Mystery Tsunami Hits Iran, Killing 1, And I think They are Lying about the Cause

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Any meteor hitting water will show as a seismic event. They have used that to tell when something hit in the middle of the pacific and we missed it. Now if there is no seismic event that leaves less violent methods like water surges caused by wind. No explosion just water pushed into an area increasing the water levels for the area.

Energy can travel through the water from a quake a long way away and it only makes the wave when it interacts with a raise in the bottom as it comes ashore or the depth reduces. This can zoom right by you and you wouldn't even know there was a tsunami going to happen from it.

The quake could have been quite a way away. You never know though, someone could have set something off in the ocean too which could cause that. A nuclear explosion could do that, so could a mudslide without an earthquake.

I am sure they will let us know the real cause someday in the near future. As long as it isn't military caused.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

I read somewhere that tsunamis could be used as weapons of war. Intentionally created to cause maximum damage. I cant find exactally what I read now, but heres some other sites/articals.

link

The Russian analyst reasoned that because 80 per cent US population lives near the coast, generating tsunamis on the San Andreas fault and in the Atlantic would be an effective way of causing massive damage to 240 million people

He references Hurricane Katrina's impact on New Orleans and says that detonating nuclear bombs near the bottom of the ocean would create waves almost a mile high that would sweep inland

Theres also Project Seal, during WWII

The Best Kept Secret of WWII, Project Seal, the Tsunami Bomb

Im telling you the Kaiju are coming.

a reply to: Chadwickus

seems more tsunami that seiche to me.



a seiche doesn't seem to encroach on as much land, as furiously as this does.

originally posted by: LoneWrecche
a reply to: Chadwickus

seems more tsunami that seiche to me.
a seiche doesn't seem to encroach on as much land, as furiously as this does.

Agreed. I knew about seiches, and was just reviewing information about them to be sure. And nope. Watch that video again in the OP. There is a clear wave train coming in, one after the other, indicative of tsunami. The high speed of the water also supports tsunami, much more than seiche.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Doesn't a tsunami suck in the water on the shore before unleashing the wave? It looks like in the first video there's water crashing over inland while a wave is incoming? Maybe it did though, the video kind of starts as its happening, not before.

a reply to: Chadwickus

Good find!

a reply to: C84K2

Depends how close to shore the "event" that caused sadi wave was. Wave after wave would to me,be more likely to be a impact or an explosion,not an underwater shift in terrain.

It is possible this is a rare recorded instance of a rogue wave hitting land? I have been attacked by sneaker waves in northern California near Eureka and Trinidad area. I sure was thankful to play it safe and step away from the shoreline.

I still believe kinetic impact is a strong candidate though.

In oceanography, rogue waves are more precisely defined as waves whose height is more than twice the significant wave height (Hs or SWH), which is itself defined as the mean of the largest third of waves in a wave record. Therefore, rogue waves are not necessarily the biggest waves found on the water; they are, rather, unusually large waves for a given sea state. Rogue waves seem not to have a single distinct cause, but occur where physical factors such as high winds and strong currents cause waves to merge to create a single exceptionally large wave.[2]

Rogue waves can occur in media other than water. They appear to be ubiquitous in nature and have also been reported in liquid helium, in nonlinear optics and in microwave cavities. Recent research has focused on optical rogue waves which facilitate the study of the phenomenon in the laboratory. A 2015 paper studied the wave behavior around a rogue wave, including optical, and the Draupner wave, and concluded that "rogue events do not necessarily appear without a warning, but are often preceded by a short phase of relative order".[4]

originally posted by: TrueAmerican

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: TrueAmerican

North Korea underwater nuke test, only rational explanation.

Ahh, have you looked at a map where NK is in relation to Iran? Not only is that not rational, but it makes no sense. At all.

How about an underwater landslide?

Earthquakes generate most tsunami. Rightly so, tsunami research has concentrated on the hazards posed by seismic sources. The past decade however, has witnessed mounting evidence of tsunami parented by submarine landslides.

Link to paper

a reply to: D8Tee

How steep are the drop offs in the gulf?

a reply to: TrueAmerican

I can't find a single news story about this, anywhere; just the YT videos. Nothing remorely close to tsunami footage in those, and looks about like some hurricane surge to me.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

I agree.. As to what caused it, if there is no seismic activity, that's the mystery..

not enough damage to be deliberate. But nature has her ways of telling what is up when she wants.

Like a woman in Missouri who is mad at you, one moment you're ok, the next, holy smokes !!!

Oo

maby some kind of underwater landslide/collapse? that is ALOT of water to move though!

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: TrueAmerican

I can't find a single news story about this, anywhere; just the YT videos. Nothing remorely close to tsunami footage in those, and looks about like some hurricane surge to me.

ht tp://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/03/19/514962/Iran-Dayyer-Assaluyeh-Nakhl-Taqi-Hamzeh-Etemad-Abdolrahim-Dadjou-Esmaeil-Najjar-Tsunami

My money would be on an underwater landslide.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Any asteroid impact, powerful enough to have caused this tsunami, would have registered as a seismic event, even if the thing had landed in the ocean. The shock of the heated air in front of the hurtling body, coming into contact with the oceans cool surface, would cause such a shockwave as to register as a very large explosion, which would be easily read by a seismograph.

Nothing large enough to move this body of water could have impacted the ocean without setting geological survey equipment off, at least locally, if not across the continent concerned.

Maybe it was a massive undiscovered whale or shark that came in closer to land and swooshed its tail creating the wave? I wouldn't think that would create seismic activity, yet it would create a huge wave? I wouldn't think this would be very probable, but an idea.

a reply to: TrueBrit

A .50 cal bullet can travel around 7,000 meters or more in air. In water?

About 1 meter.

The Persian Gulf is a relatively shallow sea, with maximum depths of about 90 meters. More than plenty enough to stop a dense metallic type meteorite. And that area of the world isn't exactly plastered with seismometers, the way the US or Japan is. I believe it is entirely possible that a small dense meteorite could have hit with enough force to cause a wave, and yet not cause a significant enough seismic disturbance to be detected 200 km or more away. Water is an incredible absorber of kinetic energy. High humidity in the atmosphere from the storm clouds could have also had a cumulative effect on the speed.