Re: Japanese papers reveal huge quake

"Gerard Fryer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>  Skywise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "George" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> >
> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3247142.stm
> > >
> > > Scientists say old Japanese papers show a huge magnitude nine
earthquake
> > > struck north-western America 300 years ago.
> > > The writings report damage from a five-metre-high tsunami that washed
on
> > > to the Japan coast on 26 January, 1700.
> > <Snipola>
> >
> > And this is NEW news? I'd have thought the BBC was more
> > on top of things than that. Nothing in that news article
> > is new to me anyway. I learned of this years ago and I'm
> > no pro, just a quake junkie.
>
> What is new is the additional analysis. The BBC picked up on the latest
> issue of JGR (probably prompted by a press release) which has an article
> by Satake, Kelin Wang, and Brian Atwater. The paper is an attempt to
> work out rupture dimensions and moment, guided by the shoreline
> geological evidence (Atwater), the GPS and plate locking evidence
> (Wang), and computer modeling (Satake).
>
> True, the determination that there was a giant earthquake on Jan 26 1700
> is not news, but there were plenty of sceptics (including me) waiting
> for stronger evidence. The new compilation further justifies the giant
> earthquake hypothesis, and imposes valuable constraints on what the
> event was really like. This follow-up work was essential, and this paper
> will not be the end of it--the earthquake hazard assessment for the
> Pacific Northwest deserves no less.

Thanks for a real follow up, Gerard.  Its nice to know someone actually read
the article.