I understood that there was a warning system in place, however simple,
but I must have been wrong. However, many people must have known about
the earthquake, would have known its effects on the sea and so could
have put out a warning.
As for notification, the BBC's World Service still has a pretty good
audience in far-flung places. And what about Radio Free America, or
has that gone down the "too liberal" Swanee?
Chris (hoping not to have mixed too much metaphor or imagery ;-))
On 3 Jan 2005, at 09:56, Andrew Fildes wrote:
>
> Because unlike the Pacific, there was no established tsunami early
> warning system in place and as the earliest victims were either very
> remote (Nicobar, Andaman) or politically sealed (Aceh) the very first
> effects went unnoticed.
> AndrewF
>
>
> On 03/01/2005, at 5:19 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
>
>> I wonder why there was no call to the various radio stations around
>> the
>> area to warn people; it was hours before the tsunami hit some places,
>> although Aceh was pretty well ravaged as soon as the earthquake
>> occurred.
>>
>> Chris
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|