From: Darryl Maddox <email@example.com>
> Could you provide a reference on that tsunami study. That sounds like one
> should have in my library of articles.
quotes from web page:
"Figure 2: Location of the Arop School transect. Tsunami sand deposited
across the coastal plain is a lighter color where it is not buried by a thin
layer of mud. ..."
"Tsunami deposits were common and were identified as gray-colored sand
typically overlying a brown, rooted soil (Figure 4)."
[Note: Only sand thought to be tsunami deposit. The overlying mud not
identified as tsunami deposit. Tsunami happened July 17, scientists there
on Sept 27. Nothing else but the tsunami could have put the mud on top of
the sand. AR]
"For further information, contact:
Dr. Guy Gelfenbaum
Dr. Bruce Jaffe"
I asked one of these two scientists about why the mud on top of the tsunami
deposits was not studied. He told me in an email (which I no longer have
due to a computer crash) that the mud must have been deposited by the
tsunami, but that it was too thin to study.
It seems to me that ANYTHING deposited by the tsunami is as worthy to be
studied as the debris wrapped around trees (which they did make note of).
Here are a couple other web sites that talked about the tsunami at New
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 10 2002 - 01:24:40 EST