Tsunami Projections for Oregon. Cascadia??

[MarAzul]

I just left a message for this fellow, about how do you project a Tsunami to be generated in water as deep as the Cascadia subduction zone off the Oregon Coast?

http://ceoas.oregonstate.edu/profile/goldfinger/

There is no record of a Tsunami ever being generated by an uplift of the sea bed in waters that deep
The math doesn't work William Van Dorn at Scripps mapped the known sites 40 years ago, and all are less than 1000 meters deep.

I doubt that I will hear from him though.

 

[riverman]

Not sure of the cause but an entire orphanage was swept out to sea at Lapahoihoi on the eastern coast of the Big Island of Hawaii in the late 50s I believe and that's some deep water

 

[MarAzul]

Not sure of the cause but an entire orphanage was swept out to sea at Lapahoihoi on the eastern coast of the Big Island of Hawaii in the late 50s I believe and that's some deep water

1958 I think. As I recall that one was generated in the Gulf of Alaska. I am talking about depth of the water where the wave is generated, not where is comes ashore, that by definition is shallow.

 

[barfo]

I just left a message for this fellow, about how do you project a Tsunami to be generated in water as deep as the Cascadia subduction zone off the Oregon Coast?

http://ceoas.oregonstate.edu/profile/goldfinger/

There is no record of a Tsunami ever being generated by an uplift of the sea bed in waters that deep
The math doesn't work William Van Dorn at Scripps mapped the known sites 40 years ago, and all are less than 1000 meters deep.

Maybe science has advanced in the 40 years while you were asleep, Mr. Van Winkle?

Not my area of expertise, but isn't the 1700 earthquake on the Cascadia tied to a tsunami in Japan (and North America)?

barfo

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[MarAzul]

but isn't the 1700 earthquake on the Cascadia tied to a tsunami in Japan (and North America)

Yes, up North off the St. of Juan de Fuca where the shallow coastal plain is wide, 1200 feet deep or less for width of maybe 70 miles. You uplift that big gold pan and you have a Tsunami.

 

[MarAzul]

science has advanced in the 40 years

Science perhaps, agendas for sure. Mathematics, not.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Science perhaps, agendas for sure. Mathematics, not.

"Even God couldn't sink this ship."

 

[ripcityboy]

I believe a local university or geological survey group have done a recent survey of possible raised water levels around the state, as a result of a large earthquake in the Cascadia Subduction Zone. But how accurate it is or how wide spread the data is I have no idea. The latest projections on our earthquake preparedness in this state are not good. Most bridges would be suffer major damage since so many need are in desperately need of retrofitting. Road, power, and general sewage are projected to take up to a year to get back to normal. Also, most of our gasoline storage is along the Columbia River and in case of a major earthquake the sediment in that area would turn into soup causing a mass pollution into the river. A major earthquake in this area would nothing short of catastrophic.

 

[barfo]

Yes, up North off the St. of Juan de Fuca where the shallow coastal plain is wide, 1200 feet deep or less for width of maybe 70 miles. You uplift that big gold pan and you have a Tsunami.

Ok... seems like that might affect the Oregon coast. Seems like it did in 1700.

But maybe you can get Trump to build a wall to keep foreign tsunamis from coming across our borders.

Not sure what that young feller said that you disagree with, exactly.

barfo

 

[MarAzul]

"Even God couldn't sink this ship."

Probably a fair statement. God didn't do it. An Iceberg and the laws of physics did the deed.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Probably a fair statement. God didn't do it. An Iceberg and the laws of physics did the deed.

Just promise me that if there is ever a tsunami warning issued for your section of coast you head to high ground instead of trying to argue how it could never happen.

 

[MarAzul]

tsunami warning issued for your section of coast you head to high ground

You can be sure of it. I am already on it, at about 200'. We have been hit by Tsunamis and we will again. But I reject the idea of being hit by one within minutes of the big earthquake centered off shore in the Cascadia fault covered by about 15000 to 18000 feet of water. We (in human history) have no record of Tsunamis being generated by a displacement event cause by and earthquake
in waters that deep. Extraterrestrial bodies entering the sea at high velocity have done it, and so have earthquakes in the shallow plains. I can show the math why but I am not going to do it here.
You can guess why, that and there is no way to prove it.
My property has a Tsunami deposit on the lower ground, about 40 feet lower than where the house sits. It is about 1.5 feet below the surface, from 3' to 6" thick, deposited way back.
Not on the high ground where I built the house.