[John Valentine]

I'd like to know exactly where these twits say the Straits of Malacca were 4000 feet deep before and now only 100 feet deep.

At the narrow point near Singapore, the Strait was always shallow.

To the northwest, perhaps it was (is) deeper. It certainly is much wider.

If a water column in the Straits of Malacca of several thousand feet were displaced as described, the ensuing tsunami within the Straits of Malacca would have wiped the coasts abutting the Straits from the face of the earth, including Singapore.

But, we know that there was NO significant tsunami effect in the straits.

From this we can conclude the obvious. The story is unadulaterated BS, and nothing more.

[xrp]

From this we can conclude the obvious. The story is unadulaterated BS, and nothing more.

Agreed. Mother Earth doesn't move this quickly.

[festus]

From this we can conclude the obvious. The story is unadulaterated BS, and nothing more.

Perhaps they are angling to get aid dollars.....

[Mike Fieschko]

Thanks for the comment. Got to admit it sounded plausible when I first read it.

[Vigilanteman]

Supposing the sensationalist story was true, what we would have is some dredging operations to widen and deepen the channel. It is not all that complicated. Two of America's businest ports are both inland with an ocean channel artificially cut-- Houston and Sacramento.

As for depositing the dredgings, Singapore is ready to take them for land reclamation projects near the tiny island city-state.

[Cvengr]

I'd like to know exactly where these twits say the Straits of Malacca were 4000 feet deep before and now only 100 feet deep.

Directly below the submarine parked on station during the govt shutdown.