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.

 

Quake Watch 2010

page: 207
123
<< 204  205  206    208  209  210 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Not unless there's volcanic activity or maybe the quake opened up a pocket of gasses...

I hope it's not volcanic. that would be bad. very bad...




posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Banks Peninsula started as an island off the east coast of the South Island, built successively by the two large Lyttleton, then Akaroa volcanoes. Sediments from the Southern Alps progressively filled the gap, and the volcanoes became a peninsula 20,000 years ago.

So, yes, there are volcanoes v. close to Christchurch - although volcanic action isn't usually associated down here on South Island, more with North Island.

Interesting that the peninsual formed c. 20,000 yrs ago and they also say the "hidden fault" hasn't been active in 16,000 yrs... what's 4,000 yrs in geological time!!?!



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   
SCIENTISTS believe not one but three earthquakes just seconds apart ripped a 13-kilometre gash across the Canterbury Plains and unleashed energy equivalent to 67 Hiroshima nuclear bombs speeding into Christchurch.

www.smh.com.au...


I don't know if anyone has read about this. But I found it very interesting and scary!



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Canterbury has received 270 aftershocks of magnitude 3 or above so far since Saturday's destructive 7.1 earthquake, according to GNS Science.

And I think I've felt 269 of them!!

[edit on 7-9-2010 by MoorfNZ]



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by aorAki

Originally posted by muzzy



We know so little about this Planet, we only been here 10,000 years ourselves




oops missed a 0,

100,000 years


give or take 10,000 "The dawn of modern homo sapiens occurred in Africa between 60,000 and 80,000 years ago."

[edit on 7-9-2010 by muzzy]



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12voltz
Is this normal after a quake?
Sulphur smell' reported in Christchurch

www.sbs.com.au...



My guess is that as a result of liquifaction lots of anoxic sediment has come to the surface.
Same smell as when we did a sand profile of the estuary last year.

The Lytellton Volcanic Complex, well, the whole Banks Peninsula Volcanic Field is between 6 and 11 million years old.


A .pdf on the natural history:
The natural history of Banks Peninsula

Intraplate Volcanism...

There is no likelihood of the volcanoes becoming involved. They're long gone.

[edit on 7-9-2010 by aorAki]



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by MoorfNZ
 


Heard some geologist from Cal. name of Schwartz?? on RNZ this afternoon talking about the 1989 San Francisco 6.9 quake, this will go on for about 1-2 months, but there will be the odd 5 mag quakes for up to a year. I understand the strike/slip faulting is similar to the San Andreas Fault.

Better get used to it , or move.


Sorry for the bad news.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Yep - see my post on the other Chch quake thread - my fear has turned to defiance and I'm "managing" the quake reaction far better (except when coal train running half speed and full runs by!!!)

So many people have asked us if we are going to leave the area. No way. This is our home, we know we have to deal with the quakes and we need to deal with it. If anything, this should have woken up Cantabrians and made them think hard about their spot on this planet - I think here in Canterbury we're a bit complacent re quakes compared to rest of country.. make that "WERE" more complacent


Friends of mine flew up to Auckland yesterday, they couldn't take any more and their kids petrified, they wanted a break. While everyone handles things differently, I find it hard to see how that will help as even when they return in 10 days they'll have to get used to aftershocks...



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Worrying.



GNS Science says it was magnitude 5.1 at 7.49am on Wednesday, at a depth of 6km, 10km north-west of Diamond Harbour. GNS says the aftershock was felt so strongly because it was closer to the city. Geologist Mark Quigley from the University of Canterbury says the magnitude 5.1 earthquake, may have been caused by another previously unknown fault. He says the initial earthquake may be putting pressure on adjacent faults.


www.radionz.co.nz...



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by MoorfNZ
 





So many people have asked us if we are going to leave the area. No way.


You go girl! Stand your ground but please be safe (I know you will)


No quakes are gonna get our Moorf!



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Humm - I wonder if something is brewing here now.

5.1 2010/09/08 19:26:00 44.371 149.839 35.0 KURIL ISLANDS
5.5 2010/09/08 17:39:42 44.760 149.665 10.0 KURIL ISLANDS



posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Oh boy, North Island again..

5.3 GeoNet / 5.2 USGS - North Island, NZ

Universal Time September 9 2010 at 4:18
NZ Standard Time Thursday, September 9 2010 at 4:18 pm
Latitude, Longitude 40.40°S, 176.73°E
Focal Depth 20 km
Richter magnitude 5.3
Region Hawke's Bay
Location

* 10 km south-east of Porangahau
* 50 km south of Waipukurau
* 80 km south of Hastings
* 190 km north-east of Wellington



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by MoorfNZ
 

I didn't feel it here in Raumati Beach, but some did MM5


www.geonet.org.nz...


edit on 9-9-2010 by muzzy because: add link



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 03:10 AM
link   
Another 6..


