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.


Quake Watch 2010

page: 97
<< 94  95  96    98  99  100 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 07:03 AM
Cumulative figures for Baja to midnight on 10th April

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 07:05 AM
Solomon Islands 7.1 downgraded to 6.8

Magnitude 6.8

* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 09:40:30 UTC
* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 08:40:30 PM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 10.913°S, 161.130°E
Depth 60.2 km (37.4 miles)
Distances 100 km (65 miles) WSW of Kira Kira, San Cristobal, Solomon Isl.
205 km (130 miles) SE of HONIARA, Guadalcanal, Solomon Islands
245 km (150 miles) S of Auki, Malaita, Solomon Islands
2025 km (1260 miles) NNE of BRISBANE, Queensland, Australia

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 07:21 AM


* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 10:40:41 UTC
* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 08:40:41 AM at epicenter

Location 58.732°S, 25.717°W
Depth 106.5 km (66.2 miles)

* 54 km (34 miles) ENE (57°) from Bristol Island, South Sandwich Islands
* 242 km (150 miles) SSE (159°) from Visokoi Island, South Sandwich Islands
* 2158 km (1341 miles) SE (124°) from STANLEY, Falkland Islands
* 2825 km (1755 miles) ESE (121°) from Punta Arenas, Chile

[edit on 11-4-2010 by MoorfNZ]

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 07:50 AM
U.S. Geological Survey: Twitter Earthquake Detector (TED)

The U.S. Geological Survey is using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to support a student who’s investigating social Internet technologies as a way to quickly gather information about recent earthquakes. In this exploratory effort, the USGS is developing a system that gathers real-time, earthquake-related messages from the social networking site Twitter and applies place, time, and key word filtering to gather geo-located accounts of shaking. This approach provides rapid first-impression narratives and, potentially, photos from people at the hazard’s location. The potential for earthquake detection in populated but sparsely seismicly-instrumented regions is also being investigated. Social Internet technologies are providing the general public with anecdotal earthquake hazard information before scientific information has been published from authoritative sources. People local to an event are able to publish information via these technologies within seconds of their occurrence. In contrast, depending on the location of the earthquake, scientific alerts can take between 2 to 20 minutes. By adopting and embracing these new technologies, the USGS potentially can augment its earthquake response products and the delivery of hazard information.

[edit on 11-4-2010 by MoorfNZ]

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 08:23 AM


* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 13:02:14 UTC
* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 10:02:14 PM at epicenter

Location 29.509°N, 130.395°E
Depth 40.5 km (25.2 miles)


* 233 km (145 miles) S (184°) from Kagoshima, Kyushu, Japan
* 288 km (179 miles) SSW (201°) from Miyazaki, Kyushu, Japan
* 369 km (229 miles) S (173°) from Nagasaki, Kyushu, Japan
* 943 km (586 miles) SSE (160°) from SEOUL, South Korea

[edit on 11-4-2010 by MoorfNZ]

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 08:42 AM
Magnitude 3.7 SONORA, MEXICO


* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 13:29:05 UTC
* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 06:29:05 AM at epicenter

Location 31.884°N, 114.877°W
Depth 28.7 km (17.8 miles)


* 50 km (31 miles) SSE (154°) from Guadalupe Victoria, Baja California, Mexico
* 65 km (40 miles) S (188°) from San Luis Río Colorado, Sonora, Mexico
* 69 km (43 miles) S (189°) from San Luis, AZ
* 214 km (133 miles) ESE (109°) from Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico

[edit on 11-4-2010 by MoorfNZ]

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 10:08 AM
Good Morning - I see it has been busy - and we have a cool new avitar :-)

MAP 3.3 2010/04/11 14:56:19 32.146 -115.086 10.5 16 km ( 10 mi) S of Guadalupe Victoria, Mexico
MAP 3.3 2010/04/11 14:29:05 32.163 -115.379 4.4 29 km ( 18 mi) WSW of Guadalupe Victoria, Mexico
MAP 3.0 2010/04/11 14:14:11 32.143 -115.355 32.6 28 km ( 18 mi) SW of Guadalupe Victoria, Mexico

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 10:38 AM
I have a question.... What is up with the downgrading all the time with large quakes? I find it interesting that we have very sensitive equipment that brings forth a magnitude and USGS downgrades them all the time..

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 10:41 AM
Good night... it's 3.30am Monday morning and it's a bit quiet so I'm zzzzz'ing!

Send me good vibrations if anything interesting occurs

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 10:56 AM
reply to post by alexgia

Hi there, The reason this is - is because the original post for the USGS is automatic from the instruments... They are then reviewed by a seismologist for accuracy. While the instruments are very sensitive they are only instruments and subject in inaccuracy.

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 01:08 PM
reply to post by MoorfNZ

Interesting but I personally feel they could better spend their money elsewhere.

Twitter! Yuk!!!!!

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 01:20 PM
reply to post by Anmarie96

TY I understand that... here is my concern... these instruments used to decide the magnitude of a quake are impartial, they just record the information. USGS, made up of people controlled by TPTB are not. I just am saying this downgrading is becoming something interesting. I can't help but wonder why....

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 01:45 PM
1314 earthquakes..

