In “The Deadliest Tsunami in History,” survivors of the tsunami recognized that a receding ocean (1 point) Responses was a sign of danger. was a sign of danger. left pollution on shore. left pollution on shore. left boats and fish stranded on shore. left boats and fish stranded on shore. signals a coming earthquake.
A receding ocean in the context of the article "The Deadliest Tsunami in History" was recognized by survivors as a sign of danger.
In "The Deadliest Tsunami in History," survivors recognized that a receding ocean was indeed a sign of danger.
In order to determine the correct response, we can analyze the given statement and eliminate the options that are not relevant. The statement mentions that survivors recognized something about a receding ocean in relation to the deadliest tsunami in history.
First, let's consider the options and see if they align with the idea of a receding ocean being a sign of danger:
- 'Left pollution on shore': While pollution may be present after a tsunami, it does not necessarily relate to a receding ocean being a sign of danger.
- 'Left boats and fish stranded on shore': Again, this option refers to the aftermath of a tsunami but does not specify if it directly relates to a receding ocean being a sign of danger.
- 'Signals a coming earthquake': This option does relate to the concept of a receding ocean being a sign of danger since it implies that an earthquake might follow, potentially leading to a tsunami. However, it is not a fact stated in the given question.
Looking at the remaining option, 'was a sign of danger', we find that it perfectly aligns with the statement made in the question. Survivors of the deadliest tsunami in history recognized that a receding ocean was indeed a sign of danger.
Therefore, the correct response is: a receding ocean was a sign of danger.