It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An Experiment in Alternative Methods of Earthquake Prediction

page: 37
108
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I'm backkk! I know who cares, lol.

I'm gonna throw this out there because I have been out of the loop for a good three days but what I am seeing is this:

In the last couple of days the quakes have been spreading East ward for one thing. Listings are fewer each day and deeper in depth?????

I'm going to repeat this again when looking at quakes and volcanoes keep an eye also on the skies. Sightings of UFO's near volcanoes tend to occur before a major event.

Damntheptb keep a check on the ants and the contour of the ground and let us know if it worsens. I would think spiders might tend to move from the ground to. Watch and listen for anything unusal.

I feel when things are coming to a head that the animals and insects will let you know and you should pay attention to the direction they are moving and follow that same path if needed/possible.

One thing I have noticed also is the Geysers in Cal. are very earthquake active but when I watch Old Faithful they give a + or - of ten minutes and the Geyser has been more toward the end of that 10 minute mark and they don't seem to be as high or last as long.

Just some observations for what they are worth.




posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Hi everyone. The puppy is napping, so I thought I'd sneak online real quick.

I noticed they moved the 6/17 3.0 from Verdi around Bridge St. back south of Somersett. If it was in the usual spot in south of Somersett, seems like I would've felt it-- which I didn't. Odd, a 3.0 too. Then other times, I'll feel a 1.5 way up north of Pyramid Lake...?

I'm still reading and checking maps, but usually not able to save anything, ie., screenshots, unless the puppy is asleep. (He's great, it's my 3 yr. old female I have to keep an eye on so she doesn't play too rough with him.) So I don't have a lot of time to be online. I'm keeping up though.

Edit to add: Welcome back, Observe!

[edit on 6/18/08 by kattraxx]



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
I see a 4.0 off Vancouver Island-- in the subduction zone, right JustMike? I saved the U.S. map and the data page, should we need it later.

4.0 offshore Vancouver Island, 6/18



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Hi Kat,

yes, that quake by Vancouver is near the boundary of the northern part of the subduction zone, which considering there has been yet another quake off the coast of Oregon certainly adds to concerns. Well it adds to mine anyway. The fact that it occurred about five hours ago but apparently only came up on the maps within the past hour is also a bit troubling...

I should note that there is no wave form data available for this latest quake. Of the four which have occurred in this area since June 14, only the first one (a mag 4.9) has any waveform data provided. The fact that data is available for this one, but not for others within just a few miles...is rather telling I think.

Because this worrying flurry of activity might be a bit confusing, here is a screen shot with my (crummy) graphics added to identify these four separate quakes that are now on the map, close to the Blanco fracture zone:



The mag 4.9 is almost completely hidden because the 4.0 is identified by a square of the same size and has a hypocenter at virtually the same latitude (to 0.001 degrees) and only slightly west of it. But it is definitely there. (Refer to previous posts about these quakes.

Here is a small map of this region, showing the plates and subduction zone:



This map and more information may be accessed at this website which is run by an educational institution in Colorado.

As to what this all portends, we are I think now in a "wait and see" (and pray) situation. We can still hope that nothing major is imminent but the signs are frankly not the best. It is highly unusual to get four quakes of any size in that region off Oregon's coast within such a relatively short time frame. In respect of quake activity, we should also consider the ones down south (Baja) and the Vancouver quake... Are they related events or simply co-incidental? That is the question.

Edited to tidy up the text a little...


[edit on 18/6/08 by JustMike]



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Just looking at the maps today and it looks like things are getting pretty active. I noticed some smaller quakes spreading out to the channel islands. The area that's been oddly quiet is the one spot that bothers me other than Oregon and around Tahoe/Reno. Look at the spot on the San Andreas right around Tejon pass, just south of Taft. I keep saying that's the where I believe the fault is "stuck".
I always feel the full moon has something to do with increased seismic activity...added stress on the plates, etc.
I still can't get those cloud formations out of my head. I wish I'd had a camera with me to snap a pic of it...you really couldn't tell from my cell phone cam.
Buckle up everyone...might be in for a bumpy ride!!!



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by billbryan516
 

Hi Bill,

hard to say if the fault is "stuck" there, by which I mean I simply don't know but you could well be right...For sure that section of the fault doesn't seem to show as much activity as is generally the case in other parts. Actually, while there is wide agreement in the scientific community that the Juan de Fuca is "stuck", even in that case there are some who say otherwise. However, the data relating to previous major quakes along that fault region and their frequencies seem to suggest the "stuck" proponents have it right.

