Abstract

Terra Nova, 23, 280–282, 2011 Abstract We question the approach followed by the Authors in identifying a presumed ‘new’ fault, and particularly the uncritical use made of topographic profiles, in which morphological features of different ages and origins are crudely correlated, creating the fake image of fault-tilting. We also point out the incorrect age attribution of faulted deposits – assumed without any analytical determination and/or stratigraphical framework – which has yielded serious errors as far as the timing of fault activity is concerned. These mistakes have led to incorrect conclusions and unavoidable repercussions for seismic hazard assessment of a region which has been just tragically struck by a disruptive earthquake.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call