Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Tsunami Hit New York City Region In 300 BC

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the no-place-is-completely-safe dept.

Earth 147

Hugh Pickens writes "Scientists say that sedimentary deposits from more than 20 cores in New York and New Jersey indicate a huge wave crashed into the New York City region 2,300 years ago, dumping sediment and shells across Long Island and New Jersey and casting wood debris far up the Hudson River. Steven Goodbred, an Earth scientist at Vanderbilt University, says that size and distribution of material would require a high velocity wave and strong currents to move it, and it is unlikely that short bursts produced in a storm would suffice. 'If we're wrong, it was one heck of a storm,' says Goodbred. An Atlantic tsunami is rare but not inconceivable, says Neal Driscoll, a geologist from Scripps Institution of Oceanography, who is not associated with the research. The 1929 Grand Banks tsunami in Newfoundland killed more than two dozen people and snapped many transatlantic cables, and was set in motion by a submarine landslide set off by an earthquake."

cancel ×

147 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fools, the fools! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27807759)

The 1929 Grand Banks tsunami in Newfoundland killed more than two-dozen people and snapped many transatlantic cables, and was set in motion by a submarine landslide set off by an earthquake

This is exactly why you shouldn't stack submarines. The fools!

Re:Fools, the fools! (0, Offtopic)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 5 years ago | (#27807833)

damn, i only read till new york city and hit read more, thinking this was happening right now!

Re:Fools, the fools! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27809039)

LOL that was on my mind.

Re:Fools, the fools! (1)

hoooocheymomma (1020927) | more than 5 years ago | (#27810793)

That word... I do not think it means what you think it means...

so this is what happened when atlantis sank .. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27807785)

a big wave hits new york and new jersey. now just backtrack where the origin was, and boom! atlantis found.

Re:so this is what happened when atlantis sank .. (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808013)

I think there might be something wrong with your timeline...

Re:so this is what happened when atlantis sank .. (2, Informative)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809143)

Never mind that - Atlantis seems to have been on Santorini in the Mediterranean, the rest is just speculation.

What's more interesting is that if it has happened once it can happen again. Living by the coast is a blessing but also a curse. Living inland has it's good and bad sides too. More extreme temperature differences between winter and summer, but less risk for severe storms except for some areas that suffers tornadoes.

So even if the ocean makes living easier it also comes with risk. But people are living there as well as on volcanoes and other dangerous places. The reason is that it happens so infrequently that the risk of dying is relatively low compared to many other risks.

Re:so this is what happened when atlantis sank .. (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809587)

> What's more interesting is that if it has happened once it can happen again.

I just struck this match, and it lit ...

Re:so this is what happened when atlantis sank .. (1)

nizo (81281) | more than 5 years ago | (#27811385)

After it burns out, let me know how many times you have to strike it before it re-lights.

proof it (1)

knappe duivel (914316) | more than 5 years ago | (#27807801)

They will have to make a blockbuster movie about this before I will believe it

Yeah, but it was okay... (5, Funny)

gyrogeerloose (849181) | more than 5 years ago | (#27807817)

...because Rudy Giuliani was mayor at the time and handled it well. And never passed up an opportunity to mention that he did so, either.

Re:Yeah, but it was okay... (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808701)

I thought it was Bloomberg. And he has been re-elected ever since.

Re:Yeah, but it was okay... (1)

Brother Seamus (937658) | more than 5 years ago | (#27810647)

...because Rudy Giuliani was mayor at the time and handled it well. And never passed up an opportunity to mention that he did so, either.

A noun, a verb, and 300 BCE.

Re:Yeah, but it was okay... (1)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 5 years ago | (#27810869)

A noun, a verb, and 300 BCE.

Yeah, that's about $2.50 in American money, right?

Good news for the young earthers.. (0, Flamebait)

Garbad Ropedink (1542973) | more than 5 years ago | (#27807857)

One of the side effects of a story like this is the young earth creationists tend to latch onto it and say it's proof there was a great flood. I'm not sure it even syncs up with their made up timeline, but you just wait and see they'll start touting this as proof.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (4, Funny)

gringofrijolero (1489395) | more than 5 years ago | (#27807947)

The great flood must have been somewhere else. There weren't that many Jews living on Long Island back then. But poor New Jersey.. Even mother nature was dumping its garbage there.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (2, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808021)

Even though I am an atheist, I still don't find this funny. Even if you don't believe, you should have enough knowledge of history to know that 300 BC is concurrent with Ancient Greece and the Roman Republic, and there was certainly no worldwide flood at that time. I guess I shouldn't be surprised you don't know your history, being your a product of the government school system, whose goal is to propagate ignorant and easily-malleable voters.