About the full moon tonight... Or just the moon in general, full or not. I am wondering what the tides might be like along the coast there (US I mean). Again, some say that tidal rates have no effect on quakes and others say different. Would seem to make some sense that considering the masses involved it is more likely to have some effect that none at all.

I know one thing: full moons keep me awake!



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I was looking at the map you put up Mike with the Ring of Fire and the Faults and The Mendocino Fracture Zone caught my eye.

I'm wondering what connection can be made if any with the underwater volcanoes/faults going to Japan then off to China. It seems on the USA side it connects to the San Andrea's Fault.

If you look at that map notice where the vertical Faults and the horizonal Faults run......Oregon.

Imagine if it all goes at once.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Mike your map of the subduction zones and how the U.S. plate is moving south verses the pacific plate points out why the quakes are moving to the north of the Reno area. That has to be lava, No doubt about it. It is created by the plates moving against each other and thats all scientific fact so I am getting pretty sick and tired of the USGS blowing smoke up our rears.

If all that Lava finds a weak spot it is going to pop like a cork.

The plates are moving allot and thats why we are seeing volcanic type earthquakes all throughout Nevada and Utah. Lets pray that Yellowstone is really its own hot spot and not connected to this in any way.

The 3.0s in the random states that pulled the disappearing acts are not connected to this same event or we would see more in those same areas.

China is rumbling again today with two more after shocks so I'm sure that saga is far from over.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 06:26 PM
link   
My mind keeps returning to that 800 degree ground temp in Colorado that they say is caused by Coal Dust. So much doesn't make sense.

I have to be honest with you my mind keeps going back to the time I was with the being I go to and I was being told that something happens/happened here on Earth that wasn't to have happened and they are going to try and help when this time comes. This is why the Elders asked me if I would come back here to help the human race when it was time. Are they releaseing pressure as bad as it is so that the real and total damage that would take place at a later time is less planet destructive.

This is one reason I say keep an eye to the sky the ships always observe/monitor and record everything.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 06:38 PM
link   
I seriously hope Yellowstone isn't connected...that would be a GLOBAL disaster. I saw something on Discovery recently that was saying it's risen over 3 feet!!
Scary!! Also...there's a place on 395 called the "long valley caldera". This is a super-volcano in the Sierra Nevadas...close to Mammoth lakes area.
The whole place is a volcanic nightmare and if you ever have the chance to drive from Los Angeles to Tahoe along 395, you'll see what I mean.



posted on Jun, 18 2008 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Long Valley we have talked about and the quakes at Mammoth Lakes. The dead land area around there tells you something too!.

I really have in the back of my head this being a small part of pole shift and as bad as we might think this is it isn't what it might become through time.

With pole shift I would expect near extinction levels for humans and I think with what is occurring this might be overted to the extent it might have been.

This might be something that takes years to decades to come about if handled correctly by you know who.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 06:28 AM
link   
See, I have my issues with the polar shift. I mean, in all honesty, what can that REALLY do other than mess up some compasses and GPS...maybe a few electronic devices. I think the issue is, what CAUSES the poles to shift might be something cataclysmic! A super-volcano, a comet impact, something like that.
Then again...I don't have the foggiest and I'm not sure there's a scientist out there who does either.
Kryon talks about the polar-shift coming in 2012 to coincide with the end of the Mayan calendar. Surprise, surprise on that one!! lol
I do think (because it's happened before) humanity will reach near extinction but what causes that could be anyone's guess. I'll go super-volcano. We'll probably dwindle down to maybe only a few thousand of us left, but like cockroaches in the night, we'll come back.
Long Valley worries me...Mammoth worries me...just about ANY mountain in Oregon and Washington freak the hell out of me...and Yellowstone...screw THAT!
All I have to say is, I don't think Mars is an active planet...can we just go there instead??? hahah



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sky watcher
Mike your map of the subduction zones and how the U.S. plate is moving south verses the pacific plate points out why the quakes are moving to the north of the Reno area. That has to be lava, No doubt about it. It is created by the plates moving against each other and thats all scientific fact so I am getting pretty sick and tired of the USGS blowing smoke up our rears.

If all that Lava finds a weak spot it is going to pop like a cork.

The plates are moving allot and thats why we are seeing volcanic type earthquakes all throughout Nevada and Utah. Lets pray that Yellowstone is really its own hot spot and not connected to this in any way.


