On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 15:44:16 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:


"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:59:58 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:


"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote in message
...
You imagined it if there was a wave at all. It's a simple fact that in deep
water tsunamies are not even noticable. Unless that bay is only a couple
hundred feet deep or less you'd not see a tsunami passing. You said you were
fifteen miles from some island. Water was probably pretty deep fifteen miles
out from the nearest land. I don't have a chart but I'd guess a thousand
feet or two is the depth where you were.

As usual you have one tiny little bit of information and a ton of
ignorance. You are correct that a wave has a vertical motion that
changes the height of the wave as the depth of water changes but this
is a variable that depends on the size of the wave and the depth of
the water.

Since, by your own statement, you have no conception of the size of
the wave or the depth of water you are in no position to comment but
of course that doesn't bother you a bit. The relief check is in and
you've got enough money, this week, to buy your favorite tipple so you
suck on the Thunderbird bottle and spout drivel.

Because I read everything in sight don't hold that against me. It's the
reading combined with the years of practical experience that makes me
biggest expert in these groups. Never forget it.

Well, the reading is good but when you filter what you read through
the Thunderbird haze they become devoid of intelligence.

Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)