Tsunami hit DR in 1946

Jasper

Bronze
Jan 10, 2002
1,026
0
0
don't know if any of you have seen the awful pictures of the tsunami that hit bay of bengal today. my wife told me about tsunami that hit las galeras in 1946.

http://www.iadb.org/idbamerica/index.cfm?thisid=1685

eerily i was watching the history channel yesterday about the tsunami that hit hawaii in 1960. it started with an earthquake in alaska. i don't worry too much about hurricanes because at least they are somewhat predictable, but a tsunami scares the hell out of me.

my wife's aunts and uncles tell her that there were fish in the trees 300-400 mtrs from the ocean. we have our place about 250 mtrs from the ocean so i am somewhat concerned. from what i can see on the internet, 1800 people were killed in the dr from this tsunami and the "wave" was 15' high.

it also concerns me because i have sat through a couple of earthquakes in the area and nobody actually thought to head for the highlands just as a precaution.

if any older dr1er's can tell us more about this tsunami, it would be interesting. would like to see the govt put a project in place to inform people in so far as do's and dont's. ie. when the water get sucked back from the shore, don't go picking up all the fish washed up on shore.
 

Werner

New member
Feb 19, 2004
273
0
0
Lambada said:
Another good reason NOT to build near the water line.
1946 Is more another good reason NOT to worry to much.

We live on a planet and that means that we have to deal with some natural events. Most of them are nice, like the trade winds for kiters and the sun for the beach lovers and unfortuntunally some are not so nice. Like eartquakes and a tsunami.

I really feel for the people that lost there beloved onces and all other victims.

The only thing I am worried about and more people should be worried about however is how we treath earth, not how earth treats us.
 

Jasper

Bronze
Jan 10, 2002
1,026
0
0
Werner said:
1946 Is more another good reason NOT to worry to much.

We live on a planet and that means that we have to deal with some natural events. Most of them are nice, like the trade winds for kiters and the sun for the beach lovers and unfortuntunally some are not so nice. Like eartquakes and a tsunami.

I really feel for the people that lost there beloved onces and all other victims.

The only thing I am worried about and more people should be worried about however is how we treath earth, not how earth treats us.
i agree with you terribly that we mistreat the earth. but from what i have seen, tsunami's go back thousands of years before we invented the tools of destruction. any way, with global warming, any house a few feet above sea level will disappear in 50 years. think of long island, ny from jfk to the hamptons. good bye jerry seinfeld.
 

getonwithit

New member
Mar 17, 2003
130
0
0
.......don't want to dwell on the terrible, terrible news coming from the other side of the world, but i followed the link in the above post and apparently there have been some great improvements in the way the local meteorological and seismological instutes can monitor remote natural hazards.

whilst i have no doubt that we are given as much information as possible about hurricanes (i don't think anyone could have predicted the effects of the jimani storm earlier this year), i'm not sure what warnings can be given for any oncoming tidal waves/tsunamis/off-shore earthquakes.

bearing in mind that these tsunamis are supposed to move about 500km/h, does anyone know what kind of warning we will be given?
i don't know of any 'air raid" style sirens in the capital. surely we can't all be expected to get the info from the internet, just before the waves come in. perhaps the radio stations will start blaring out warnings or something, but wouldn't that create more panic.............perhaps there will be no time to panic.

i do remember the famous 'false' maremoto of a few years back, when everybody in santo domingo clamboured for higher ground at 2am in the morning - this warning apparently spread by word of mouth. however, is there no official stance? something similar to the (futile, perhaps) steps people should take in london in the case of flooding from the thames.