Intensifying Seismic Crisis at La Palma Volcano: Mega-Tsunami Potential | Hacker News Reader

Intensifying Seismic Crisis at La Palma Volcano: Mega-Tsunami Potential

electroverse.net

19 pointsjozydapozy18 comments

> You likely won’t hear of this event via the mainstream media. I very much doubt they’ll even inform you if the volcano actually blew its top. And that’s because the MSM’s aim is not to keep you informed, or to give you a heads-up regarding real-world threats; instead, its purpose is to manage your behavior and to keep you controlled.

La Palma is indeed very interesting, but this kind of talk makes me take the author much less seriously than I would have otherwise.

> Social Media channels are restricting Electroverse’s reach: Twitter are purging followers while Facebook are labeling posts as “false” and have slapped-on crippling page restrictions.

Mmhmm. Nothing burnishes credibility like devoting column space to how they're out to get you.

Yup. Especially with the ending. The site may get zero funding, but whoever owns the Patreon account is getting a couple grand a month.

With that said, I think there's a valid point there. Even if the chances of a large tsunami hitting the east coast of NA are low (chance of having an eruption, chance of that eruption being large, and chance of that eruption causing 500km^3 of displaced earth), the amount of destruction it could cause should at least prompt some analysis as to what could be done to mitigate that damage. Especially since there are likely useful public works projects that could be done to mitigate damage from climate change anyway.

> Especially since there are likely useful public works projects that could be done to mitigate damage from climate change anyway.

If you did public works to protect against this, then they would help you against climate change. But if you did public works to protect against climate change, they would not protect against this, because this is maybe 3 times worse. (Nobody that I have ever heard is talking about an 80 foot sea level rise from climate change.)

There are some dual-purpose systems.

E.g. ensuring New Orleans' pumps are in working condition, and a levee system is built to survive overtopping without collapsing.

The difference between a crisis and a catastrophe is how quickly mitigation kicks in after an event.

The cost of protecting against this would be very high. The marginal cost of additions to blunt the effects of a tsunami in addition to protecting against climate change might not be that much.

I checked a few other writing by the author and there is a lot of tin foil hat stuff.

You can get the real content without the commentary at https://www.volcanodiscovery.com/lapalma/sep2021seismic-cris...

Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbre_Vieja_tsunami_hazard for a good summary of the risks.

> They do not appear to form through individual collapses; multi-stage failures lasting hours or days appear to be more common

That's a pretty major factor.

Yes, and good news:

> most collapses in the Canary Islands took place as multistage events that are not as effective at creating tsunamis

I immediately started wondering if the entire article was bogus when I read that. It reads like a paragraph in an article about about chemtrails. Made me question my previous firm belief that the island in question even exists…

> I immediately started wondering if the entire article was bogus when I read that.

Makes me question the OP. Hacked account or someone who promotes disinformation? It isn’t hard to find much better sources, so why use a trash source?

Ouch. Not at all the case. Stumbled upon this article and thought it was interesting. I fully agree with the opinions here that the author of the article writes some strange things as well, but still thought it was worth sharing..

As others have pointed out there are certainly better sources for the same information.

My thinking was either the OP didn't read all of it (bad) or didn't find the tinfoil stuff shocking enough to completely disqualify the rest of the content from being worth reading (bad) or the OP simply agrees with the article author (bad).

The fourth alternative "Well the article was interesting and I didn't really think just one crazy tinfoil paragraph changes that" doesn't make any sense to me tbh.

I've the opinion that you don't have to 100% agree with an article to share it though. Can still have interesting parts. And the discussion about the article and the author (being right or wrong) itself can be insteresting as well!

But this link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbre_Vieja_tsunami_hazard) mentioned above, was maybe better source to share indeed.

A comment history that shows very brief activity nearly half a year ago, with regular activity occurring well over two and a half years go, doesn’t exactly inspire confidence that you’re the original owner of the account.

The information was interesting (and terrifying). I could have done without the conspiracy theory drivel mixed in, though...

But I've heard about this threat before. It could cause massive damage. For historical reasons, an awful lot of the major US cities are on the eastern seaboard. (Of course, it could damage a lot more than just the US...)

Potentially world-ending crises everywhere - be scared, very scared. And don't trust well-known sources, pay me, so I can keep you scared.

Super-volcanoes, tsunamis, asteroids - they all happen and can be catastrophic. And La Palma is a major concern - a recent bout of activity certainly should be on the agenda for countries that would be directly affected.

But I would recommend following other sources to remain informed. Perhaps check what your local government has to offer in the way of tsunami alerts, if you think you would be affected, because checking conspiracy mongers' websites around the clock isn't a viable alternative.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com