Second virtually every culture in the world has a record of a flood circa 8000 BC, from the Jews to the Eqyptians the Iraqis, Indians, and Chinese. Apparently *something* happened that year... perhaps a side effect of the melting ice flows after the previous glaciation. Again I guess I shouldn't be surprised you didn't know this.

Furthermore, and I'm guessing here, you're probably a member of the Democrats. Even if you're not a member you still should listen to their founder who said, "Whether my neighbor worships one god, many gods, or no gods, matter not to me. His belief does not harm my body, my property, nor my rights. I will allow my neighbor the liberty to worship as he pleases." Mr. Jefferson had enough intelligence to respect religious freedom, even if he did not agree with them. It's called tolerance. You might want to try emulating him instead of emulating a donkey's anus.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1, Flamebait)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808061)

Young earth creationists shouldn't be "tolerated," their view is akin to, "The universe was born from the Great Banana in the year 500BC, and as a test of our faith, it was made to appear as if 13.x billion years old in every conceivable way."

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (4, Funny)

inasity_rules (1110095) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808151)

Intolerant people should not be tolerated...

Oh. Wait...

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808565)

Ban Censorship Now!

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Eighty7 (1130057) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809503)

Kidnappers should not be jailed...
Extortionists should not be fined..

whoosh, i know, i get it. It's ok to kill someone who's trying to kill you. We punish harmful behavior, that's the whole point to civilization.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

witherstaff (713820) | more than 5 years ago | (#27811139)

Kidnappers should not be jailed...

That's perfectly understandable if you use the Obama's administration's reasoning [abcnews.com] on why Bush era torture shouldn't be prosecuted. "This is not a time for retribution. It's a time for reflection. It's not a time to use our energy and our time in looking back and in a sense of anger and retribution.'"

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27812125)

Don't be stupid.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (-1, Flamebait)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808459)

>>> [African-americans] shouldn't be "tolerated," their view is akin to...

Fixed that for ya. You see, I consider your views just as bigoted as one of "those" persons. I see no difference. Whether it's prejudice against a color, or a sex, or a believer, it's still prejudging an entire group as if they all think alike. It is wrong. Case in point:

- many physicists, those who study the inner workings of the universe, believe in a god. People like Einstein, Asimov, Hawking. I wouldn't call them idiots as you seem wont to do.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (4, Insightful)

Omestes (471991) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808601)

Your analogy is REALLY flawed. Being Black doesn't imply a certain rational framework, or adherence to a certain theory. As far as I know, no ethnicity has a defining body of theory, that once they change their minds, they change their race.

I just stopped believing that the Earth Revolves around the Sun, therefor I ceased to be white.

Your statement is rather silly, since basically your saying that no group that holds a view contrary to science, reason, or evidence, should be discredited, even if this opens a very large can of worms, since there are so many contradictory views. This is especially true when you make a statement of an ontic nature, which is falsifiable such as the claims of the young earthers. Either the world is 3000 years old, or it isn't, and proof would exist that would prove or disprove one or the other claim. Faith never plays into it.

Intolerance would be saying "never tolerate religious group x", which is almost as bad as racism, even if it is much more prevalent than racism. Though oddly religious groups seem much less tolerant than anyone else, since your are a bad bad person if you don't align with their sexual, social, or ideological mores.

I have nothing against religion, or the religious as long as they don't try to muck with my life, or tell me what do based on what their supreme deity of choice told them, since that argument has no bearing on my life. If they keep their ideas away from me, I'll happily ignore them. UNTIL, that is, they try to pass of faith for reason because of religious arguments. The second they say something disprovable, it is fair game, and they shouldn't complain when someone attacks it with evidence, science, and reason.

I cannot scientifically disprove God or gods, but I can easily disprove the world being 3000 years old, or similar claims.

There is no right to be wrong, especially when you try to spread falsehood as unassailable truth (there is no such thing as an unassailable truth, truth should be attacked at every chance we have, just to make sure truth is REALLY truth, and some some pleasing falsehood that makes us happy).

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

inasity_rules (1110095) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809031)

The problem I have is with the atheists who like to make fun of and insult the religious. It doesn't help their arguments at all. Not even the most rational person will react well to insults let alone change their mind.

I'm not saying you have this problem, but I suspect this is what Commodore64_love is driving at (and missing...). And yes, the religious do so too, but pointing that out is like the little kid crying "mommy, mommy, but he started it." Both sides sink to the same old dreary level of name-calling.

It is possible and helpful to respect the people who hold differing viewpoints to you. Even if they are demonstrably wrong.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808673)

No.

Race, gender, nation of origin -- all of those are things that are outside of our control. If I'm a black woman from Italy or a white man from South Africa, those are unchangeable facts. Beliefs are not put to the same standard. Prejudice against an innate characteristic is wrong.

Prejudice against a belief is different. People who believe, defend and hold an opinion that is poorly supported, leads to incorrect conclusions should be subject to criticism and judgment. See: politics, science, anything involving theories.

