Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: blam

"Our impressions support the idea that it was destroyed not by an earthquake but by a tsunami."

The two tend to go hand in hand, so I don't know how they're making the distinction, unless the skeleton is only buried in sand, and even then, earthquake cannot be completely ruled out.


5 posted on 12/29/2005 12:07:03 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: RegulatorCountry
"Our impressions support the idea that it was destroyed not by an earthquake but by a tsunami."

The distinction would be that a quake would be a local effect, distorting the earth, shaking and toppling the lighthouse, whereas a tsunami would knock it over with a wall of water which originated elsewhere, possibly from far enough away that the lighthouse never felt the quake.
6 posted on 12/29/2005 12:33:09 PM PST by Fatuncle (Were I not ignorant, I would not be here to learn things from you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson