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 ArMaP
Does this help?
Originally posted by intrptr
the 3-3-2013 chart shows another spike simultaneous with the trailing activity.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Celestica
I remember seeing a documentary on this a few years ago I think on NatGeo?
Both the claim that a catastrophic collapse would occur at La Palma and that such a collapse would create an Atlantic-wide tsunami are a topic of debate.
chuma.cas.usf.edu...
www.lapalma-tsunami.com...
www.drgeorgepc.com...
library.lanl.gov...
Originally posted by qmantoo
What about the nuclear power plants in the path of the tsunami UK, Spain, France, and on the East coast of the USA if there is a >10m tsunami ?
Originally posted by ArMaP
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
Originally posted by qmantoo
What about the nuclear power plants in the path of the tsunami UK, Spain, France, and on the East coast of the USA if there is a >10m tsunami ?
The mega tsunami is the part that I doubt, as I don't think it will happen as they say. Yes, it may make a huge wave when it happens, (like in all other cases I have read about) but I don't think it will spread as a huge tsunami, as the way it is created is not the same as a real tsunami.
As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
from your links posted...
another link is from 1995
and the other 2 links are posting the same document
Maybe. In a few thousand years. If the volcano grows enough. But it probably won't be as extreme as you seem to think.
this is gonna blow
The slope-instability has been investigated at the Engineering Geology department of Delft
University of Technology (van Berlo 2006) and it was concluded that it is very unlikely that the
flank will collapse in the current configuration. Furthermore in the case the flank collapses, it is
more probable that a landslide volume of circa 7 km3 moves into the sea, instead of 500 km3
which was assumed by Ward and Day (2001).
Actually, a worst case view could be even much worse than what Ward/Day outlined in their pdf. Why? Because if both the top flank AND the lower portion of La Palma, below the water- which is even more substantial, and goes all the way to the ocean bottom- ALL COLLAPSE AT ONCE- that would equal a mega tsunami so big and rare that only a huge asteroid mega tsunami could compare. The amount of water displaced would be outrageous. In that case, the east coast of the USA could well see a 300 foot wave- even after dissipation and crossing the ocean. And the west coast of Africa? Forget it. Gone.edit on Wed Mar 27th 2013 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Actually, a worst case view could be even much worse than what Ward/Day outlined in their pdf. Why? Because if both the top flank AND the lower portion of La Palma, below the water- which is even more substantial, and goes all the way to the ocean bottom- ALL COLLAPSE AT ONCE- that would equal a mega tsunami so big and rare that only a huge asteroid mega tsunami could compare. The amount of water displaced would be outrageous. In that case, the east coast of the USA could well see a 300 foot wave- even after dissipation and crossing the ocean. And the west coast of Africa? Forget it. Gone.
Originally posted by Olivine
It looks like the La Palma seismometer went offline a little more than an hour ago. EHIG (also known as ES.TBT.SHZ)
Originally posted by ArMaP
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Actually, a worst case view could be even much worse than what Ward/Day outlined in their pdf. Why? Because if both the top flank AND the lower portion of La Palma, below the water- which is even more substantial, and goes all the way to the ocean bottom- ALL COLLAPSE AT ONCE- that would equal a mega tsunami so big and rare that only a huge asteroid mega tsunami could compare. The amount of water displaced would be outrageous. In that case, the east coast of the USA could well see a 300 foot wave- even after dissipation and crossing the ocean. And the west coast of Africa? Forget it. Gone.
A 300 foot wave reaching the US? What size would that be at the origin? Is that even possible?
I ask because I am not aware of the mechanics involved, but from an energy point of view, wouldn't that need a bigger energy than what was provided by the landslide itself?
As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
The new computer models of the 19-cubic-mile landslide suggest a tsunami that would be less than 5 feet tall by the time it reached New York City. By contrast, Hurricane Irene in 2011 delivered a mostly harmless 4-foot-tall storm surge to parts of the metropolis.