Hawking, Einstein do/did not believe in god in any relevant sense. They use(d) "God" as an equivalent for "Nature", something natural, fundamental -- something disconnected from humankind but true to the utmost. Calling them believers or theists is an abuse of terms. "God" in a religious sense is a deity who created the universe, interacts with it, and is worthy (or necessary) of worship. That is not what those men believe.

By your standards of "God", I can prove horses can fly. By defining a horse as a bird.

As an Einstein quote.. "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses...the Jewish religion[,] like all other religions[,] is an incarnation of the most childish superstition"

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808787)

and Asimov was one of the most outspoken atheists of the 20th Century. And he wasn't a physicist, he was a chemist. Maybe he means a different Asimov?

This whole thread was sort of interesting but now it's just getting dumb.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Telepathetic Man (237975) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808945)

If I recall correctly your examples were Agnostic in the end.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Ginger Unicorn (952287) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809571)

Your arguments are jumbled and misinformed. You are conflating "young-earth creationists" with anyone who believes in a god. None of those scientists you mention believed in the god of the bible, or indeed any kind of god that requires willful ignorance of the scientific understanding of the world.

You saying that he's calling them idiots directly implies that you think they are all young earth creationists.

You keep perceiving an intolerance of the demonstrable lies of one small group as an intolerance of the very existence of all the other people who happen to share some unrelated religious beliefs with them.

You chastise him for judging a group as if they all think alike, but he has addressed a group BASED on their shared ideology, so that is the ONLY valid generalisation to make since it is defined into the terms of the argument.

its like saying that the claim that all white supremacists are rascist is somehow a bigoted generalisation. It doesn't work, because the definition of a white supremacist requires that all white supremacists are rascist.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809065)

Why not? What harm to you if they wish to delude themselves? Does their defiance of logic just offend you so much that you have to "correct" them. Or shall I say "convert" them to your logic-based beliefs?

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812435)

They and other specific groups of fundamentalists, of any religion, commit certain specific harms upon the future of the human race. Their particular views are immune to questioning, held to be incontrovertible truths. There are fundamentalists who believe that those who convert away from their belief are heathens, and don't deserve life, or liberty, or their belongings, or other things. There are fundamentalists who believe that scientific research and questioning our origins is blasphemy, and should be shunned, and if possible, punished. There are fundamentalists who believe that an entire half of humanity, the fairer sex, is always unclean, because of misleading teachings from before the widespread understanding of something as simple, as well understood today, as the menstrual cycle.

Fundamentalist, hard-liner beliefs that are held to be above question are damaging to all of society. By keeping down women, we hurt our economic, scientific and social progress. By restricting our areas of scientific inquiry without good reason, we hurt our ability to better all of humanity. Many sects of the Abrahamic and other religions still practice despicable practices and wage war on each other for petty differences in the form of a god they all think exists. Keep in mind, they all claim to believe in the same god, they just think that by adding or subtracting certain books, all of a sudden they're heathens, barbarians, or worse.

It's insanity. It hurts my future, it hurts my children's future. It caused untold harm to what my life may have been, or what life on earth would be now had religious organizations in the past not destroyed vast amounts of scientific literature because it questioned the status quo.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (3, Funny)

StillG60Rado (1518543) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808103)

being your a product of the government school system, whose goal is to propagate ignorant and easily-malleable voters.

Careful, you're superior private education is showing.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (3, Funny)

kbrasee (1379057) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808165)

Careful, you're superior private education is showing.

And YOUR inferior education is showing.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808253)

[...] being your a product of the government school system, whose goal is to propagate ignorant and easily-malleable voters.

Careful, you're superior private education is showing.

And YOUR inferior education is showing.

And you're sarcasm detector is broken.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

kbrasee (1379057) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808339)

[...] being your a product of the government school system, whose goal is to propagate ignorant and easily-malleable voters.

Careful, you're superior private education is showing.

And YOUR inferior education is showing.

And you're sarcasm detector is broken.

And you're starting an irreversible reaction which will ultimately result in the longest reply chain in the history of Slashdot.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (2, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808485)

Maybe this is why Commander Data doesn't use contractions. If you consistently say "you are" then there's no confusion.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808793)

[...] being your a product of the government school system, whose goal is to propagate ignorant and easily-malleable voters.

Careful, you're superior private education is showing.

And YOUR inferior education is showing.

And you're sarcasm detector is broken.

And you're starting an irreversible reaction which will ultimately result in the longest reply chain in the history of Slashdot.

First!

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808191)

Oh my god, somebody made a sarcastic comment on the internet! let's burn him at the stake!

