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.
Originally posted by mockrock
The resulting Tsunami would have been huge.
geomar.geo.ub.es...
No evidence for tsunamis associated with known landslides has been discovered to date
For Surinam, at a distance of 4700 km from La Palma, the r-1 decline yields a wave height of about a meter, and the r-1.85 decline yields a wave height of only about 2 cm. For Florida, at a distance of 6100 km, the r-1 decline yields a wave height of about 77 cm, and the r-1.85 decline yields a wave height of only about 1.2 cm. Even the largest of these estimates is considerably smaller than the worrisome values given by Ward and Day (2001). Shoaling and distant focusing are of course omitted here, but are not expected to yield disastrous waves in any case.
Originally posted by Phage
Originally posted by mockrock
The resulting Tsunami would have been huge.
You're a geologist are you? An oceanographer?
What do you base your assessment on? Evidence of such a tsunami? There doesn't seem to be any.
geomar.geo.ub.es...
No evidence for tsunamis associated with known landslides has been discovered to date
Or do you base it on computer models? If a tsunami did occur as a result of the El Golfo landslide it would have been localized. Perhaps reaching the coast of Spain but not crossing to North America.
For Surinam, at a distance of 4700 km from La Palma, the r-1 decline yields a wave height of about a meter, and the r-1.85 decline yields a wave height of only about 2 cm. For Florida, at a distance of 6100 km, the r-1 decline yields a wave height of about 77 cm, and the r-1.85 decline yields a wave height of only about 1.2 cm. Even the largest of these estimates is considerably smaller than the worrisome values given by Ward and Day (2001). Shoaling and distant focusing are of course omitted here, but are not expected to yield disastrous waves in any case.
tsunamisociety.org...edit on 10/8/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)
edit on 10/8/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)
If there is a chance that this could cause the death of innocent people.. then what is the harm in asking people to just be aware. No harm whatsoever..
We are well aware from Katrina that our governments don't care about innocent people.. extra DIV
Originally posted by mockrock
If there is a chance that this could cause the death of innocent people.. then what is the harm in asking people to just be aware. No harm whatsoever..
I hear 6 hours warning if a major landslide does occur.. But please! Don't trust mainstream media, really important to keep a watch yourself. Plenty of time to get people safe if something does happen
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by lasertaglover
Perhaps.
But Hierro is a shield volcano, like the Hawaiian volcanoes. Such volcanoes are not subject to explosive eruptions. The main concern seems not to be of an eruption but of landslides caused by the earthquakes. The populated areas on the Northwestern side of the island are at the foot of some very high and steep cliffs.
You're a geologist are you? An oceanographer?
What do you base your assessment on? Evidence of such a tsunami? There doesn't seem to be any.
Originally posted by mockrock
Ignore the dudes flinging random numbers at you they are not on your side.
Suggestions that the strange position of boulders and chevrons in the Bahamas is related to the collapse of El Hierro in the Canary islands are pure speculation and are NOT based on scientific research. In fact the author of the original report suggested in 2001 that geologists should start looking for evidence of the effects of a possible tsunami on the East coast of America, Brazil and the Bahamas, which is a sure indication that no such evidence existed at that time. Even mentioning a possible link can only be described as deliberately misleading. Geologists in the Bahamas insist that the chevrons could not have been caused by a tsunami.
In the Bahamas, the SW–NE orientation of the chevron ridges and runup deposits, and the restricted wave access to the
megaboulder deposits of northern Eleuthera (Hearty, 1997) favor formation from long-period waves generated from a
distant northeastern source. The orientation of these features at the Bahamas and Bermuda points to a very large and extremely
energetic and weather systems in the North Atlantic Ocean at this critical time of abrupt climate change.
Originally posted by Manhater
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by lasertaglover
Perhaps.
But Hierro is a shield volcano, like the Hawaiian volcanoes. Such volcanoes are not subject to explosive eruptions. The main concern seems not to be of an eruption but of landslides caused by the earthquakes. The populated areas on the Northwestern side of the island are at the foot of some very high and steep cliffs.
Quote end quote
You're a geologist are you? An oceanographer?
What do you base your assessment on? Evidence of such a tsunami? There doesn't seem to be any.
And that makes you an
volcanologist?
I must say...You must know all. I mean all these special skills you have, I just can't keep up...
edit on 8-10-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)