Re: not an aftershock
Posted by Cathryn on March 28, 2005 at 23:46:58:

I would agree. Now the news is saying it is only 100 miles from the Dec. EQ. I don't know what to believe.

And why was there no tsunami?

Cathryn

Follow Ups:
     ● distance, not aftershock, no tsunami - chris in suburbia  04:01:15 - 3/29/2005  (25420)  (1)
        ● Re: distance, not aftershock, no tsunami - Canie  08:15:57 - 3/29/2005  (25424)  (1)
           ● flat thrust, no tsunami - chris in suburbia  08:37:39 - 3/29/2005  (25425)  (1)
              ● no really up on this - John Vidale  21:35:29 - 3/29/2005  (25448)  (0)