Hi Sky watcher,

You raise several good points so I thought I’d add my own comments…In the course of this post I’ll include some bits of info and also several links to other posts, which are already known to you but might be of interest to anyone who’s dropped in on this thread only recently. Otherwise it could get a bit confusing for some J

It could well be that the Reno region quakes are related to volcanic activity, but without some waveform data that we can submit to independent analysis it’s very hard to be sure. There is no waveform data available for any of those Reno quakes, but such data is on the USGS site for many Californian ones, even for some that are smaller than some of the NV quakes. It’s also a curious fact that very few Oregon quakes on the current maps have waveform data available either, and only one of the four recent quakes off Oregon has such data. (The first one on June 14.)

About plate movement. Well I get your point but not all who read this thread might follow or even be aware that most tectonic plates are moving pretty much all the time. So for the benefit of any readers who are new to this, in cases where one plate is colliding with another and subducting (one plate is pushing under another -- see this post for images), fresh magma formation is normal if the subduction is deep enough. On the other hand, where the plates’ contact creates a “slip” fault (meaning they rub past each other) then it’s not the same. True, there will be heat generated and volcanism can occur on these boundaries but magma release is more common where the plates are spreading apart.

But back to your own point…if the rate of movement is greater than normal then it could mean more activity, both in terms of quakes and volcanic events. Again, it’s very hard to get up-to-date data for this.

My own feeling is that if the quake swarms in NV are volcanic related (and yes it’s possible that they could be), then it’s highly unlikely they are a direct result of subduction (ie many miles away across the mountains and by the sea), but could be linked to “stretching” of the crust there. The crust in that region is much thinner than in many places on dry land. How magma finds its way to the surface depends a lot on the overlying terrain, but magma under a thinner region of crust is going to find an easier path than normally. The crust is generally thinnest beneath the oceans, which is one reason why we have so many volcanic-based islands that form along sub-marine plate boundaries, especially where the plate are either subducting or moving apart.

On the other hand, we do know that Yellowstone’s below-ground influences spread far beyond the boundaries of that particular national park. Magma associated with it could be causing quakes well outside of Yellowstone’s boundaries.


The 3.0s in the random states that pulled the disappearing acts are not connected to this same event or we would see more in those same areas.

China is rumbling again today with two more after shocks so I'm sure that saga is far from over.


Well, yes and no…Again, without any data it is very hard for anyone to work out what (if anything) those “disappearing” quakes are connected to. We don’t even know if there have been more quakes in those regions, because it depends on whether (if they occur) they are even made public at all… I think most of us had been living under assumption that quakes were automatically logged and posted on the USGS by “the system”, but we now have evidence that this is not always the case… As I mentioned back in this post just after midnight on June 18 my time, there was a delay of more than 20 hours between when that particular quake (off the coast of Oregon) occurred and when it actually appeared on the maps. There was also a delay in USGS posting the next quake in that same region (as mentioned in this post on June 18), but this time it was in the region of four hours or so as best as I can work out. So, as there are “delayed postings” and we also know that some quakes have “disappeared”, we have to accept the possibility that some quakes will simply not get posted at all.

This certainly makes things rather difficult -- and not only for us, but for the many other people around the world who very much require that information for their own purposes.

Yes, those latest China quakes are certainly cause for some concern. Of course, they are quite a long way from the big one and its after-shocks, so it looks like a different region is experiencing yet more movement.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by observe50
 

Hi Observe50,

it's very hard to say what might happen during a pole shift and also scientists are still unsure about whether it can happen or not...It's a very scary scenario so I hope it doesn't!

I assume you are speaking of the "Pole Shift Hypothesis" and not geomagnetic reversal... We know that geomagnetic reversal has occurred in the past but what its effects might be if it happens again are unclear. Pole shift, on the other hand, would be absolutely catastrophic.

The Wikipedia article on the Pole Shift Hypothesis is a good starting point for any readers who are unfamiliar with this subject. Or googling the subject will also give enough links to keep anyone busy for a while.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by billbryan516
 

Hi Bill,

I'd love to know where they got their data for that "Discovery" program. That sort of info is news for me! Most sources I've looked at lately give "rise" rates of around three to four inches per year in the past few years. Even at that rate it's considered to be faster than it was previously, but I very much doubt the "three feet" figure -- not even in total since measurements began in (I think) 1923. Of course, anyone who does the arithmetic will say, "Hey, if it's been rising even an inch per year since 1923 then it'd be up around 7 feet higher by now."

True, it would be, if it rose year on year. But there have also been periods when the caldera has fallen...

