| Your personal background. |
|---|
The most important thing is to remain vigilant when handling emails, text messages, or phone calls!
Almost everyone will have to deal at some point or other with
these kinds of attacks. Be especially wary if you are asked to act immediately.
In case your password does fall into the wrong hands, here is an important tip: store your mobile number and a private email
address via user administration. This will ensure that you receive help more quickly
if your user account is blocked and that you can be provided with a new one-time password.
This signature tells you if the email really comes from an internal sender-namely, through the red seal symbol.
If you click on this, you will find more information about the signature and its validity.
This allows you to determine if the mail is trustworthy or not.
The more Universität Hamburg members set up digital signatures, the more
secure email correspondence becomes! Tip: Contact the Regional
Computing Center to find out about personal certificates,
which enable you to create digital signatures.
Journal of Natural Disaster Science. Satake, K.; Sawai, Y.;
Shishikura, M.; Okamura, Y.; Namegaya, Y.; Yamaki,
S. (2007). "Tsunami source of the unusual AD 869 earthquake off Miyagi, Japan, inferred from tsunami deposits and numerical simulation of inundation".
T31G-03. 31: T31G-03. Bibcode:2007AGUFM.T31G..03S. Ian Sample (11 March 2011).
"newspaper: Japan earthquake and tsunami: what happened and why".
Maugh, Thomas H (11 March 2011). "Size of Japan's quake surprises seismologists".
Y. Asano, T. Saito, Y. Ito, K. Shiomi, H. Hirose, T. Matsumoto,
S. Aoi, S. Hori, and S. Sekiguchi. Okada,
Norio; Ye, Tao; Kajitani, Yoshio; Shi, Peijun; Tatano, Hirokazu (8 August 2012).
"The 2011 eastern Japan great earthquake disaster: Overview and comments".
International Journal of Disaster Risk Science. Okada Yoshimitsu (25 March 2011).
"Preliminary report of the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tōhoku Earthquake" (PDF).
National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED).
Erol Kalkan; Volkan Sevilgen (17 March 2011). "March 11, 2011 M9.0 Tōhoku, Japan Earthquake: Preliminary results".
United States Geological Survey.
Alteration of the physical form and natural hydrologic characteristics had
negative impacts on the fishery, waterfowl, wading birds and other natural resources.
Lost in this bureaucratic speak is the extent
of the damage. For instance, the project caused wading
bird and other waterfowl populations to decline 92 percent.29 Prior to channelization, the river produced approximately 81,000 pounds of
fish that thrive on freshwater with a high dissolved
oxygen content, including largemouth bass, black crappie,
bluegill, catfishes, and redear sunfish.30 The stagnant
water created by the USACE had a very low oxygen content, leading to the near elimination of these species.
The ecological damage caused by the channelization was so profound that Congress
authorized the restoration of the Kissimmee River in 1992-just 21 years after the completion of the project.31 Stated simply,
this was a stunning reversal. A central reason that this
disastrous project ever moved forward is that the
federal government was not required to engage in any environmental review.
The USACE began work on the channelization well before the enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act and other key environmental statutes,
including the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act, among others.
In both approaches, all input layers carried an equal
weight of influence. The flood vulnerability maps determined by
the four and five layer overlay results were compared to the
benchmark USGS surge extent/depth raster map which was determined
by field measurements. A linear regression between the values
of the USGS surge extent/depth positions was run against
the exact same positions from the four and five layer overlays using
SPSS Statistics 20 (SPSS 2011). In addition, a stepwise linear regression analysis was run to
assess the contribution of the individual layers to the
prediction model. 0.1. Correlation coefficients were calculated for the
four and five layer models. The values for elevation, slope, distance to stream and catch basins were reclassified
into 5 quantile classes over a 0.6 m cell-size raster where
the lower value class represents the highest vulnerability to flooding
and the higher class represents the lowest vulnerability to flooding
(Fig. 2a-e). In a first approach, all four input layers
were assigned the same weights of 25 %. The result provided a thematic map reflecting the composite level of flood hazard of each area according to the selected
input layers (Fig. 4a). In a second approach, a ponding layer was included to account for the added
vulnerability of areas in the proximity to depressions
(Fig. 2e). It was assumed that during a surge,
low-lying areas would be the first ones to collect water and would spill
over neighboring areas once they fill up.
My web blog :: "http://Sourceavl.com/user/profile/121595 |
| Your feedback on this profile |
|---|
| Recommend this profile for User of the Day: |
I like this profile |
| Alert administrators to an offensive profile: |
I do not like this profile |
|
| Account data |
View |
| Team |
None |
|