Whats going on at yellowstone?

reply to post by PuterMan


I just use this calcuator.

www.fourmilab.ch...

I've used it to look at other swarms and didn't find much other than for 1985. Crud- now I want to check something else. 85 not perhelion but uplift was substainal. Like a sunspot in my eye, I will keep seeing a map of Hudson Bay fading in and out of my mind.

Statistically there may be small swarms that correllated with tides. But it would be a tiny fraction. This two year cycle was especially influential because of the occurance in early January.

The mining quakes come from the east. And they are barely noticable in the west. However minor the difference, it means that energy is being absorded by the mass of Yellowstone. Makes me wonder why the YVO was so interested in Shirakawa's observation of mining. Maybe the YVO doesn't think it's a good idea but they've been trumped by another bueracracy in America's rush for energy. I understand the tiny amounts of energies involved. And the vastness of material being affected. But it doesn't take much of a vibration to start an avalanche. If it's been scientifical noted that the moon's gentle tug on ground water is causing earthquakes, what is explosions with magnitudes +- 3M going to do to the seismic network of Yellowstone. These explosions are not earthquakes. They cannot be expected to have the same outcomes as these explosions. An earthquake is a sudden release. A snap. These explosions are long chains of repeative burts. These vibrations travel through the ground different than a regular earthquake. These explosions are completey on the surface and aren't lateral. I'm certain there would be great landslides involved as material settled prolonging the occurence. I have absolutely no proof that they are dangerous and a threat. But I am defienatley not sure of the soundness of experimenting with the geological theory behind the safety of these blasts within about 200km (is that right) of the world's largest volcano. Did you know Hudson Bay was a formed by a chain of three calderas?

reply to post by Robin Marks


no ..wasent aware that hudson bay was formed by caldera's... recently found out that the napels bay in italy is also an huge caldera...and active.. note....vesuvius is connected with it...not so far away from it...

sideway... long valley is active to!

earthquake.usgs.gov...


[edit on 1-3-2010 by ressiv]

[edit on 1-3-2010 by ressiv]

Originally posted by jvz123
reply to post by westcoast

 

Actually, didn't we establish that the "double tap" were p-wave and s-waves from other quakes or mine blasts?

If someone in this thread tried to establish that, then I most definitely missed it, because I would have disagreed profusely.

One of the things from GEE seismosgrams as they come in you can tell right away is whether they are likely local (closer to the station) or distant (teleseisisms). You can tell this because of the character of the first peak: when it is abrupt and sharp, it is almost always local. When it is smoother, with a clear definition between the P and S wave, establishing some kind of distance between the epicenter and the station, then it is likely a distant quake.

The double taps we are referring to were local, no question about it in my mind, as they were all abrupt, sharp peaks, just like the rest of the quakes in the swarms.

reply to post by ressiv


Don't let me steer you wrong. I was ribbing Puterman so he'd make me a map. It is my soley my hypothesis that Hudson Bay was formed by volcanoes. I won't explain here. But here's a link to my You Tube channel which explains it all.

www.youtube.com...

I'm adding this video of tsunami because it reminded me of the tide. It was as if you just sped the process. Everything is connected. And water makes the connection. El Nino=warm water. Evaporated water falls on the Andeas, Conception= increased rainfall. Rainfall feeds aquifers= increased groundwater pressure. Lunar Tidal forces increase pressure and change flows=lubricated faults. Lubricated faults=earthquakes. I think it not a coinsidence the moon was hours away from perigee. NOTE. The video I was going to post has been removed. So just imagine the tide going in and out really fast.

I got water on the brain. I'm obsessed with water. Especially ice water. And vulcanized rubber. Hudson Bay is in Canada. Canada has lots of frozen water. Canada has 70% of the world's frozen fresh water. I am Canadian. Canada rules the ice. CANADA HOCKEY GOLD

YMR. There's been a dozen or so mirco-quakes. We'll call it a micro-swarm. Or a nano-swarm. People are so hung up on labels. Call it steam(geysers, damn old faithful webcam is down),ocean, lakes, rivers, hockey rinks (CANADA # 1), or ice, it's all water.

I was just looking around Yellowstone and ran into this.
www.seis.utah.edu...
www.iris.edu...

YDC is normally very quiet, with no apparent human noise. Has
anyone seen anything like this before?

All seismic networks are down at Yellowstone.

Perhaps the activity at Yellowstone isn't a reaction to the 8.8. Perhaps it sensitive to the perigean spring tide. Even though it isn't near the ocean, the moon affects all water including the ground water. The quake happened at the closest perigee of the moon this year and also on the full moon. That could affect the ground water enough to cause quake activity to pick up. What say all of you?

reply to post by shutterbugw


GEE is still working here. Looks like the University site is working
also. What can't you see?

