“…These methods are complementary; the onshore record provides temporal precision for the most recent events by using radiocarbon dating, coral chronology, and dendrochronology (tree-ring dating), whereas the turbidite record extends farther back in time, at least 10,000 years in Cascadia, which is long enough to encompass many earthquake cycles. In recent years, turbidite paleoseismology has been attempted in Cascadia (Adams, 1990;others, 2003a,b, 2008;Nelson, C.H., and others, 1996;Nelson, C.H., and Goldfinger, 1999;Blais-Stevens and Clague, 2001), Puget Sound (Karlin and Abella, 1992;Karlin and others, 2004), Japan (Inouchi and others, 1996), the Mediterranean (Anastasakis and Piper, 1991;Kastens, 1984;Nelson, C.H., and others, 1995b), the Dead Sea (Niemi and Ben-Avraham, 1994), northern California (Field and others, 1982;Field, 1984;Garfield and others, 1994;others, 2007a, 2008), Lake Lucerne (Schnellmann and others, 2002), Taiwan (Huh and others, 2006), the southwest Iberian margin (Gràcia and others, 2010), the Chile margin (Blumberg and others, 2008;Völker and others, 2008), the Marmara Sea (McHugh and others, 2006;Beck and others, 2007), the Sunda margin (Patton and others, 2007(Patton and others, , 2009(Patton and others, , 2010, and the Arctic ocean (Grantz and others, 1996). Results from these studies suggest the turbidite paleoseismologic technique is evolving as a useful tool for seismotectonics.…”