The Age has one headline reading <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/100-per-cent-chance-of-tsunami-expert/2005/03/29/1111862351697.html?oneclick=true">"100 per cent" chance of tsunami: expert</a> and then directly beneath it is <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Tsunami-nations-cancel-warnings/2005/03/29/1111862351747.html">Tsunami nations cancel warnings</a>. Just goes to show how incredible difficult it is to predict these things I guess.
But this article (<a href="http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Small-tsunami-heading-towards-Perth/2005/03/29/1111862355609.html?oneclick=true">Small tsunami headed towards Perth</a>) does make me a bit angry: "He said the 23cm tsunami detected this morning by monitoring equipment in the Cocos Islands was significantly smaller than the 35cm wave recorded there following the 9.0 Boxing Day quake that sparked the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster." It seems odd to mention a 23cm wave (10 inches or so) in Perth in the same headlines as the 'real' tsunami.