Atlantis Online
April 17, 2024, 09:51:09 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Secrets of ocean birth laid bare 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5191384.stm#graphic
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Mega-tsunami theory disputed

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Mega-tsunami theory disputed  (Read 295 times)
Adam Hawthorne
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4250



« on: February 04, 2008, 02:42:21 am »

Mega-tsunami theory disputed
February 03, 2008

SUPPOSED evidence Australia has been subject to prehistoric tsunamis up to 20m in height over the past 10,000 years could just be the result of Aboriginal occupation, a major conference is set to hear tomorrow.

Archaeologists from the Australian National University say the theory about the mega-tsunamis, which has influenced the development of emergency service plans in Western Australia, is not supported by evidence.

In 2003 Australian geological researchers suggested prehistoric tsunamis over the past 10,000 years were much larger than those recorded since European settlement, including findings of surges up to 20m in height affecting a 2500km stretch of the WA coast.

“Our field work would suggest that the shell and coral deposits found high on headlands in WA or further inland are evidence of Aboriginal occupation of the area, and not deposits of mega-tsunamis or other major inundations,” ANU researcher Dr Tony Barham said.

He and colleagues Dr Sue O'Connor and Dr Stewart Fallon have also found that archaeological deposits in the area have not been disturbed by major inundation for 1000 years, undermining the theory that giant waves had flooded the area once every 400 to 500 years.

The findings will be presented to the Archaeological Science Conference at ANU, which starts tomorrow and concludes Wednesday.

“These earlier theories about mega-tsunamis and their frequency have been quite influential in WA for the development of emergency service plans – but our research would suggest that they are not supported by the archaeological evidence,” Dr Barham said.

“This is a great example of why solid archaeological research should be taken into account in the planning processes for future emergencies.

“Archaeology is a vital discipline for understanding the environmental and climate-change risks we face in Australia, as it shows how the continents' earlier inhabitants dealt with sudden and long-term changes to their environment.”

The conference will also hear how early agriculture was sustained in drying landscapes.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23152580-26103,00.html
Report Spam   Logged

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Mark of Australia
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 703



« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2008, 12:17:09 pm »

Hi Adam ,

That is a very interesting article. I find the attitude of the archaeologists in the story to be a little offensive. ..I'll explain myself   ..the archaeologists seem to suggest that their conclusion about undisturbed habitation by aborigines is somehow how better than the work of the 'geologists' who found clear evidence of mega-tsunami in W.A.     

You see , I did read the book by Ted Bryant called 'Tsunami -the underrated hazard' in which he presents most of the evidence for the mega-tsunami in Australia. It was very overwhelming evidence. To have a couple of archaeologists suggest those conclusions are wrong based only on their interpretation of the archaeological record is ludicrous. They 'see' that the habitation record in W.A. is unbroken. Roll Eyes  .I doubt that can be a very 'sure' conclusion. How did they reach the conclusion that it is unbroken??   bloody archaeologists! they are known for being pushy aren't they ? Roll Eyes

oh ,,  they are from the Australian National University  Lips sealed,    that explains it then.

« Last Edit: February 04, 2008, 12:20:32 pm by Mark Ponta » Report Spam   Logged
BlueHue
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1126


il mio va Piano, sono Asino ?


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2008, 02:55:38 pm »

Mega-tsunami theory disputed
February 03, 2008

SUPPOSED evidence Australia has been subject to prehistoric tsunamis up to 20m in height over the past 10,000 years could just be the result of Aboriginal occupation, a major conference is set to hear tomorrow.
The conference will also hear how early agriculture was sustained in drying landscapes.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23152580-26103,00.html

Dear ... HAWTHORNE,


TWO " MEGA--Tsunamies have hit and knocked-out Atlantis at Ad-Land
(= Aden.) in 1055/ 855 bc,  called the TITANO- machia + GiGANTO-machia

The Drying of any Landscape began in 855 bc when the "Quarternary Lake(=dam-)BURST "occured

 Sincerely,  "  BlueHue   " dd 3 -June--2008              Cry - Cry - Cry
« Last Edit: June 03, 2008, 11:37:31 am by BlueHue » Report Spam   Logged

( Blue's)THEORY, locating"original" Atlantis( in Aden-Yemen.)
1: ATLANTIS =Fake=Latin name, original Greek: ATHE(=a Region in Aden)
2: Atlantic-OCEAN=Greek: RIVER-of-Atlas+also" Known "World-OCEAN(=Red-Sea)
3: Greek-obsolete-Numeral 'X' caused Plato's Atlantisdate:9000=900
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy