|
Re: Could nobody properly predict the South Asian cataclysm? |
Roger...can you be more precise and have give more information on Berkland's windows? I have not looked at SGYZ whatever in like a year...and have only ever been there 2 or 3 times. As worded now, your post is not clear. Hmmm, Juliet, I have to be careful here: the following is my opinion: I don't think there is anyone anywhere who can predict earthquakes of any size well enough that it could have been used to evacuate people ahead of this quake. On the other hand, the quake broke a known subduction zone, so at least M8 quakes are expected on the 100 year time frame. So, enough was known that there was a risk of large subduction earthquakes that a tsunami warning center could have been set up long ago...and some Australian scientists were urging that this be done. But, the problem was that it was not known that there had ever been a tsunami even close to this scale. That makes it less likely that anyone was going to act on this. In the next few years, I am sure there will be research to locate geologic evidence of previous tsunamis, to see how often they have occurred in the past. Follow Ups: ● Re: Could nobody properly predict the South Asian cataclysm? - Roger Hunter 08:47:28 - 1/2/2005 (24213) (1) ● still don't understand, but let's not bother - chris in suburbia 11:31:57 - 1/2/2005 (24220) (1) ● No, he didn't. - Roger Hunter 12:03:57 - 1/2/2005 (24226) (1) ● Re: No, he didn't/tech question - Cathryn 17:18:11 - 1/2/2005 (24236) (1) ● Re: No, he didn't/tech question - Roger Hunter 17:33:39 - 1/2/2005 (24237) (1) ● Re: No, he didn't/tech question - chris in suburbia 19:20:16 - 1/2/2005 (24243) (0) |
|