That's quite possible. The New Madrid quake was centered in a relatively unpopulated area, but was felt as far east as Washington DC. "Most damaging" and "largest" aren't always the same thing...if a big quake is centered in an unpopulated area, it might not do much damage (depending on what's in its way...quakes create "ripples" like dropping a stone into water), or it might do a lot...it kinda depends on what's in its path and what kind of ground it's sitting on.TelegramSam wrote:Hrm, I was told that the most destructive earthquake in the US is that one that wiped out Charleston, SC in 1886...
For example, the Loma Prieta quake was centered a few miles south of Santa Cruz, but caused extensive damage as far away as San Francisco (about 70 miles). That was a much smaller quake than the New Madrid, which I believe was a 9.
Redwolf