Irish beach washed away 33 years ago reappears overnight after freak tide

theguardian.com

2 points·Mtinie··4 comments

Very strange, it appears that the HN submission algo didn't flag this as a duplicate of @grej's post of this from yesterday:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14291548

My apologies for the duplicate post, @grej!

Still hoping that I can learn more about the mechanisms that allow it work, if anyone is able to share their hypotheses.

From the FAQ: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

> Are reposts ok?

> If a story has had significant attention in the last year or so, we kill reposts as duplicates. If not, a small number of reposts is ok.

The dupe detector is slightly week to allow good stories to get a second chance in case the first submission was unlucky. I don't know the thresholds, but clearly the previous submission didn't get attention.

(This is a problem with some stories that are submitted 5 times and get only 1 or 2 votes each time.)

Good to know, thank you. I must have run into the duplicate detector on widely discussed items in the past and that's why I thought it was triggered on all matching URLs/titles.

Can anyone with a background in oceanography help me understand the mechanisms that would enable this event to occur?

Was this a case where the bulk of the original sand that had been lost in 1984 was trapped offshore in a location that was generally untouched by wave action? Or is this a case where an entirely new set of sand was deposited from some other location?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com