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 05:33 PM
Magnitude 6.2
Date-Time Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 22:08:10 UTC
Monday, April 12, 2010 at 12:08:10 AM at epicenter

Location 37.078°N, 3.470°W
Depth 616.7 km (383.2 miles)
Region SPAIN
Distances 24 km (15 miles) SE (129°) from Granada, Spain
93 km (58 miles) ENE (64°) from Malaga, Spain
95 km (59 miles) WNW (287°) from Almeria, Spain
372 km (231 miles) S (177°) from MADRID, Spain

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 5.2 km (3.2 miles); depth +/- 4.6 km (2.9 miles)
Parameters NST=251, Nph=270, Dmin=285 km, Rmss=0.91 sec, Gp= 40°,
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=6
Source U.S. Geological Survey, National Earthquake Information Center:
World Data Center for Seismology, Denver

Event ID us2010uycs

Magnitude 3.7
Date-Time Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 21:38:47 UTC
Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 05:38:47 PM at epicenter

Location 19.026°N, 64.649°W
Depth 17.7 km (11.0 miles)
Distances 48 km (30 miles) NW (314°) from Settlement, Anegada, British Virgin Islands
63 km (39 miles) N (352°) from East End-Long Look, Tortola, British Virgin Islands
64 km (40 miles) N (357°) from ROAD TOWN, British Virgin Islands
156 km (97 miles) ENE (63°) from Carolina, PR

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.8 km (0.5 miles); depth +/- 1.2 km (0.7 miles)
Parameters NST= 14, Nph= 20, Dmin=46.7 km, Rmss=0.23 sec, Gp=223°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=0
Source Puerto Rico Seismic Network, University of Puerto Rico

Event ID pr10101005

[edit on 11-4-2010 by Anmarie96]

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 05:34 PM
Earthquake Details
Magnitude 6.2
Date-Time Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 22:08:10 UTC
Monday, April 12, 2010 at 12:08:10 AM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

.... oops - I'll eventually get quicker at this "post" thingy...


[edit on 11-4-2010 by Casing]

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 05:49 PM
reply to post by alexgia

I am not sure if can explain this adequately but I will try. First a minimum of three recorders is needed before the location of an earthquake can be pinpointed. The more recorders (stations) that report an earthquake the more accurate it's location becomes.

The waves that create the wiggles on the recorder pass through the earth. They do this by basically moving the recorder, and a mass in the recorder is used to record the inertia. You are probably better to read Wikipedia than have me attempt to explain.

Anyway, despite the fact that these are 'impartial' and just record the information, there are many steps that can affect the results. Things like the current pressure, or wind pressure, and the suddenness of the quake in particular. How to explain? If the quake is distant the waves might be 'slower' and the slower motion produces a lower acceleration than a sharp shock. Because of all the variables that can affect this it needs a human to look at the data and see if the computerised system is making sense. We are still better at some things than computers! Take a look at the document "Seismic Sensors and their Calibration" which is a link off Wikipedia, if you have Word (if you don't then let me know and I will put up a pdf version for you)

By the way quakes are not always revised down. They can be revised upwards as well.

Hope that helps, and lastly I think that USGS are not likely to downgrade something just to allay fears. It just would not be in their scientific interests to do so and they would very soon get caught out by other networks.

Edit: I have been reading through that document on Calibration. If you avoid the complex maths it is very interesting. In particular I found this:

Broadband seismometers are to some degree sensitive to magnetic fields because all thermally self-compensated spring materials are magnetic. This may be noticeable when seismometers are operated in industrial areas or in the vicinity of dc-powered railway lines. Magnetic inter-ferences by trains must especially be suspected when the long-period noise follows a regular timetable. Magnetic storms have frequently been seen in seismograms. At a very quiet site, the natural background variations of the geomagnetic field may limit the long-period resolu-tion of a vertical sensor when its magnetic sensitivity exceeds 0.5 m/s2 per Tesla (Forbriger 2007, Forbriger et al. 2008). It is apparently difficult for manufacturers to avoid this level of magnetic sensitivity. Seismometers can also accidentally acquire a remanent magnetization during transportation or installation. Magnetic shielding (see 5.5.4) is therefore recommended at quiet sites.

[edit on 11/4/2010 by PuterMan]

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 06:29 PM
reply to post by Anmarie96

That one's right next to the Sierra Nevada Observatory, hope it hasn't broken anything, although it doesn't seem uncommon for Quakes in the area

Magnitude 4.9

* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 22:54:04 UTC
* Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 07:54:04 PM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 31.966°S, 67.605°W
Depth 123.9 km (77.0 miles)
Distances 100 km (60 miles) ESE of San Juan, Argentina
155 km (95 miles) NE of Mendoza, Argentina
190 km (115 miles) NW of San Luis, Argentina
885 km (550 miles) WNW of BUENOS AIRES, Argentina
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 15.2 km (9.4 miles); depth +/- 2.2 km (1.4 miles)
Parameters NST=116, Nph=168, Dmin=443.1 km, Rmss=0.72 sec, Gp=122°,
M-type=body wave magnitude (Mb), Version=6


Event ID us2010uycz

[edit on 11/4/10 by Discotech]

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 06:45 PM
---------------SPAIN------------ not allowed to mention what size because that will be nit picked to death ohhh it was a 6.000900 not a 6.0008 , so lets just back to reading and reading, data and more data , yup more data,, or bring in the charts,, yup thats data alright ,
Really getting tired of it.

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 06:47 PM

It's getting a bit too close to home for me.

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 07:08 PM
reply to post by Isis_Is_I

616.7km close?

Bit too deep to be a bother I think.

new topics

top topics

<< 94  95  96    98  99  100 >>

log in