I say were living in a time where every plate is becoming active at once for one reason or another, there are just to many quakes happening back to back.
Plus it seems that the up life ceasing seems to getting a great deal of attention.

The general uplift and subsidence of the Yellowstone caldera is of scientific importance and will continue to be monitored closely by YVO staff.

An article on the recent uplift episode at Yellowstone and discussion of long-term ground deformation at Yellowstone and elsewhere can be found at: volcanoes.usgs.gov...

in other words there is something that has changed or is unusual. is this how I am reading it?
is it with in context?

IMO, the Pacific plate is twisting counter clockwise--not just sliding east. This is why Japan and that region is more active as is the bottom right tip of the plate hitting South America.

If this theory holds true, you will see stronger quakes near and north of Japan and Alaska. (as well as more quakes south of the 8.8).

Just going on past data, and this seems to show twisting of the plate...

IMO, YS may calm down due to this--temporarily.

reply to post by Pharyax


Well, Taiwan just got a quake, still waiting on the USGS report. And as we speak, one appears to be hitting somewhere near the Mariana Islands.

Edit: was just south of Taiwan, 5.8, Phillipines.

That one near Guam (Mariana Islands), looks to be pretty good size though.

[edit on Mon Mar 1st 2010 by TrueAmerican]

Originally posted by Robin Marks
reply to post by ressiv

 

It is my soley my hypothesis that Hudson Bay was formed by volcanoes.

It would seem not. I have found after spending a long time on this, someone else who says it was formed by (1) caldera.

Never look at the topic review without saving your reply. I had a long reply written out and I have lost it.

Anyway basically I find some potential contradictions, I think, between the plate movements and the Canadian Shield, as promulgated by those that supposedly know, so when I get my head round these I will get back to you.

Roald - even though you tagged me as a respected foe, which i just saw (why and what does that mean - gee thanks - i don't consider you a foe) did you feel that quake?

New update: volcanoes.usgs.gov...

shutterbug - the last to paragraphs have been standard for the past few years. volcanoes.usgs.gov...

[edit on 1-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

Hopefully, Shirakawa quiet because he is working on the neat stuff he said he was working on and not because They issue a Gag Ordered on him!!!!!

[edit on 1-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

Originally posted by Anmarie96
Roald - even though you tagged me as a respected foe, which i just saw (why and what does that mean - gee thanks - i don't consider you a foe) did you feel that quake?

New update: volcanoes.usgs.gov...

shutterbug - the last to paragraphs have been standard for the past few years. volcanoes.usgs.gov...

[edit on 1-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

Aii.. Anmarie. No, I clicked the wrong button. It was an accident. Guess the pointer was over the button while I was having coffee. Probably clicked it with my cup. I do not consider you a foe. I thought I was able to undo the click? Sorry for that.

If anyone is interested in how to predict earthquakes accurately then you might want to visit my 22 YouTube videos.

www.youtube.com...

I show how and why earthquakes of all magnitudes are detectable for days and weeks before they strike in the videos.

I also talk about how to use man-made earthquakes as weapons of mass destruction to destroy cities and economies of countries from hundreds to thousands of miles away. I also show how to stop this type of terrorism and the accidental man-made earthquakes that are currently killing people in different countries. I also show how to reduce earthquake magnitudes and much more, I hope you will find my science videos interesting.

Visit my YouTube Channel page also at:

www.youtube.com.../a/f/0/mKbd9eDq6bo

Some of my favorited videos show the amount of destruction in the cities of Sichuan China, Bam Iran and Kobe, Japan.

reply to post by PuterMan

For it to be 'spreading' faster than the rest of the main body would this not imply lift or tilt? If not then how do you account for this. Do you have any map or other reference you could post (a link to) so we can see what this entails?

Here are some links.

Yellowstone: Plumes, Plums, Norris Disturbance, and Scoping the Earth.

There are also a short info here at Intraplate deformation and microplate tectonics of the Yellowstone hot spot and surrounding western U.S. interior.

California Science & Technology News

And you can download one of the reports here JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 114, B04410, doi:10.1029/2008JB005940, 2009

Edited to remove a fluffy intro.

[edit on 2/3/2010 by Roald]

reply to post by Roald


ok - good - worried there - did you feel the jolt 5.8 last i looked?

Now, after a few days here - Things are not evening out. Yellowstone is humming again. Vibrations deep in the earth rocking the plates ever so slightly, which is bad. Alaska should have sounded off to this in some small degree - it always does but has not as of now. All the other regions are fairly quiet whereas over the past few weeks they squeaked - now - to quiet. - I can not give scientific information in long lengthy speach here now. I just know what is typical and what is not from the visual from years and years of observation - and if I have to dig out the archives if i had time I would and post - best way i guess to do that would be links -

now mr. scientist above from Kansas - you scare me. maybe back to the sci-fi cannel for you.

Someday - if i ever have time, i'm gonna figure out how to use spell check on this site so i don't have to cut and paste

Good Link - I just got through reading another just hours ago in print much more indepth - i don't remember where I printed it from at the moment - been out of touch here for awhile - i will look tomorrow at work and see if I saved it there

[edit on 1-3-2010 by Anmarie96]

reply to post by PuterMan


Wow. I'm not the only one who thinks Hudson Bay is not a sinkhole. But it isn't one caldera. Even the smallest and youngest of the three, the perfect arc in the southeast, is so big it's almost inconceiveable. I thought it was a single event as well, but that's why I didn't see it for it really was. I'm so glad you are taking my request seriously. All I wanted was a map with the circles and an intersecting line to show direction of plate movement. I didn't expect you to follow me all the way down the rabbit hole.

On that note, here's a 100 year old movie.

www.youtube.com...

(My grampa's name was Percy)(Too bad parents don't name their kids Percy and Cecil anymore.)

Sorry for the diversion. But whenever anyone tries to understand me, I ask them if they're prepared to suspend disbelief and see things in a new way. I only allowed myself to post this purely off topic joy because I found a gem. It's a recent interview with Jake Lowenstern. I listened very critically, but in spite of this, I can honestly say I have no major disagreements with anything he said. The only thing I would add, is that there is a missing element to Yellowstone's cooling system. Glaciation. Over the last ten thousand years or so, there has been no glacier covering the volcano. During the last ice age, the sheet would have compressed the crust and not allowed for as much expansion and contraction. Also without ice sheet, the chamber wouldn't transfer as much heat out of the system. I just think this needs to be taken into account when assessing risk.

www.youtube.com...

Dear Zachi, you mentioned the moon. If you want to know more, just go back a hundred or so pages and read my continued and repetative observations and thoughts on the moon and the geyser system.

Just one last thing Puterman, eruptions like the ones that caused the calderas in the Canadian Shield were common in Earth's early formation. My Mega eruptions are similiar to solar ejections of plasma. Not long after there was enough water to form oceans, there would have been many water induced explosions. It is commonly accepted that Santorini exploded in this way. Throwing massive boulders great distances. Early in earth's evolution, ejections threw material into near space, helping to form our atmosphere. The farther out into space the ejection, the greater the volume of gas to form the atmosphere. My crazy, screwed up, whacked out ideas have even led me to believe the moon was formed not by a planetary object smashing into the earth and peeling away a great chucks and debris, which eventually became our moon. Rather, I believe the moon formed as a result of repeated Mega eruptions which threw massive quanities of magma into space.

Volcanoes are the Pheonix. Volcanoes are the story. They created all the land and provided all the nutrients in cycle. The first bacterial life probably started out on a volcanic vent in an ocean. They produced our atmosphere and water came as gases condensed and cooled. But with all that creative force, they come with the power of ultimate destruction. My six year old son and I have been debating the wisdom of the "Atlantians" in building their civilization on a volcano. His interest was ignited by a Spongebob cartoon. Volcanoes can utterly devestate a ecosystem and change the earth's climate. But even as we seen in the area around Mt. St. Helens, nature returns and is renewed by the open space. Life rushes back in.

Volcanoes are life. Volcanoes are death. Earth wouldn't be earth without a near perfect balance. It would be Venus or Mars.
The story of life on earth is the story of the Pheonix.

Sorry. It's a deep burrow.

reply to post by Anmarie96

You know what, I was so busy replying here that I did not really feel it. The quake was also located far north and I'm in Baguio City.

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by Roald

 

I am curious. Why do we worry if the quakes do not move North? I got the impression from Mike and others that we should worry if they do. I am confused.

As I told kennylee, I would be worried if the quakes do not move north because the rupture in Chile obviously have reduced the stress in that particular place of the fault, and as a result, increased the stress in other parts of the fault and by that brought those places closer to failure. So having quakes moving north now, would in my opinion be just good because that would release the stress that this M8.8 and following numerous aftershock might have build up along the fault, and we might then just see quakes moving north with a decreasing intensity. If it do not move north, but are more or less stationary as we see it right now, then I'm worried that we might be in for another "big one" in the near future further up the Nazca Plate.

Edited to ad that the quakes at Ryukyo Islands in Japan and Santa Cruz Islands in my opinion may have more effect on the North American Plate than the Nazca Plate since we are here talking about an interaction between the Pacific Plate and the Eurasian and Australian Plate. On the other hand, no one can be sure, and if those quakes should effect the Nazca Plate, then we might see the effect someplace between North Peru and Panama. I just base this on what I know about the tectonic plates movement and the ongoing unrest in Chile.

[edit on 2/3/2010 by Roald]