2016
DOI: 10.1002/2016gl070426
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On a flawed conclusion that the 1255 A.D. earthquake ruptured 800 km of the Himalayan Frontal Thrust east of Kathmandu

Abstract: A reexamination of the observations and analysis recently reported to conclude that an 800 km section of the Himalayan Frontal Thrust ruptured in 1255 A.D. shows that the conclusion is flawed and without merit because of misinterpretations of trench logs and incorrect interpretation of radiocarbon statistics.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An extreme example of enthusiastically connecting weakly constrained dates from palaeoseismic trenches is the suggestion by Mishra et al (2016) that the 7 June 1255 earthquake, for which we have a single-line historical account from the Kathmandu Valley (Pant 2002), ruptured 800 km eastwards from 86°E to 94°E. Pierce & Wesnousky (2016) demonstrated that data from six of the seven trench sites invoked in this extrapolation use data with large uncertainties, and that their association with a 1255 rupture is unjustifiable and misleading. The timing of a palaeoseismic earthquake is bracketed by the age of ruptured sediments and by the age of undisturbed sedimentary cover, which provide minimum and maximum bounds for the time of the causal earthquake.…”
Section: Palaeoseismic Studies Of Great Earthquakesmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…An extreme example of enthusiastically connecting weakly constrained dates from palaeoseismic trenches is the suggestion by Mishra et al (2016) that the 7 June 1255 earthquake, for which we have a single-line historical account from the Kathmandu Valley (Pant 2002), ruptured 800 km eastwards from 86°E to 94°E. Pierce & Wesnousky (2016) demonstrated that data from six of the seven trench sites invoked in this extrapolation use data with large uncertainties, and that their association with a 1255 rupture is unjustifiable and misleading. The timing of a palaeoseismic earthquake is bracketed by the age of ruptured sediments and by the age of undisturbed sedimentary cover, which provide minimum and maximum bounds for the time of the causal earthquake.…”
Section: Palaeoseismic Studies Of Great Earthquakesmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…4). Although two or three great medieval earthquakes were inferred from paleoseismic trenches in Nepal, of which the historic 1255 earthquake has attracted the most attention, their exact magnitude and extent of slip remain controversial 8,1416 . Surface ruptures attributed to the 1255 earthquake have recently been documented from locations to the south and southwest of Kathmandu 36 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the Kathmandu area, the 1255 earthquake is a major event (Pant, 2002), although his location is presently strongly debated (Pierce et al, 2016). By taking into account the synthesis performed by Mugnier et al (2013) and the recent trenches performed by Chamlagain et al (2016), we consider that this earthquake ruptured the MHT both south and west of Kathmandu.…”
Section: Towards a "Barrier Type" Framework For Interpreting The Succession Of Historic Earthquakes In Central Himalayamentioning
confidence: 93%