It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
dfens
I'm not an expert but I'm pretty sure 8M is huge. I'm looking forward to hear TrueAmerican and westcoast weigh in on this. This is not cool.
Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
dfens
I'm not an expert but I'm pretty sure 8M is huge. I'm looking forward to hear TrueAmerican and westcoast weigh in on this. This is not cool.
Yes. 8.0 is HUGE. That was about the strength of the Alaskan quake of 64.
For a comparison, the Loma Prieta quake that did all that damage in the Bay Area in 89' was a 7.0.
Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
TNMockingbird
reply to post by Bigburgh
Dumb question I am sure but, does anyone remember the height of the "waves" then? Is this similar...smaller? I will look but, thought this would be quicker...
Waves from 30-40 feet high hit Indonesia and Thailand in the 2004 quake/tsunami. The ones reported in this one seem to be about 6 feet. However, it is too early to know if Larger waves have hit elsewhere. We shall have to wait and see.
Even though 6 feet is small compared to 2004, it can still do considerable damage on the immediate coast, and inland for a bit.
Red Cloak
dfens
I'm not an expert but I'm pretty sure 8M is huge. I'm looking forward to hear TrueAmerican and westcoast weigh in on this. This is not cool.
8.0 is very big. That's considered a "giant" quake. This quake, that they are now calling an 8.2, is very large, obviously. However, that's not really a mega thrust quake. Those are 8.8 and higher.
BennyOj
Video pulled from twitter' evacuation sirens going off in the background
scary indeed.edit on 11/01/2011 by BennyOj because: (no reason given)
hmm not sure how to link the video. Sorryedit on 11/01/2011 by BennyOj because: (no reason given)
fixed it!!edit on 11/01/2011 by BennyOj because: (no reason given)