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.

 

Tsunami on way to Australia/NZ

page: 2
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
I don't know what to think to be honest, this is the sort of thing that would generally be reported immediately. I can only assume we're seeing the data wrong.... but I don't know how that could be.




posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
There are no further buoys on the way to Oz, so I guess all we can do now is wait and see.

Good luck to all you Ozzies and Kiwis, really hope this isn't what it looks like.

Stay safe!



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
I don't know what to think to be honest, this is the sort of thing that would generally be reported immediately. I can only assume we're seeing the data wrong.... but I don't know how that could be.


ABC 24 have only been reporting a wave of 30cm high all day for A & NZ... I'm sure we'll be just fine.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
I don't know what to think to be honest, this is the sort of thing that would generally be reported immediately. I can only assume we're seeing the data wrong.... but I don't know how that could be.


Not seeing the data wrong as far as I can tell....that is a water column height of around 70 feet....almost the exact same thing registered at the buoy right off the coast of Chili when the quake hit.

Like I said earlier though, I would think it would have hit by now.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
I don't know what to think to be honest, this is the sort of thing that would generally be reported immediately.
Which is why I wouldn't be worried if lived on the coast of Australia. I would need more than a thread on ATS lol



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

You're right, the first wave would have hit 12am local time which was 3 hours ago!!



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: flammadraco

I think that is actually about when the first wave hit NZ, but it was negligible. This buoy went into event mode about 3 hours ago too, so it could be a trailing wave.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Lets hope this is a false reading... But if it wasn't, shouldn't the threat for a tsunami be over by now? The EQ happened yesterday and tsunamis typically move fast, right? You'd think if there was a risk, it would have hit Australia by now...



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   
OP title should have had a question mark at the end at least to stop it appearing as click bait fear mongering.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Why is that?

A tsunami has already hit New Zealand.

Now, if I had said "Massive Tsunami to hit NZ" you may have a point, but I didn't, so you are being unnecessarily argumentative.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   
From the focal point there is a steady increase in water depth therefore this will lead to longer wave frequency (distance between two consecutive crests/troughs) and lower amplitude (wave height) and reduction in velocity. As the water depth decreases the same wave, depending on velocity at the time of reduced water depth, will increase the amplitude and decrease frequency.

The distance between Chile and NZ / Aust suggests that this phenomena would be un-noticable under the current circumstances and information I have at hand. Yes, certain seafarers will report the dip - it will be massive and somewhat noticable to an astute observer.

Australia's (NSW / QLD coast) saving grace is the great barrier reef - call it a cross between a dampening field and levee.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

No, I am posting my opinion, don't like it well that's kind of tough luck.
The OP title was a statement, and the post mentioned a 70 foot wave. I considered it overly dramatic, and as it turned out you were incorrect.

Oh, and the ripple that hit N.Zealand was technically a tsunami of course, a bit like a pin-prick could be called an injury.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

www.weather.com...

The lead tsunami waves reached as far west as the Chatham Islands east of New Zealand's two main islands Thursday morning U.S. time, where a 1.2 foot wave height was measured at Owenga.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

I stated a tsunami was en route to NZ - which it was.
I stated that buoys were showing 70ft swell - which they are.
I stated that I was not an expert and would like someone with more experience to chime in and so far noone has been able to explain the readings.

What exactly have I been incorrect about?

I don't see how I've been over dramatic, or even dramatic for that matter... just looking for answers.

Anyway, you are entitled to whatever poorly drawn opinions you can muster.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Thanks for weighing in. Always enjoy your posts.

I have literally no idea what you said though, sorry. Can you dumb it down for me? You say it will be massive and somewhat noticeable, although also say it will be unnoticeable. Can you clarify what you see in the charts?



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
a reply to: grainofsand

Anyway, you are entitled to whatever poorly drawn opinions you can muster.
As are you.
My opinion from first reading the OP was that clearly there was no threat as only you and this thread appeared to be concerned.

Rather obviously, the National Data Buoy Center would have made an emergency announcement if there was a threat.
There is no threat so you will be pleased to know I have no further interest in this thread.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Ok then! Thanks for your "input".




posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

Imagine you are standing in the middle of a sports oval/field/pitch that is perfectly level and flat and you are constantly watching the stadium seats and everything else around you - including, every now and again, the outer white painted boundary line.

Now, would you notice that boundary line being 10 centimeters higher (or lower) than you for a period of 3 seconds...or even for a split second (depending on wave velocity) - you might IF you happen to be watching and "absorbing" what you were seeing?

How is a surf wave formed?
edit on 17-9-2015 by Sublimecraft because: Also, for a visual, Google-video or Youtube "HOW ARE SURF WAVES FORMED"



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner
a reply to: grainofsand

I stated a tsunami was en route to NZ - which it was.


Well actually, I heard an expert on the news today say it had to be wave of 1 metre or more to be classified as a tsunami. But the wave that was predicted to hit A&NZ was only 30cm high... so not technically a 'tsunami'.



posted on Sep, 17 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Only thing earth quake related that happened in Australia yesterday was one off King Island in the bass straight.

Interesting at the least..



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join