Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I saw this posted on another site I frequent. Anyone here know anything
about this? October 30, 2008 BOOTHBAY HARBOR, Maine—Meteorologists are baffled by rapid tidal changes along the Maine coast, which damaged some boats and piers. Witnesses say low tide turned and became high within a matter of minutes on Tuesday afternoon. The changes occurred six or seven times. The National Weather Service says reports from several locations indicated that water levels fell and rose from 4 feet to as much as 12 feet during the event. In a public information statement, the weather service says the cause "remains a mystery and may never be known." It said significant rapid rises and falls in tide levels were observed around 3 p.m. in Boothbay Harbor, Southport and Bristol. The statement said rapid surges can be caused by the underwater movement of land, most often due to an earthquake, or due to slumping of sediments along a steep canyon or shelf, but no earthquakes were reported in the area Tuesday. A similar event occurred on Jan. 9, 1926, in Bass Harbor, the statement said. |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 21:22:48 -0400, hpeer wrote:
I saw this posted on another site I frequent. Anyone here know anything about this? October 30, 2008 BOOTHBAY HARBOR, Maine—Meteorologists are baffled by rapid tidal changes along the Maine coast, which damaged some boats and piers. Witnesses say low tide turned and became high within a matter of minutes on Tuesday afternoon. The changes occurred six or seven times. The National Weather Service says reports from several locations indicated that water levels fell and rose from 4 feet to as much as 12 feet during the event. In a public information statement, the weather service says the cause "remains a mystery and may never be known." It said significant rapid rises and falls in tide levels were observed around 3 p.m. in Boothbay Harbor, Southport and Bristol. The statement said rapid surges can be caused by the underwater movement of land, most often due to an earthquake, or due to slumping of sediments along a steep canyon or shelf, but no earthquakes were reported in the area Tuesday. A similar event occurred on Jan. 9, 1926, in Bass Harbor, the statement said. I can't speak for Maine but that is what happened during the sunami here in Thailand. First the water goes out.... way out and then it comes back with a vengeance. In protected areas there were what appeared to be several rapid tide changes with essentially the usual depth change, say 2-3 meters. However, if that was what happened I'm surprised that the earthquake people didn;t record a disturbance. Bruce-in-Bangkok (correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom) |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
This is certainly the strangest confirmable marine event I've ever heard of.
More pictures he http://www.wcsh6.com/includes/tools/...?storyid=95015 Damage is worse than any storm in memory. Since it's my former hometown, it is especially interesting. Local sources do not indicate any seismic activity but there may simply be a lag in reporting. A similar but smaller surge was reported in Cundys Harbor. Both places are similar in having configurations that could magnify surge effects and also in that both are more active at this time of year than other nearby areas where surge might simply not have been observed. The Coast Guard says surge from a storm at sea but I give that no creedance. The effects would be over a much larger area or these events would be more common. My guess would be a large but slow underwater slide of bottom sediments that didn't create much seismic vibration but sucked the water down. It's still early though and more widespread damage reports may come in. The geologists may also look back and find an event they would have overlooked if not for the land reports. Add another to my long list of reasons to prefer being anchored out than tied to a dock. It's not the first Boothbay Harbor mystery I've heard of. In 1973 (or close to it), a small research vessel simply disappeared. Witnesses reported it rounding Small Point at the proper time and one said they saw it turn around and head back out. No radio calls, no debris, nothing. -- Roger Long |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Roger Long" wrote in message ... This is certainly the strangest confirmable marine event I've ever heard of. More pictures he http://www.wcsh6.com/includes/tools/...?storyid=95015 Damage is worse than any storm in memory. Since it's my former hometown, it is especially interesting. Local sources do not indicate any seismic activity but there may simply be a lag in reporting. A similar but smaller surge was reported in Cundys Harbor. Both places are similar in having configurations that could magnify surge effects and also in that both are more active at this time of year than other nearby areas where surge might simply not have been observed. The Coast Guard says surge from a storm at sea but I give that no creedance. The effects would be over a much larger area or these events would be more common. My guess would be a large but slow underwater slide of bottom sediments that didn't create much seismic vibration but sucked the water down. It's still early though and more widespread damage reports may come in. The geologists may also look back and find an event they would have overlooked if not for the land reports. Add another to my long list of reasons to prefer being anchored out than tied to a dock. What, anchored in the same stuff that's sliding? Alisdair |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Alisdair Gurney" wrote in