6.1 Bio-Bio, Chile


Magnitude 6.1
Date-Time

* Thursday, September 09, 2010 at 07:28:02 UTC
* Thursday, September 09, 2010 at 03:28:02 AM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 37.005°S, 73.368°W
Depth 17.6 km (10.9 miles)
Region OFFSHORE BIO-BIO, CHILE
Distances 35 km (20 miles) SW of Concepcion, Bio-Bio, Chile
70 km (45 miles) NNE of Lebu, Bio-Bio, Chile
105 km (65 miles) WNW of Los Angeles, Bio-Bio, Chile
465 km (290 miles) SSW of SANTIAGO, Region Metropolitana, Chile



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 03:13 AM
link   
I know that this is "tiny" compared to what has been happening around the world lately but does anyone have any info on the tremor that was felt in Windhoek, Namibia yesterday at around 4pm local time? I have lived here for over 40 years and this is my first and it was even on the local news last night, telling us there is no reason to worry! Just the fact that they say we shouldn't worry worries me! Is this normal, is there a fault line here we (locally) don't know about/aren't aware of? We do have an extinct volcano (the Mukarob) south of Windhoek! Just wondering!


edit on 9/9/10 by wiser3 because: to add "local time"




edit on 9/9/10 by wiser3 because: spelling



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 03:42 AM
link   
Another on North Island, same place, Hawke's Bay

4.3

Universal Time September 9 2010 at 8:25
NZ Standard Time Thursday, September 9 2010 at 8:25 pm
Latitude, Longitude 40.41°S, 176.73°E
Focal Depth 25 km
Richter magnitude 4.3
Region Hawke's Bay
Location

* 20 km south-east of Porangahau
* 50 km south of Waipukurau
* 80 km south of Hastings
* 190 km north-east of Wellington



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by wiser3
 


Can you identify the earthquake please?

I can find nothing with Namibia as a location in the past 7 days. I have checked the lists for quakes between -17 and -28 latitude but don't see anything so I assume that this was a local one under 4.5 and thus has nor registered on the USGS lists.

There was a 3.6 in Mozambique on 2010-09-07 14:10:47.1 UTC, but I think that is too small and too far away from you to be felt in Windhoek being 1,000 or miles away.

There are no plate boundaries in your area so any seismic activity will be due to the local geology. Interesting place, surrounded by mountains and quite elevated. I must take a further look at it!

According to the USGS, who appear to be responsible for seismic reporting in Namibia(??), the last earthquake was this one

This however is the link to the Namibian geological site On this site you can find this information:


Six seismological stations will form the National Seismological Network. Two stations (Tsumeb and Windhoek) are in operation and four stations (RUndu, Kamanjab, Aus and Ariamsvlei) will be installed by the end of 2005.


Tsumeb is the the station that feeds into NEIC/IRIS.

I can find no links on the site to any seismic information in the form of earthquake lists.


edit on 9/9/2010 by PuterMan because: To add info about The Geological Survey Of Namibia.



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Hi Puterman

Thanks for the reply, I am quite new to the site and all the EQ data/info but have been trying to keep up to date and get myself informed.
Question: What do you mean by can I identify the EQ? Sorry to sound so dumb!
I do believe that it was very small, it happened yesterday 08 Sep while I was driving home from work, a friend sent me a message asking if Ifelt it which I read once Igot home. Left office at around 4 and reached home by 4.15. I actually thought that he had been making a joke but he visited later and while he was at my place his mom called to find out where he was because of the item on local TV news stating that residents of Windhoek should stay calm.
Sorry I can't provide more info, but knew that I would get some from those in the know!



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by wiser3
 


I just added some bits to my post above. No I don't think you will be able to identify the earthquake as it must have been local and less than 4.5 magnitude (and therefore nothing to be concerned about).

As I said above there does not appear to be any way to get information from the area on these smaller quakes.

It's a bit of a pity really. I think all earthquakes everywhere in the world should be recorded in a central database. (Preferably not run by scientists so they can't fiddle it / decide to discard data because it does not 'fit')

Sorry I can't help you further. If I happen to find anything exciting about the geology of the area I will post, but I think you will just have to rely on the local papers.



new topics

top topics



 
123
<< 204  205  206    208  209  210 >>

log in

join