So anyway, while I have my doubts that Yellowstone's caldera has recently risen three feet, I still am not completely comfortable with the fact that its current rate of rise is significantly greater than it has been before.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 01:33 PM
link   
We all well know that Nasa has the ability up there that gives us data what is going on underground and we know the seismologist know things aren't right. We should know that they have to be working together but not sharing with we the people that pay for all this. Reason: Same excuse, they don't want panic because they can't out right predict anything in real time.

My thing is I do know that something happens here that wasn't supposed to happen the thing is they didn't tell me exactly what this was. They showed me the volcanoes and earthquakes that happening at the same time with Tsunami's so massive it's hard for most to even comprehend.

My problem is I don't know "when" other then this will all happen before March 17, 2046.

What is happening now could just be to make something that might be extinction level in the future less so it won't be total extinction.

I would like to think that people would work together on this planet and get over boundry lines and every other little stupid notion and this is what it is stupid notions of thing like (religion, color all that stuff you know what I mean) being better then another.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by JustMike
reply to post by billbryan516
 

Hi Bill,

I'd love to know where they got their data for that "Discovery" program. That sort of info is news for me! Most sources I've looked at lately give "rise" rates of around three to four inches per year in the past few years. Even at that rate it's considered to be faster than it was previously, but I very much doubt the "three feet" figure -- not even in total since measurements began in (I think) 1923. Of course, anyone who does the arithmetic will say, "Hey, if it's been rising even an inch per year since 1923 then it'd be up around 7 feet higher by now."

True, it would be, if it rose year on year. But there have also been periods when the caldera has fallen...

So anyway, while I have my doubts that Yellowstone's caldera has recently risen three feet, I still am not completely comfortable with the fact that its current rate of rise is significantly greater than it has been before.


Yeah, I've heard it's up and down too...but this particular show was talking about how a forest on a lake edge was inundated with water..they figured out that there was such significant rise in the caldera that the water from the lake was actually spilling out. They showed a computer graphic of it...it threw me for a loop too!
That's a big scary number to throw around.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by JustMike
reply to post by billbryan516
 

Hi Bill,

I'd love to know where they got their data for that "Discovery" program. That sort of info is news for me! Most sources I've looked at lately give "rise" rates of around three to four inches per year in the past few years. Even at that rate it's considered to be faster than it was previously, but I very much doubt the "three feet" figure -- not even in total since measurements began in (I think) 1923. Of course, anyone who does the arithmetic will say, "Hey, if it's been rising even an inch per year since 1923 then it'd be up around 7 feet higher by now."

True, it would be, if it rose year on year. But there have also been periods when the caldera has fallen...

So anyway, while I have my doubts that Yellowstone's caldera has recently risen three feet, I still am not completely comfortable with the fact that its current rate of rise is significantly greater than it has been before.



Thanks Mike for the other post, I agree completely. If Yellowstone rose three feet even the most ignorant park ranger would get out of dodge and not come back. Three feet for that size of a volcano would mean that about 200 million cubic feet of lava was being pushed up.

That we would know about because all the animals would be gone as they know whats up. I know the show he is talking about and it was a lake that moved and the depth changed three feet on one side verses the other because one side rose up while the other stayed down. They knew because the tree line was now in the water. While it was quite drastic, It was an isolated event and occurred over time.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Mike, Regarding the subduction verses the shearing of the plates. Notice how the two zones meet right about in the middle of Nevada or maybe a little north of Reno on the California coast. Maybe all the pushing under by the northern plate and the shearing by the southern plate is letting lava build up in that area and maybe there is a whole lot more lava being formed down there now than they think.

I think its high time they do allot of soundings in the area to figure it out before a new or old volcano pops in the Reno area. Most of the quakes are so shallow that its got to be lava in my mind or we would see more quakes in California by the Reno area.

I see that the area north of Reno is still going strong as well.

I sent Kat my pictures that I took from Hawaii, I don't know if she has sent them to you yet but I think she is busy cuddling up to her new adorable little puppy and thats why she hasn't posted them here yet.



posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:55 PM
link   
At Yellowstone are you talking about Yellowstone lake and how the water has risen so trees are now in the shallow end of the lake.

Wasn't it last year they shut a section down because the ground temp was 200 degrees which in turn makes me wonder about that 800 degree ground heat in Colorado.

I am very concerned about radio active material being exposed because of lava movement causing a volcanic eruption.

Everyone in that locations has to watch military movements, animal movements and sightings.

Unless they aren't posting everything I see there are less quakes listed and at a deeper depth and I don't like the feeling and as usual I am hoping this settles as fast as it started.



new topics

top topics



 
108
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join