: Damage is worse than any storm in memory. Since it's my former hometown, it is especially interesting. Local sources do not indicate any seismic activity but there may simply be a lag in reporting. A similar but smaller surge was reported in Cundys Harbor. Both places are similar in having configurations that could magnify surge effects and also in that both are more active at this time of year than other nearby areas where surge might simply not have been observed. It's got tsunami written all over it. There IS a history: http://www.state.me.us/doc/nrimc/mgs...nami/jan05.htm If it happened on 10/28/08 at 3PM mentioned in the article, I don't see any USGS Atlantic activity near that date/time or hours before, in the Atlantic, other than several strength 2-4 quakes in a cluster along the S side of the trench N or Puerto Rico where the 5.5 quake happened today. There was a 5.5 underwater quake on the south side of the trench, in a cluster of quakes over the last day or so just N of Puerto Rico, but the times are all wrong. NWS report is more accurate: "PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE GRAY ME 630 PM EST WED OCT 29 2008 ....TUESDAY'S UNUSUAL TIDE FLUCTUATIONS ALONG THE MID-MAINE COAST... THE CAUSE OF YESTERDAY'S UNUSUAL TIDE FLUCTUATIONS ALONG THE MID COAST OF MAINE REMAINS A MYSTERY...AND MAY NEVER BE KNOWN. SIGNIFICANT RAPID RISES AND FALLS IN TIDE LEVELS WERE OBSERVED AROUND 3 PM IN BOOTHBAY HARBOR, SOUTHPORT, AND BRISTOL. ONLY VERY MINOR FLUCTUATIONS WERE NOTED AT TIDE GAUGES ALONG THE COAST. THERE ARE SEVERAL POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS FOR YESTERDAY'S EVENT. RAPID SURGES CAN BE CAUSED BY THE UNDERWATER MOVEMENT OF LAND, MOST OFTEN DUE TO AN EARTHQUAKE, OR DUE TO THE SLUMPING OF SEDIMENTS ALONG A STEEP CANYON OR SHELF. NO EARTHQUAKES WERE REPORTED IN THE AREA YESTERDAY. IN RARE INSTANCES, LARGE AND RAPID SURGES CAN BE GENERATED BY STORMS. IN EITHER CASE, THE BATHYMETRY OF THE OCEAN FLOOR REFLECTS AND REFRACTS THE WAVE ENERGY AND CAN CAUSES SIGNIFICANT VARIATIONS IN TIDE LEVELS ALONG THE COAST...AND RAPID CHANGES IN TIDE LEVELS AT A PARTICULAR LOCATION. THESE SURGES ARE QUITE UNLIKE THE MUCH SLOWER SURGES NORMALLY ASSOCIATED WITH COASTAL STORMS. EYE-WITNESS REPORTS FROM SEVERAL LOCATIONS INDICATED THAT WATER LEVELS FELL AND ROSE FROM 4 FEET TO AS MUCH AS 12 FEET ALONG THE COAST DURING THE EVENT. THESE RAPID CHANGES IN TIDAL LEVELS GENERATED THE STRONG CURRENTS THAT DAMAGED PIERS AND BOATS IN THE AREA. ALTHOUGH THESE EVENTS ARE RARE ALONG THE MAINE COAST, THEY HAVE OCCURRED IN THE PAST. ON JANUARY 9, 1926, AN EVENT SIMILAR TO YESTERDAY'S EVENT WAS OBSERVED IN BASS HARBOR. DURING THAT EVENT, THE HARBOR DRAINED RAPIDLY AND THEN WAS FOLLOWED BY A 10 FT SURGE OF WATER, FOLLOWED BY TWO OTHER SMALLER WAVES. THERE WERE NO EARTHQUAKES REPORTED ON THAT DAY. NO ONE WAS INJURED IN THAT EVENT BUT ABOUT 50 FISHING BOATS WERE HURLED ASHORE. $$ JENSENIUS NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE GRAY, MAINE NNNN" I found some good discussions with supporting maps and references on this topic in this discussion group: http://able2know.org/topic/124844-1 We who live so near the sea, do so in our peril in many more ways than we envision...... |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 19:22:03 -0000, "Alisdair Gurney"
wrote: "Roger Long" wrote in message ... This is certainly the strangest confirmable marine event I've ever heard of. More pictures he http://www.wcsh6.com/includes/tools/...?storyid=95015 Damage is worse than any storm in memory. Since it's my former hometown, it is especially interesting. Local sources do not indicate any seismic activity but there may simply be a lag in reporting. A similar but smaller surge was reported in Cundys Harbor. Both places are similar in having configurations that could magnify surge effects and also in that both are more active at this time of year than other nearby areas where surge might simply not have been observed. The Coast Guard says surge from a storm at sea but I give that no creedance. The effects would be over a much larger area or these events would be more common. My guess would be a large but slow underwater slide of bottom sediments that didn't create much seismic vibration but sucked the water down. It's still early though and more widespread damage reports may come in. The geologists may also look back and find an event they would have overlooked if not for the land reports. Add another to my long list of reasons to prefer being anchored out than tied to a dock. What, anchored in the same stuff that's sliding? Alisdair Actually its more like off the continental shelf, down the continental slope and into the abyss. Few anchor two hundred miles out. Drill rigs maybe. These are landslides we are discussing. You might have trouble getting an anchor to set on a steep hillside. I never tried it, myself. Casady |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I wonder if the limited area of the reported occurance indicates a
close proximity of the initiating event. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 06:49:16 -0500, "Roger Long"
wrote: The Coast Guard says surge from a storm at sea but I give that no creedance. The effects would be over a much larger area or these events would be more common. My guess would be a large but slow underwater slide of bottom sediments that didn't create much seismic vibration but sucked the water down. It's still early though and more widespread damage reports may come in. The geologists may also look back and find an event they would have overlooked if not for the land reports. I would conjecture that something like a large meteorite hitting the water offshore could create a similar effect. The successive waves of high and low water would be the outward spreading rings from the impact, similar to that created by a stone thrown into the water. The outer approaches to Boothbay Harbor may have served to focus and intensify the waves in some way. |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wayne.B wrote:
I would conjecture that something like a large meteorite hitting the water offshore could create a similar effect. The successive waves of high and low water would be the outward spreading rings from the impact, similar to that created by a stone thrown into the water. The outer approaches to Boothbay Harbor may have served to focus and intensify the waves in some way. Good thought. Large meteorites aren't detectable by any means known to modern man. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Anyone Know Anything About This Unusual Boat? | General | |||
Most Unusual Anchor>>> | Cruising | |||
Unusual Drives | General | |||
Anything 'unusual' on your menu today? | General | |||
unusual docking situation | ASA |