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Aqualung812 (959532) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808245)

Thank you, Commodore64_love. I'm glad to see there are some people that understand what the word "tolerance". We could expand that to other religious discussions, such as Linux, Mac and Windows.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

machine321 (458769) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808509)

Okay, as long as I don't have to use emacs.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Aqualung812 (959532) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809725)

St IGNUcius would be pleased.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

omi5cron (1455851) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808527)

"such as Linux, Mac and Windows." whoa, let's not get crazy, if everyone was tolerant of each others OS, i wouldn't get half the entertainment that i do from this place!!

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808291)

So you judged him as a democrat and assumed him an atheist because he made a negative comments about young earth creationists. Wow. Your 'knowledge' of history 'circa' 8000 BC is amusing and I'd bet you can't find a citation to back up your assertions that doesn't link to Wikipedia.

To be frank you aren't the tolerant intellectual you like to think you are and we atheists would thank you to not label yourself as such. We really don't want to be grouped in with reactionary idiots with a love of 'popular' history.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (4, Informative)

Ginger Unicorn (952287) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808395)

Second virtually every culture in the world has a record of a flood circa 8000 BC, from the Jews to the Eqyptians the Iraqis, Indians, and Chinese.

citation please? some cultures have flood myths but where did you get the idea that they all pin the date down to circa 8000BC? and how circa is circa? Indeed the dates seem to be all over the place [wikipedia.org] . They also seem to involve their cultures surviving the flood, which isn't much use to people trying to prop up the Genesis flood story. Unless noah's family traveled the globe restablishing exact replicas all the cultures of the world and then carried on as if nothing had happened. Presumably noah had at least one black kid, and one asian kid, etc.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (2, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808521)

Missed the point. I'm not debating theology; I'm debating tolerance. I find it rather annoying that I hear certain "liberals" preach tolerance and then 5 minutes later they slam religious people like Jews, Christians, or Muslims.

A true liberal doesn't give a damn what his neighbor believes, and he supports tolerance in ALL cases.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808759)

Religion is a belief. A theory. And a bad one at that. Theories deserve only the respect that the evidence supporting them does. Religion is a bunch of nonsense that parades around demanding respect. It doesn't deserve any more respect than ideas that "photographs steal souls" or "there is gold at the end of a rainbow" or "fairies live in my garden". If you ever use religion as a reason, justification, or evidence in the public sphere, you deserve to be laughed at and criticized for being an idiot.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

riverat1 (1048260) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812547)

I would call religion a hypothesis more than a theory. There's not much empirical evidence to back it up.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808781)

If the timing of the flood accounts wasn't your point, then you ought to have left it out. It's a pointless distraction, at best, and the fact that you begin the paragraph introducing it with "Second," indicates that it's intended to be part of the argument.

But worse is your condescending attitude towards the original poster's - at least as you imagine it - and the completely gratuitous political slap which presumably you only included to tie things in to the general attack on (liberal) intolerance. If the structural issues with your argument weren't enough to convince someone to ignore it, your sounding like a smug little doucebag certainly do their part to discredit you.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808827)

But worse is your condescending attitude towards the original poster's - at least as you imagine it -

"educational background," should follow the final hyphen.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808937)

> A true liberal doesn't give a damn what his neighbor believes, and he supports tolerance in ALL cases.

Yes, and no. A true liberal doesn't give a damn what his neighbour believes, but that doesn't have to mean, that he has to shut up, when other people speak up. Not speaking up, when people are trying to form public opinion with their dogmatic world-view is the opposite of supporting tolerance in my book.

> they slam religious people like Jews, Christians, or Muslims.

Where in this context are religious people as a whole group slammed?
Yes, a certain group of religious people, which try to replace scientific truth with mysticism and pseudo-science are slammed.
Those "certain liberal" can very well be religious themselves, except they don't subscribe to a literal interpretation of the scripts.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Ginger Unicorn (952287) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808951)

You missed the point of the OP. Criticism is not the same thing as intolerance. He wasn't slamming jews muslims and christians. He was pointing out that science-denialists will present this information out of context to try and actively deceive people into thinking there is a scientific basis for the genesis flood. Do you think that criticising demonstrable misinformation is intolerant? Perhaps we should be more tolerant of HIV-denialists, and holocaust denialists? Oh wait, they aren't hiding behind a banner of religious tolerance...

Religious tolerance does not extend to allowing a minority of fundamentalists to spread lies about the scientific evidence. Tolerance cuts both ways. And extending that criticism is not any kind of attack on the religious majority who can happily reconcile there religious beliefs with scientific facts. If someone tells a lie, calling them out on it is intolerance of the lie, not intolerance of the person.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (2, Insightful)

kimvette (919543) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809019)

it depends on what your definition of tolerance is.

To me tolerance is simply having the maturity to agree to disagree, acknowledging there is one correct and are many incorrect answers to a question, be it is there a flying spaghetti monster, the answer to 2+2, or whether we evolved.

