of events during that catastrophe.

ESS 101 A Special Readings 8 Questions

What percentage (%) of buildings were destroyed by fire during the 1906 San Francisco earthquake?

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

Under the assumptions used in cost-volume-profit analysis, as the activity increases:

The CVP and break-even analysis are supported by a range of important assumptions. Which of the following is not an assumption of the CVP:

The break-even point is that at which:

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler