It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 75
<< 72  73  74    76  77  78 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 09:13 AM

Hope you don't mind me posting, but here's a link I found about gives the lat and long, and a pile of other info. Hope it's not this waking up.


posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 09:22 AM
Hi, i never post but read ATS alot on almost every subject. Somebody has spoke about an earthquake in Greece. I live in Greece and can say that there is an earthquake in Greece everyday. Its the same with Turkey. We seem to have a BIG one early in the year normaly in Jan/Feb, and then a medium one in the middle of the year. Luckely they are so far underground that damage is rare.

Here is a link to the European-Mediterranean Seismological Centre that shows how many there are. Hope the link works.

[edit on 7-12-2008 by stoo82]

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 09:35 AM
reply to post by caitlinfae

Mind you posting? Mind??
We're delighted!

Honestly, the more help we can get here, the better, and your contributions are very welcome.

Moving on to the Greece 4.3 quake. Its coordinates of 37.418°N, 21.063°E puts it a bit over a degree north and 4 degrees west of Santorini (Thira) at 36.24°N and 25.23°E, and a rough measure on Google Earth makes it about 700 km (roughly 450 miles) between them as the crow flies. That's a fair distance, so I doubt that it's an indicator of anything special coming up for the Thira region. (Info for those who maybe don't know: Santorini/Thira was a volcanic island that blew up in about the year 1640 BC, wiping out the Minoan civilization and also causing a lot of disruption throughout that entire region.)

Living here in Europe, I haven't picked up any reports of significant volcanic activity in Greece, so for now we can just make note of this probably-unrelated quake and hope things stay quiet there.

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 09:55 AM
New Cal offshore quake:

2008 December 07 15:39:01 UTC

* Details
* Maps
* Scientific & Technical
* Additional Info

Where can I find...?
Earthquake Details
Magnitude 3.5

* Sunday, December 07, 2008 at 15:39:01 UTC
* Sunday, December 07, 2008 at 07:39:01 AM at epicenter

Location 33.881°N, 119.380°W
Depth 0.1 km (~0.1 mile) (poorly constrained)

* 34 km (21 miles) SSW (205°) from Channel Islands Beach, CA
* 35 km (22 miles) SSW (209°) from Port Hueneme, CA
* 39 km (24 miles) SSW (208°) from Oxnard, CA
* 106 km (66 miles) W (260°) from Los Angeles Civic Center, CA

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 1.1 km (0.7 miles); depth +/- 2.8 km (1.7 miles)
Parameters Nph=045, Dmin=27 km, Rmss=0.62 sec, Gp=155°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=2

* California Integrated Seismic Net:

Event ID ci14408728

From USGS at this link.

Waveforms are provided in the "Scientific & Technical" page, so I have saved copies for any further study we may wish to do.


posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 10:30 AM
These were not on the map last night when I was posting the other offshore California EQs. Now they are in yellow.

2008 December 02 02:23:52 UTC

2008 December 05 10:58:32 UTC

Micros again, but in the subduction zone. I've been keeping a very close eye on the west coast of N. America lately.

As for any intense precursors that would precede EQ's as large as the ones forecast by web bot, nothing yet. Frankly, I'm a little worried about what that would feel like.

cait and stu, thanks for the input and links; stay alert everyone.

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 11:08 AM
"As for any intense precursors that would precede EQ's as large as the ones forecast by web bot, nothing yet. "

I was thinking after I posted that, about the hot flashes, for lack of a better description, and the seemingly constant headaches for the past six or so weeks, experienced by so many people... it may mean something; those could be precursors of something building. That has been my gut feeling, but I just don't know enough about all this to say for sure. But Charlotte does, and she will email an alert if she picks up anything.

As of this moment though, I personally, have no intensely painful precursors, which is what I'd expect if EQ's of that magnitude were a couple days away, or even a week, for that matter.

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 11:16 AM

MAP 4.7 2008/12/07 14:15:33 -4.449 -106.126 10.0 CENTRAL EAST PACIFIC RISE
MAP 4.7 2008/12/07 08:53:22 -4.588 -106.080 10.0 CENTRAL EAST PACIFIC RISE
MAP 4.4 2008/12/07 02:00:51 -5.501 -105.323 10.0 CENTRAL EAST PACIFIC RISE

Up from 4.4 to 4.7/

Edit to add: another in this region, on the same rise, I believe.

2008 December 07 17:02:23 UTC

[edit on 12/7/08 by kattraxx]

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 11:48 AM
As anyone who reads here knows, the Juan de Fuca region has been sort of a focus of mine on this thread, an area that gave me a bad feeling every time I looked at it on the maps. It still does.

external image

external image

There are only two places in the United States where colliding tectonic plates could cause a major tsunami.... (the other is Alaska.)

The Cascadia subduction zone, is a 680-mile fault that runs 50 miles off the coast of the Pacific Northwest -- from Cape Mendocino in California to Vancouver Island in southern British Columbia.

Scientists say a rupture along the Cascadia fault would cause the sea floor to bounce 20 feet or more, setting off powerful ocean waves relatively close to shore. The first waves could hit coastal communities in 30 minutes or less....

"In the case of the Cascadia Subduction Zone, you could have an area of ocean floor that's 50 miles wide and 500 to 600 miles long suddenly snap back, causing a huge tsunami," Goldfinger said. "At the same time, we could expect some parts of the upper, or North American, plate to sink one to two meters. These are massive tectonic events. Subduction zones produce the most powerful earthquakes and tsunamis in the world."

A few more facts:;

The Cascadia subduction zone produces great earthquakes, the most recent of which occurred in 1700 and was of moment magnitude (Mw) 9.

Great Cascadia earthquakes generate tsunamis, the most recent of which was probably at least 10 m high on the Pacific coast of Washington, Oregon, and northern California, and up to 5 m high in Japan. These tsunamis threaten coastal communities all around the Pacific Ocean but would have their greatest impact on the U.S. and Canadian west coasts, which would be struck 15–40 minutes after the earthquake.

Strong ground shaking from a Mw 9 plate-boundary earthquake will last three minutes or more and will be dominated by long-period ground motions. Damaging ground shaking will probably occur as far inland as Vancouver, Portland, and Seattle.

[edit on 12/7/08 by kattraxx]

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 01:07 PM
Noting the earthquakes now happening, and increasing in magnitude on the East Pacific rise...

The research team, led by Jeffrey McGuire of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, studied past earthquakes along two so-called transform faults on the East Pacific Rise, where tectonic plates are spreading apart.

Next year (2006) an oceanographic expedition led by McGuire will drop sensors along the East Pacific Rise to begin testing the researchers’ hypothesis. The possibility that slow slip transients may herald earthquakes has wider significance, researchers said. Slow slip transients have been detected in subduction zones, where one tectonic plate scrapes under another. The most powerful and dangerous earthquakes occur in subduction zones.

"The possibility that aseismic slip triggers large earthquakes on subduction megathrusts is especially intriguing given the observation that a slow slip transient occurred 15 minutes before the great 1960 Chilean megathrust earthquake," the authors wrote in Nature. "Notably, subduction zones are observed to have higher foreshock rates than continental regions."

[edit on 12/7/08 by kattraxx]

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 01:37 PM

Repeated slow slip events observed on the deeper interface of the northern Cascadia subduction zone, at first thought to be silent, have now been found to have unique, non-earthquake, seismic signatures. Tremor-like seismic signals have been found to correlate temporally and spatially with slip events identified from crustal motion data spanning the past six years. During the period between slips, tremor activity is minor or nonexistent. We call this associated tremor and slip phenomenon Episodic Tremor and Slip (ETS) and propose that ETS activity can be used as a real-time indicator of stress loading of the Cascadia megathrust earthquake zone.

This is interesting because in other articles I've been reading, some scientists say this "chatter" may predict subduction zone EQs. However, since this ETS activity is seismically silent, we the public would have no way of knowing about it. It may even cause certain physical precursors in EQ sensitives that we don't/can't correlate with silent slip, since we have no way to verify the information.

If the one-to-one correlation between transient slip and seismic signatures proves to be robust, then the tremor-like seismic signals can provide a real-time indicator of the occurrence of slip. Because slip events on the deep slab interface increase the stress across the locked plate interface located up-dip, it is conceivable that a slip event could trigger a large subduction thrust earthquake (10, 11). Consequently, the onset of ETS activity could lead to recognized times of higher probability for the occurrence of megathrust earthquakes in the Cascadia subduction zone.

And current research into the "expected 2008 ETS activity", however, the log ends on June 12th.

June 12, 2008 - This is the wrap-up of this ETS since nothing new has been seen since the tremor on Vancouver Island seems to have died out on June 2. This may have been one of the longer lasting ETSes recorded based on the tremor record. While there were short bursts of tremor in April the more continuous record didn't start until May 4 and was located under the southeast corner of the Olympics (just north of the southern end of Hood Canal. After slowly moving north northwest for about a week it was under the Straights of Juan de Fuca about May 11-12. On May 15 it clearly divided into a patch just moving onto southern Vancouver Island and a second patch in souther Puget Sound (near Olympia). This southern patch only lasted for three days while the northern patch seemed to stick around souther Vancouver Island before moving on northward around May 18-20. While the GPS signals from this ETS were reported to be weaker than some previous ones they can be clearly seen on some stations in northwest Washington as well as southern Vancouver Island (in particular P418 & P436 starting in early to mid May, SC02 & ALBH in mid May, BAMF & CLRS in late May).

Unlike seismic earthquakes, which release sudden shock waves, silent temblors are too slow to cause ground shaking and thus are not considered hazardous. However, some researchers have speculated that silent quakes may be precursors of M8 and M9 mega-temblors that regularly occur in subduction zones--seismically active regions where one tectonic plate is constantly diving ("subducting") beneath another.

These swarms of micro-earthquakes are a clear sign that the silent temblor is adding stress to the fault zone, say the authors, and some day might provide an early warning that a harmless silent event is likely to trigger a destructive mega-earthquake of M8 or larger.

[edit on 12/7/08 by kattraxx]

posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 06:32 PM
I believe this one just popped onto the maps. I didn't see it in red, but I could've missed it.

2008 December 07 22:57:47 UTC

Not a large one, but anything in this region concerns me.

Time for the night shift to come in... JustMike, we're counting on you to keep an eye on things for us, like you always do.

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 08:26 AM
reply to post by kattraxx

Night shift here...

Actually I'm on a bit late today. Had some work to do. Thanks for the several posts about the Juan de Fuca (and similar) faults. Yes, if we are going to worry about any major quake threat in the US region, then this is the one we should be most concerned about. People talk about a major quake in Frisco as the "big one". In some ways they could be right, but THE "Big One" is actually a major movement in the Juan de Fuca subduction zone, which would affect hundreds of miles of coastal regions. True, there is the potential for some pretty major quake activity in Frisco and other land areas, but such scenarios pale in comparison to what could happen when the Juan de Fuca lets go again. I say "when" because the experts seem in general agreement that there is little doubt that it will let go; the only question is when. So, when it does, the possible tsunami could be on a scale of the last one, which studies of salt-water flooding into inland lakes (in Oregon) gave them a tsunami height of about 10 metres (ie over 30 feet!) for the last event on Jan 26 1700. (The Japanese recorded its arrival on their shores, which is how we know the date.)

We can only imagine what such a wave would do to near-coastal communities, but bearing in mind there might be under an hour's warning for many people living by or near the coast, the effects could be quite devastating. One only has to consider the great Asian quake of Dec 2004, which killed (by some estimates) over 350,000 people.
The whole situation there was different in some ways, but on the other hand, a lot of the coast along Or and Cal (and up into Alaska and Canada) is quite low-lying and densely populated. People like to live near the beach...

We can all recall the dreadful images of the devastation on Galveston, TX, after the Hurricane there just a few months ago. Thousands of homes were basically washed away. And there, most people had days of warning and were able to evacuate. In this case, they might have an hour (or maybe two if they're further down the coast). Worst scenario: middle of the night in winter, when people sleep soundest. So when it happens, pray it's a working day, and after peak hour so the roads are clear for evacuees. One thing with a tsunami that's very different from an approaching's not about getting a long way away, it's about making it to high ground. I just hope that people will listen to the orders to evacuate and get out of there fast. And if anyone reading this lives in that region -- along the west coast -- and you see animals literally heading for the hills, then follow them! That's what saved some people in the Indonesian tsunami. Unfortunately, most ignored the behaviour of the animals, to their great cost.

So, when will THE Big One be? The problem is that while we know the Juan de Fuca will lurch/jump/let go sooner or later, it's very difficult to predict exactly when. Scientists only know that it is not a tremendously long time interval, more in the hundreds of years rather than thousands. So it could be today, or maybe in the year 2200 or something.

Anything we can do to try and learn more about predicting quakes has to be of benefit. We have had some successes (or "hits") and have learned from the "misses" as well, but I think for all of us, this is far more than just a matter of interest or research. It's about trying to contribute to knowledge in n effort to save lives.

Thank you for getting this thread started, Kat.

Going on to that 2.3 you mentioned: I recall it popping up on the map late last evening my time and I think it was in red. They've also supplied waveforms for this one, and this makes me wonder if there has been some kind of sea change (no pun intended) in their thinking, in regards to supplying waveform data for offshore quakes. Whatever the reason, here's one of the waveform charts. Fairly classic-looking seismic forms, from what I understand:

(Image from USGS. Posted for informational and educational purposes.)


[edit on 8/12/08 by JustMike]

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 11:53 AM
Magnitude 3.7 - SOUTH OF ALASKA
2008 December 08 08:38:34 UTC
Offshore, south of Alaska smack on the subduction zone.

I've been getting a consistent precursor for the past 24 hours that I'm trying to narrow down. Normally this one is southern California, but there are central California things going on too, although I don't have the (new to me) stomach pains I had just before the Ludlow EQ. With this region as active as it is lately, it could be confusing the issue here.

Adding in offshore PNW pains, this could all be about that region, probably more off Oregon. I'm not 100% sure yet.

Basically, the precursors are confusing me, so I'm waiting to see if I get one more that is definitive. Nothing is happening right now that I would consider a major intense precursor, just this persistent one. Sorry I can't be more specific right now; I would if I could and I certainly don't want to encourage any wild speculation without much to go on.

Adding: From yesterday.

2008 December 08 06:59:12 UTC
Offshore Santa Cruz, CA

Is it just me, or does it strike anyone else as odd that there are all these small/micro EQ's in the subduction zone along the western U.S.?

[edit on 12/8/08 by kattraxx]

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 01:10 PM
reply to post by kattraxx

I've been reading these posts for months now and have always wondered (and looked but could not find) what the precursor symptoms are. Are these online anywhere? Thanks

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 01:48 PM

Originally posted by kattraxx
Is it just me, or does it strike anyone else as odd that there are all these small/micro EQ's in the subduction zone along the western U.S.?

[edit on 12/8/08 by kattraxx]

Hi Kat,

yes I'd have to agree that it's a bit out of the ordinary, compared to what we have observed (and logged here on this thread) over the past several months. Generally, we have seen quakes in the Mag 3 - 4 range, sometimes in isolation and other times in small groups, usually clustered fairly close together on or around One of the Juan de Fuca's fault lines. I suppose we could go back through the past 75 pages to check, but I doubt that there have been any such examples of series of micro-quakes posted. At least, I don't recall any.

The other oddity was that there were apparently no aftershocks whatsoever following the mag 5.9 off Cal late last month (on Nov 28 I think it was). I would guess that even the most casual followers of the daily news would know that typically there are aftershocks after quakes of that sort of magnitude or higher, but for this one, on a major fault line, there was not a whimper. Not even any micro-quakes. That in itself is a matter of concern, because it means that either (a) that seismic event was highly atypical and very hard to fathom, or (b) there were aftershocks but the data was suppressed. Neither case gives much comfort.

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 02:31 PM
Anyone reading this thread knows that I don't usually post about pains I get as being possible precursors. It's not normally something I can "tie down" to anything specific enough, and living nowhere near the US I cannot link it to that region as some of you can.

But this time I'll post, because it's just so unusual. About three hours ago I started getting sharp pains in mid-right back and shoulder. I have not, as far as I know, done anything to cause this and it's not a classic sign of an approaching viral infection or whatever, so it's of unknown origin. Don't know what to make of it.

I am aware that there has been a lot of talk on this site and elsewhere about predictions for a major PNW quake by 12/12. I can only comment that the unusual activity on the Juan de Fuca plate faults in the past several days is very troubling, but I have nothing that leads me to predict a major event in that area in the next few days. If I pick up on any indicators that lead me to a different view then I'll certainly post about it.


[edit on 8/12/08 by JustMike]

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 02:49 PM
I appreciate what you all are doing. I live in Cal and have been reading this thread pretty much since the beginning. Please post if you think something major is up per Webbots.

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 03:31 PM
Cait and Stoo82 hello and welcome. Cait I am going to check at that link when I finish here.

Stoo82 you can be our Greece reporter on the thread and keep us updated if anything happens in your area.

Mike you simply amaze me.

Katt your doing such a great job with this thread it makes grandma proud

Stupid question here
is there a possibility that the San Andres fault that went through SF and heads out into the waters connect with that Jaun de Fuca Fault?

[edit on 8-12-2008 by observe50]

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 03:53 PM
reply to post by observe50

Stupid question here is there a possibility that the San Andres fault that went through SF and heads out into the waters connect with that Jaun de Fuca Fault?

Not a stupid question at all, Observe, yes it does.

external image

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 04:01 PM
observe50 - hello, thanks for the welcome.

I will happlly update you on any earthquake activity in the Greek area.

I have not noticed any today. Although it looks like there have been around 15, mostley around 3 - 4.5 on the R/S. This is a little more than normal but not by much.

Just to give you an idea of where i am in Greece. Im in a suberb of Athens on a 3rd floor apartment.

new topics

top topics

<< 72  73  74    76  77  78 >>

log in