Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Mystery surrounds 1919 'wave of molasses'


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

 

I find this very hard to believe. I don't doubt that the molasses burst out of its container, but 'a 40' high wave'? I don't think so! I can accept that 'vehicles were overturned' and even that some 'buildings were destroyed'(they just look like flimsy garden sheds), but '15 people killed and 150 injured'? I find it hard to accept that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article isn't accurate- the death toll was 21. The 150 injured is right. It isn't really that difficult to accept the numbers with dead and injured- some of the buildings that were demolished or damaged by the wave had more than one person in it. A tank with over two million gallons of liquid in it is going to cause a small tsunami, regardless of what the liquid is.

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Molasses_Flood

History Today about it: http://www.historytoday.com/chuck-lyons/sticky-tragedy-boston-molasses-disaster

A NY Times article from 1919 with some details: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9B04E4D71339E13ABC4E52DFB7668382609EDE&oref=slogin

 

A comparison.. the London Beer Flood of 1814 released over 300,000 imperial gallons, and claimed 8 lives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Beer_Flood

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Updated the article to reflect the death toll of 21, rather than 15. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rashore said:

The article isn't accurate- the death toll was 21. The 150 injured is right. It isn't really that difficult to accept the numbers with dead and injured- some of the buildings that were demolished or damaged by the wave had more than one person in it. A tank with over two million gallons of liquid in it is going to cause a small tsunami, regardless of what the liquid is.

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Molasses_Flood

History Today about it: http://www.historytoday.com/chuck-lyons/sticky-tragedy-boston-molasses-disaster

A NY Times article from 1919 with some details: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9B04E4D71339E13ABC4E52DFB7668382609EDE&oref=slogin

 

A comparison.. the London Beer Flood of 1814 released over 300,000 imperial gallons, and claimed 8 lives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Beer_Flood

Thank you for the History Today article, lots of information there, however, it states the wave was 15' high and in the Wikipedia article it's mentioned as 25' and  8'!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ouija ouija said:

Thank you for the History Today article, lots of information there, however, it states the wave was 15' high and in the Wikipedia article it's mentioned as 25' and  8'!

Yeah, I'm not sure where 40 foot waves comes in.. probably some other articles or accounts. I just pulled the first three decent articles that popped up to give some more info about it. It is interesting how it changes though... maybe because the heights were being noted at different places in the flood during different points in the wave peak?
Like one person saw the start of the wave crest up against a 25 foot tall building, but at another point in the flood it topped out at a carriage height or smushed a shorter building. It's what we do now with tsunami waves, only our measuring devices are WAY better. Back then it would have been eye-witness accounts and some damage "high tide" indicators to guesstimate it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story,
Most of these type of tales on here are like fishing yarns down the local boozer, the more the story gets passed along the bar....the bigger the fish gets and the battle to land it gets even more exciting,

Its basic human nature to exaggerate and elaborate, its what makes the history books worth reading!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, ouija ouija said:

I find this very hard to believe. I don't doubt that the molasses burst out of its container, but 'a 40' high wave'? I don't think so! I can accept that 'vehicles were overturned' and even that some 'buildings were destroyed'(they just look like flimsy garden sheds), but '15 people killed and 150 injured'? I find it hard to accept that.

Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Myles said:

Why?

I just couldn't imagine it. *shrugs* After reading the History Today article I got a better understanding of the event. Apparently, the 150 injured included animals, mainly horses. Still not sure about the 40' wave though. The tank was only 50' high so the 40' wave would have diminished very, very quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ouija ouija said:

I just couldn't imagine it. *shrugs* After reading the History Today article I got a better understanding of the event. Apparently, the 150 injured included animals, mainly horses. Still not sure about the 40' wave though. The tank was only 50' high so the 40' wave would have diminished very, very quickly.

I agree the 40' wave was exaggerated.   I don't question the amount of people killed though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was on 'Drunk History' recently. If you haven't caught the show I highly recommend it :) 

As for the 40' wave, the tank was 90' feet tall. If the side completely ruptured, the initial wave could have easily been that high. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Calibeliever said:

This was on 'Drunk History' recently. If you haven't caught the show I highly recommend it :) 

As for the 40' wave, the tank was 90' feet tall. If the side completely ruptured, the initial wave could have easily been that high. 

History Today says 50' tall by 90' diameter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Just now, ouija ouija said:

History Today says 50' tall by 90' diameter.

Well heck, so it does. Need to check my glasses. So where does that put us with the possibility of a 40' high wave?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Calibeliever said:

Well heck, so it does. Need to check my glasses. So where does that put us with the possibility of a 40' high wave?

I guess it could have initially been 40' at the moment the tank burst, but would very rapidly drop in height as the molasses spread along streets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see the 40" wave.  It depends on how quickly the storage tank broke and the height of the tank and how far off the ground. We have all of our storage tanks at our plant in containment walls just in case this happens.  Of course OSHA also mandates this for safety.  We had a tank of fuming sulfuric acid (Oleum 20%) break.  Without the containment someone would have been killed. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.