Tolerance to some liberals means that everyone should agree that there are no absolutes (which ironcically is an absolute statement) and libel, slander, or persecute anyone who disagrees with their idea. They speak with a forked tongue.

Neocons don't do tolerance, period.

Others think that tolerance means that everyone should agree that all statements are equally valid.

FWIW, I'm a conservative (libertarian is closest to my world view) and I think tolerance means having the maturity to agree to disagree without forcing my world view on you. I do believe in god but I don't condemn those who don't.

*shrug*

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812077)

Tolerance to some liberals means that everyone should agree that there are no absolutes (which ironcically is an absolute statement) and libel, slander, or persecute anyone who disagrees with their idea.

Can you name one who advocates this and where they said it, i.e. give a cite?

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812575)

the liberal media, for starters. ;)

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27809091)

I find it rather annoying that I hear certain "liberals" preach tolerance and then 5 minutes later they slam religious people like Jews, Christians, or Muslims.

You must either hang with some simple-minded liberals or never have taken the time to understand what they actually believe. The liberals I know all have views that are much more complex and nuanced.

On Jews, the liberals I know are appalled by the holocaust and have favorable views of certain Jewish intellectuals such as Einstein and Chomsky but are deeply uncomfortable with Israel's discrimination against non-Jews (e.g. the Palestinians).

On Christians, the liberals I know tend to work with a variety of Christian organizations devoted to peace and social justice but are deeply uncomfortable with Christian denominations that advocate war and intolerance of minorities (e.g. gay people).

On Muslims, the liberals I know have for many years been deeply concerned about certain governments and organizations that use Islam to justify discrimination against women and gay people but they are also deeply concerned about persecution against Muslims that is justified by a belief that Islamic religions are inferior to other religions.

One of the key ideas of the liberals that I know is that the world is not black and white: it is not a battle between good people and bad people. A person can do bad things and also have bad things done to them: being victimized by one person does not mean that you are not victimizing someone else. Maybe when you try to fit liberal views into your own black and white framework you find contradictions. Or maybe you just happen to know to simple-minded liberals.

Anyway, it's just plain wrong to say that liberals generally are intolerant of Jews, Christians and Muslims.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812065)

No you made a statement which was the very first line of your argument. He's absolutely right to ask for a citation. Otherwise, you just showed an example of why the belief is considered stupid.

Liberals preach legal tolerance, that is people can't say stupid stuff with no fear of legal penalty and in fact the full protection of law. That's quite different then demanding that when they say stupid stuff they don't get called on it.

Things like posing about the good quality cultural records from 10,000 years ago being a prime example.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808957)

noah's family traveled the globe restablishing exact replicas all the cultures of the world and then carried on as if nothing had happened. Presumably noah had at least one black kid, and one asian kid, etc.

That sounds like a great sitcom!

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27809627)

Parts of the flood myths in semitic countries stem from the flood myth of the babylonians!
But the funny thing is there was a big flood in the region around that time, it was the flood of the mediteranean base when the atlantic ocean was flooding the metiteranean base at the end of the last ice age 10.000 years ago.
It might be possible that all the flood myths have their source in this desaster. The flood itself must have been pretty quick and must have surprised many people even ancient cultures having their setting in the mediterranean base!
(there were some ancient cultures in the black sea flooded as well!)
DonÂt get me wrong those cultures werent very sophisticated but nevertheless.
Over the years myths have changed people have travelled and voila we have the gread flood of today!

Similar things have happened to other myths. For instance the Sigfried myth of the germans have been transformed from two events, the battle of the deutoburg forest and the destruction of the first burgundy realm to a tale of a dragon slayer and the revenge upon the murderers! It just took around 700 years to transform the story that significantly and after that it was written down and stayed more or less the same. Now imagine a huge desaster having befallen a certain percentage of mankind before anything was written down and first cultures were emerging the impact of this must have been huge and out of a local desaster of the centuries it must have become a worldwide desaster and would have gotten its local variants in the cultures around the mediterrenan and the middle east!

But on the other hand regular big floods are a common event, so it is very likely that each culture has developed its own flood legend over time like each culture has a legend of the beginning and end of earth!
So go figure!

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

allurtuxRblng2us (1294688) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812049)

yeah, because we all know that black kids, asian kids, etc kids, and everyone else already showed the genetic disparity that you assume exists between races? in 8000 BC?

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

dbcad7 (771464) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808641)

So.. and I am guessing just like you.. your saying that because the Republicans of the last administration had the support of fundementalist religous zealots, it is therfore a good bet that someone who is not so, must be a Democrat ? ... all atheists are Democrats ?

