Hi Mark,Actually, I talked to my father over the phone yesterday about the article. I think he said much the same thing.
I guess I remembered “74” because the prof died in ‘73’ and I just misremembered the year.
I agree that mini tsunami’s could be started by conventional bombs. But a huge tsunami requires nuclear bombs and probably several of them. The signature of these bombs would be so easy to detect that no one would be foolish enough to try it. Plus those who would have bombs available to do this would be few and the backlash would be fierce.
To think of this as a wartime weapon is one thing but as a way to blackmail countries during peace time, I don't think, anyone is so foolish.
This is the third sentence of the tsunami bomb article.
Professor Thomas Leech’s work was considered so significant that United States defence chiefs said that if the project had been completed before the end of the war it could have played a role as effective as that of the atom bomb.This sentence implies that you do not need to use atomic bombs to create a sizable tsunami. Remember, we created the atomic bomb at the end of the war. Those U.S. defense officials in the above quote seem to be implying that had Professor Leech completed his project before we assembled our first atomic bomb, we could have used the tsunami bomb to end the war instead of using the atomic bomb. If we needed the atomic bomb to make a tsunami bomb, there would have been no use for the tsunami bomb. We could have just nuked Japan (which is what we did).
If I remember correctly, after I discovered the tsunami bomb article, I decided that all I needed to do was to keep working towards revealing the truth. Sooner or later, I would succeed because I kept finding new evidence which supported my theories.
My government keeps threatening to reveal the truth by releasing bits and pieces of information. When they do that, I gain more evidence which I can use. Sooner or later, I will have enough evidence to make people believe me.