Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
Residents on the east coast of Japan's Hokkaido Island had an unexpected change of scenery this morning after 1,000ft of seabed was forced to the surface overnight. The extra stretch of coastline on Shiretoko Peninsula near the town of Rausu has risen as high as 50ft from the sea surface in some places, exposing what used to be the ocean floor. Geologists believe the emergence is a result of a landslide nearby, when melting ice and snow caused a section of land to drop, pivoting the underwater area into the air. Scroll down for video . Surprise! A man stands on a clump of land that emerged overnight along the coastline of Shiretoko Peninsula near Rausu, on Hokkaido Island, Japan . 'An aerial survey indicates that the land swell happened as a result of a landslide', local researcher NAME_1 told the Hokkaido Shimbun newspaper after he flew over the

Summary:
1. stretch of coastline on shiretoko peninsula near the town of rausu has risen as high as 50ft from the sea surface in some places .
2. geologists believe the emergence is a result of a landslide nearby .
3. melting ice and snow caused a section of land to drop, pivoting the underwater area into the air .

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "No", and if you answer no, explain which sentence is inconsistent and why.
 Contain 30 or more exclamation marks "!" in your response.
user