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808715)

Second virtually every culture in the world has a record of a flood circa 8000 BC,

You fool, the earth is only 6000 years old, therefore the flood certainly didn't happen 10,000 years ago. You must've learned math in home school.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

poopdeville (841677) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809069)

Second virtually every culture in the world has a record of a flood circa 8000 BC, from the Jews to the Eqyptians the Iraqis, Indians, and Chinese. Apparently *something* happened that year... perhaps a side effect of the melting ice flows after the previous glaciation. Again I guess I shouldn't be surprised you didn't know this.

Proof please. It's called pre-history for a reason.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 5 years ago | (#27810595)

Do you ever do a google search before whining? Look it up, I found a good summary on Wikipedia in less than a minute [wikipedia.org] . Flood stories from all over the world: this is pretty common knowledge.

I get tired of people asking for citations in posts. If people say something, and you think it's wrong, GO FIND EVIDENCE THAT IT IS WRONG. Don't sit there expecting everyone else to do your work for you.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27811603)

Cool, so Wikipedia has a list of deluge myths that all originate from circa 8000 BC... ...NOT

[citation still needed]

You get it backwards. Have you ever stopped to wonder how goddamn difficult it would be to find EVIDENCE THAT CHINA DOES NOT HAVE FLOOD STORY FROM 8000BC?

It's as if I claim that South Pacific harbors mermaids and then challenge others to bring evidence that mermaids don't exist. Basically I can just sit and gloat until they search every ounce of South Pacific water... ...or get modded troll.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 5 years ago | (#27811691)

You have to demonstrate that you've made a reasonable effort. You can say, "I've looked and I can't find any reference to that, how did you find it out? I think your wrong because.....etc" In the case of mermaids, I can reasonably point out that most people consider them to be a myth [wikipedia.org] . Iif you are asking for a citation, you are asking someone to go out and do some work for you, and if you haven't made any reasonable effort to find it, you end up looking like a lazy bum who doesn't know how to do research. Especially if it is something findable within two minutes by google.

Basically if your comment is nothing more than, "I don't know where to find that" it adds nothing to the conversation, other than to convey your own ignorance. If you think they are wrong, you should have some reason why, and you should explain your reasoning.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812097)

That's a list of flood stories from pre history. Far far less than cultures having a record of a flood datable to a particular time.

1) Most of those stories don't claim to be historical

2) They aren't describing a common event

3) They didn't happen in 8000 BCE

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812055)

There no accurate records from 8000 BCE, I wish there were.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

Ian Alexander (997430) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808323)

It wouldn't make sense. The Bible was in the process of being written when these events occurred.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808801)

Well, there is a hypothesis that a land bridge at the Bosporus was breached around 5600 BC, causing a massive flood event creating the Black Sea. While the origins of the Jewish people did not occur for several thousand years after that, even a "mild flooding event" taking years or decades would be a story handed down by people living in the region, and spread throughout the world in subsequent millennia.

Of course, this doesn't make the Biblical, world wide flood historical in any sense.

Re:Good news for the young earthers.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27809751)

It makes sense in the context of the time itself.
People did not know that the world was bigger than their nearest surroundings.
So having a big local flood == worldwide flood to the survivors of such a flood.

Btw. also have in mind that the bible has heavy Babylonian influences, the flood tale most likely has its origins in the babylonian flood tale which is way older (the first jews were emigrants from Babylon, the canonisation of the old testament happened in Babylon as well 500-300 bc)

So take this with a grain of salt, if the great flood tale is not a local flood which there were many in the southern area of Iraq back then, then it definitely either was the flooding of the mediterranean or the black seas basin which happened a few thousand years earlier!

Both floods probably killed early cultures which there seems to be some proof already at least in the black sea. Those cultures were not really that sophisticated but they nevertheless were cultures (huts, small villages)

I assume if Plato did not make it up the Atlantis tale (which is very likely), it also has its roots there, it would make a lot of sense, also in the context that Plato said, that the tale was not lost to the egyptians because Egypt was not affected by the catastrophy which came over Atlantis! (which also would make sense in the context of the eruption of Thera! which killed off some parts of the Minoan culture)

News for nerds (5, Funny)

WARM3CH (662028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27807883)

300 years BC and you call it news? Good job Slashdot!

Re:News for nerds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27807995)

Still, Slashdot has improved quite a lot compared to last week [slashdot.org] .

Re:News for nerds (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808531)

and they had dupes in 150 B.C. and 1300 A.D. !!

This isn't a new worry (5, Interesting)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | more than 5 years ago | (#27807895)

A few years ago I had a relative who was involved in a lot of the disaster planning for New Haven. Some scenarios were so bad that he more or less concluded that there wasn't any point in trying to make any substantial preparations because there wouldn't be anything they could do that would help. A large tsunami hitting New England was one of the situations. Either you get a warning on time or you don't. Not much local governments can do about it.

Re:This isn't a new worry (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808039)

I would think Long Island would take the brunt of force from the New Haven area. Echoes are bound to hit, but they're much lighter than the initial impacts.

