Though the magnitude 7.0 quake was not large enough to be considered 'The Big One,' it was enough to produce a dangerous tsunami, Snider told the LA Times. But because there's no way to predict ...
"We’re glad it didn’t." The conditions could have produced a dangerous tsunami, but there's no way to predict such an event accurately ahead of time, Snider said. So his team errs on the side ...
“If an earthquake is above a certain size, and it’s in an area that has historically generated a dangerous tsunami, they are going to issue a warning out of an abundance of caution,” said ...
But as his team continued to analyze the impact of the quake, it led them to believe that a dangerous tsunami would not strike California. "For the U.S. West Coast, this is tricky stuff," Snider said.
A look back at the horrible loss of life. In photos A woman mourning a relative killed in the tsunami in Cuddalore, India, on Dec. 28, 2004.Credit...Arko Datta/Reuters Supported by Text by Hannah ...
Random rogue waves in Florida are more likely than a tsunami but less dangerous. On July 3, 1992, just before midnight, a rogue wave said to be nine feet or taller hit Daytona Beach without warning, ...
Today people around the world are far likelier to receive a timely warning to evacuate a giant, dangerous wave. But as a Dec. 5 earthquake and (tiny) tsunami off Northern California showed ...
But as his team continued to analyze the impact of the quake, it led them to believe that a dangerous tsunami would not strike California. "For the U.S. West Coast, this is tricky stuff," Snider said.
Random rogue waves in Florida are more likely than a tsunami but less dangerous. On July 3, 1992, just before midnight, a rogue wave said to be nine feet or taller hit Daytona Beach without ...