I suppose a sufficiently powerful quake from the right direction in the NE could send a wave down the sound. Talk about racking up the property damage...

Re:This isn't a new worry (1)

Iburnaga (1089755) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808345)

Umbrellas, lots and lots of umbrellas. It's all you can do.

Re:This isn't a new worry (1)

Gerafix (1028986) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808797)

What about launching nukes at the tsunami? They have enough of them, might as well use 'em for something. It would maybe help a bit, or create a huge wave of super heated steam...

Re:This isn't a new worry (2, Informative)

u38cg (607297) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809333)

Well, indeed. A tsunamai hitting that part of the world would be, say, 200km long, very approximately. In open water, a tsunami is approximately a meter or so tall and travels at circa 1000km/h. So, roughly speaking, we have 0.5*((200km*pi*1m^2)*1000kg/m^3)*((1000km/s)^2)= pi*10^20 Joules. Now a megaton, roughly speaking, is 4.184*10^15 Joules. So, to deal with our posited tsunami, we will need pi*10^20/4.184*10^15 megatons of nuke, that is, around 75 000 megatons. The Tsar Bomba, the largest device ever tested, yielded 50 megatons. So, we would need some 1500 Tsar Bombas (or 750 if the theoretical maximum yield can be squeezed out of them). However, sadly for firework fans everywhere, the Soviet Union discontinued these highly useful devices, and so we are left with the current arsenal, which generally have a typical yield of 1.2 megatons or less. This means in turn we need some 63000 nuclear weapons. After START II, however the US reduced its arsenal to around 2200 in active deployment. In other words, learn to swim, boy!.

Re:This isn't a new worry (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27811201)

Umm, sorry you got the math wrong.

It is the tsunami WAVE that travels at 1000km/h. There is no way the water itself travels at that speed. (It is almost the speed of sound. Do you really believe tsunami waves cause ocean to fly hypersonic?)

Think of the sound: it travels at 340m/s, which does NOT mean that the medium (air) travels at that speed.

The correct way to estimate tsunami's energy, I believe, is to calculate its *potential* energy. I.e., (200km*pi*1m^2)*1000kg/m^3 * 9.8m/s^2 * (roughly) 0.5m = 3*10^9 J.

Multiply by 2, because waves tend to have 50:50 mix of potential & kinetic energy, if my memory of classical mechanics is correct.

Re:This isn't a new worry (2, Insightful)

supercell (1148577) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812179)

I disagree, there could be evacuation routes that would only have to move folks 2 miles inland to get out of harms way. A tsunami generated in the eastern Atlantic would take several hours to reach the Eastern Seaboard of the U.S. giving time for some to evacuate low lying areas near the immediate coast.

Could happen again (1)

Kranerian (1427183) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808019)

I can't remember the name of it, but I read about an island somewhere off the coast of Africa. It's a giant chunk of rock that's split in such a way that its eventual collapse into the ocean is near certain. When it happens, the amount of water suddenly displaced could potentially cause a tsunami that we here on the East coast would definitely notice.

Re:Could happen again (4, Informative)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808077)

You're talking about La Palma [wikipedia.org] .

And yea, no one is really sure what will happen when it goes into the sea. It depends a great deal on how it goes, I suppose.

My money is on Yellowstone violently erupting, which shakes apart La Palma.

Which gets the attention of the martians...

Re:Could happen again (4, Informative)

Smitty825 (114634) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808081)

You're probably thinking about the Cumbre Vieja [wikipedia.org] volcano, which is located off of the coast of Africa, and is believed to potentially cause a super-tsunami in the Atlantic.

Re:Could happen again (1)

Bandman (86149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808123)

You must be a fellow (amatuer, like me?) volcano-seismo-doomsday-ologist :-) Not many people would have known not just the island, but the volcano's name at the drop of a hat. Nice!

Re:Could happen again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808163)

There is the La Palma volcanoe [rense.com] in the canary islands that could do generate a tsumnami again.

Re:Could happen again (2, Insightful)

Snowblindeye (1085701) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809617)

I can't remember the name of it, but I read about an island somewhere off the coast of Africa. It's a giant chunk of rock that's split in such a way that its eventual collapse into the ocean is near certain.

Well, there's one scientist who thinks its near certain, and a BBC documentary that focused on his points of view and made them sound like fact. Doesn't mean it couldn't happen, but it's not the certainty that the documentary made it sound.

If I recall correctly, other scientist are far from convinced that his assumptions are right. I believe some theories predict slow land slides instead, which wouldn't cause tsunamis.

Re:Could happen again (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#27811909)

I can't remember the name of it, but I read about an island somewhere off the coast of Africa. It's a giant chunk of rock that's split in such a way that its eventual collapse into the ocean is near certain. When it happens, the amount of water suddenly displaced could potentially cause a tsunami that we here on the East coast would definitely notice.

The US should put an instrument on that rock. When it stops transmitting, they have a couple of hours to evacuate the east coast of North America.

simple answer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808283)

Atlantis sank, the displacement caused tsunamis, case closed.

A more important question is why do kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?

Today... (1)

CBob (722532) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808713)

They'd call it neighborhood improvement.

Obligatory Science/Religion post (1)

MoeDrippins (769977) | more than 5 years ago | (#27808735)

> and it is unlikely that short bursts produced in a storm would suffice. "If we're wrong, it was one heck of a storm," says Goodbred.

And this is what makes science, science. The fact that it COULD be wrong and (good) scientists not only recognize it, but relish the possibility.

Re:Obligatory Science/Religion post (1)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 5 years ago | (#27812105)

You wrote your post seemingly from a point of view that says science must be separate from religion. If that is true then I have to ask why you think that? For example, if the Holy Bible says there was a Great Flood then isn't it science's responsibility to prove it right or wrong? If not then I don't think there is any room to call Christians idiots for believing in something that can't be proven. Many of the events in the Bible can be proven but if science isn't going to take the time to do that then there is no reason to say they believe in something that can't be proven. They are simply believing in something that scientists don't want to take the time to prove, possibly because by proving what the Bible says would lend too much credence to it and start the downfall of other theories that go against the Bible.

When we do have some proof such as this that *could* indicate a Great Flood we then have other idiots who say that this is going to be taken as proof by Christians that the Bible is right and that it has been proven to a certain extent instead of just viewing it as proof that a tsunami hit New England a long time ago and nothing more.

So bottom line is that Christians are blamed for believing in something that really can be proven but no one wants to take the time to directly do so and when scientists uncover what could be proof w/o that being their intent and someone starts making a connection they are ridiculed for reading into it for more than what it is. Religion just can't win it seems but when some people don't want to maintain a level playing field what do you expect, right? Science could easily destroy religion if it thought it could based on disproving events and other facts in the Bible and other books but it does not make any direct attempt to do so nor does it attempt to make any religious connection when it uncovers other facts such a major aquatic event occurring in New England a long time ago. I'm sure some people would argue what is the point of disproving religion wrong when they already "know" it is wrong. That is faith, not proof, and a double standard that seems to be okay as long as it is maintained against religion. If you (in general) know it is wrong then simply disprove it with unbiased interpretation of evidence of direct facts mentioned in the Bible. It seems that people want to maintain a large distance between science and religion, and pretend they are mutually exclusive, for fear that science could too easily prove religion correct when viewed with unbiased eyes.

Atlantis sinking.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808743)

is what caused it.

Wait a second ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27808803)

If this is true, there'd have to be other sediment deposits in nearby and maybe even not so nearby places on the east coast? If not, I think the author tried to fabricate a sensational title...

Now, I admit, I didn't RTFA, but since when is that a requirement :)

mod do3n (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27809045)

FreeBSD 4t about 80

Mormons already knew this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27809239)

Totally from in 3 Nephi 8 in the Book of Mormon. They are just ~300 years off.

  5 And it came to pass in the thirty and fourth year, in the first month, on the fourth day of the month, there arose a great storm, such an one as never had been known in all the land.
    6 And there was also a great and terrible tempest; and there was terrible thunder, insomuch that it did shake the whole earth as if it was about to divide asunder. ...
9 And the city of Moroni did sink into the depths of the sea, and the inhabitants thereof were drowned.

Cumbre Vieja (1)

bobdevine (825603) | more than 5 years ago | (#27809335)

Cumbre Vieja is a volcano in the Canary Islands that if it were to blow could cause a tsunami from the eruption or, worse from a large landslide. Its tsunami would hit the East Coast of the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbre_Vieja [wikipedia.org]
http://www.iberianature.com/material/megatsunami.html [iberianature.com]

tidal bore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27809939)

It would indeed take a big wave to sweep across Long Island and New Jersey, but a rush up the Hudson isn't that surprising. LI & NJ sit at almost right angles to each other, with the mouth of the Hudson right in the corner. Any tsunami or storm surge will get magnified and funneled up the Hudson.

Supposedly New York City is the third most at-risk for devastation in the country (after Maimi and New Orleans), with the potential of a relatively mild storm to flood Manhattan.

I've seen the evidence (3, Interesting)

Haxx (314221) | more than 5 years ago | (#27810555)

I grew up 5 miles from the water on Central Long Island's "South Shore". When I was a kid my friends father had a large garden, about 80 yards by 20 yards. Every year when he would till/turn the soil, large crumbling shells would turn up. We always wondered why they were so close to the surface in a place that had been above sea level for millions of years. Maybe this is the answer.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>