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.

 

Magnitude 6.5 - Offshore Northern California

page: 1
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Magnitude 6.5 - OFFSHORE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA


earthquake.usgs.gov

Magnitude 6.5
Date-Time

* Sunday, January 10, 2010 at 00:27:39 UTC
* Saturday, January 09, 2010 at 04:27:39 PM at epicenter

Location 40.674°N, 124.655°W
Depth 16.4 km (10.2 miles)
Region OFFSHORE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
Distances

* 35 km (22 miles) WNW (288°) from Ferndale, CA
* 39 km (24 miles) W (261°) from Humboldt Hill, CA
* 41 km (26 miles) WSW (256°) from Bayview, CA
* 43 km (27 miles) WSW (253°) from Eureka, CA
* 361 km (224 miles) NW (312°) from Sacramento, CA

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.7 km (0.4 miles); depth +/- 1.1 km
(visit the link for the full news article)

mod edit:
all caps in title

[edit on Mon Jan 11 2010 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I have a feeling that we will be seeing this on the news soon. It's common to have a 2-3 Earthquake, or even a 4 in California, but this is a 6.5! I know there are a few people here who life around there. Did anyone feel it? Are there any waves yet?

If I get anymore info I will post it up. This is a big one.

Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah

(50 words yet?)

earthquake.usgs.gov
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 06:57 PM
link   
It must be a hell of a time to live on God's Etcha-Sketch.

This is ridiculous eh?

I really am worried that we won't have beautiful California in the near future.

~Keeper



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:00 PM
link   
ya i live in norcal about an hour from the coast, didnt really feel anything im suprised i didnt though, but got gee up and running ready for sum rock n rolling hopefully



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Four after shocks. 3.7, 2.7, 3.8, 3.5, in that order.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Phlynx
 


She is still rumbling with those aftershocks. Lets just hope they are all actually after shocks and not just preshocks for a much bigger.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by whoshotJR
reply to post by Phlynx
 


She is still rumbling with those aftershocks. Lets just hope they are all actually after shocks and not just preshocks for a much bigger.


I hope not, that would horrible if those where preshocks.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:10 PM
link   
No news on Google yet. I expect it to be up soon though.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   
MSNBC has a .line up but no story....

MSNBC

~Keeper



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   
hisz.rsoe.hu...

acording to this site there was a 6.2 on land in northern cali why isnt usgs picking it up?



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   
news.smh.com.au...




A powerful 6.5 magnitude earthquake struck off the coast of northern California on Saturday, the US Geological Survey said.
Local media said police in Ferndale reported some damage to the city hall building, but gave no initial reports of injuries.




hopefully, no more bigger quakes to follow.


[edit on 9-1-2010 by grantbeed]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by alysha.angel
hisz.rsoe.hu...

acording to this site there was a 6.2 on land in northern cali why isnt usgs picking it up?


That's odd. If there's two, that's a bad thing. There was just a 3.6 earthquake, offshore again. If you have firefox, download the equake app thing. That's how I found out so fast. It shakes the browser screen whenever there is an earthquake



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by alysha.angel
hisz.rsoe.hu...

acording to this site there was a 6.2 on land in northern cali why isnt usgs picking it up?


Your post reads like you think USGS are wrong.

Lets face it, that other site uses data originating from USGS somewhere down the line.

Due to dodgy software/conversion of the data is obvious a few details have been offset from the 6.5.

Yes, this may be a conspiracy theory but don't assume everything is one!



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by phoenix103

Originally posted by alysha.angel
hisz.rsoe.hu...

acording to this site there was a 6.2 on land in northern cali why isnt usgs picking it up?


Your post reads like you think USGS are wrong.

Lets face it, that other site uses data originating from USGS somewhere down the line.

Due to dodgy software/conversion of the data is obvious a few details have been offset from the 6.5.

Yes, this may be a conspiracy theory but don't assume everything is one!


Where did you hear him say that it was a conspiracy theory?



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phlynx

Originally posted by phoenix103

Originally posted by alysha.angel
hisz.rsoe.hu...

acording to this site there was a 6.2 on land in northern cali why isnt usgs picking it up?


Your post reads like you think USGS are wrong.

Lets face it, that other site uses data originating from USGS somewhere down the line.

Due to dodgy software/conversion of the data is obvious a few details have been offset from the 6.5.

Yes, this may be a conspiracy theory but don't assume everything is one!


Where did you hear him say that it was a conspiracy theory?


The tone and content of their post indicates they felt USGS was wrong. As the "its a conspiracy theory site" is the usual defence for not considering a situation, i felt it prudent to nip that in the bud beforehand.

I've actually looked at the other site and see no such thing anyway. The recent quakes for California clearly are located offshore.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phlynx

Originally posted by alysha.angel
hisz.rsoe.hu...

acording to this site there was a 6.2 on land in northern cali why isnt usgs picking it up?


That's odd. If there's two, that's a bad thing. There was just a 3.6 earthquake, offshore again. If you have firefox, download the equake app thing. That's how I found out so fast. It shakes the browser screen whenever there is an earthquake


ha i had it installed for over a year now , but i just dont trust the usgs


also the two are to far apart to be mistaken

[edit on 9/1/10 by alysha.angel]



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by alysha.angel

Originally posted by Phlynx

Originally posted by alysha.angel
hisz.rsoe.hu...

acording to this site there was a 6.2 on land in northern cali why isnt usgs picking it up?


That's odd. If there's two, that's a bad thing. There was just a 3.6 earthquake, offshore again. If you have firefox, download the equake app thing. That's how I found out so fast. It shakes the browser screen whenever there is an earthquake


ha i had it installed for over a year now , but i just dont trust the usgs


also the two are to far apart to be mistaken

[edit on 9/1/10 by alysha.angel]


Yes, because they could easily pretend a 6+ magnitude land based quake in California never happened...

How is the weather on your planet?



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by phoenix103

Originally posted by Phlynx

Originally posted by phoenix103

Originally posted by alysha.angel
hisz.rsoe.hu...

acording to this site there was a 6.2 on land in northern cali why isnt usgs picking it up?


Your post reads like you think USGS are wrong.

Lets face it, that other site uses data originating from USGS somewhere down the line.

Due to dodgy software/conversion of the data is obvious a few details have been offset from the 6.5.

Yes, this may be a conspiracy theory but don't assume everything is one!


Where did you hear him say that it was a conspiracy theory?


The tone and content of their post indicates they felt USGS was wrong. As the "its a conspiracy theory site" is the usual defence for not considering a situation, i felt it prudent to nip that in the bud beforehand.

I've actually looked at the other site and see no such thing anyway. The recent quakes for California clearly are located offshore.


Never mind.... Your theory is confirmed.

To everyone else: Info is up.

www.cnn.com...

"(CNN) -- A 6.5-magnitude earthquake has struck off California's northern coast, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

The quake, which ran about 10 miles deep, hit at 4:27 p.m. (7:27 p.m. ET) Saturday, about 25 miles from Eureka.

There were no immediate reports of injuries, according to the U.S. Coast Guard in Humboldt County.

Local officials were taking calls from residents. "

hisz.rsoe.hu... Anyone know what the bluish green around California is? edit: It's in more places than just there. My computer loaded poorly, but it does seem concentrated there for some reason.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by Phlynx]


la2

posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Fox has just reported a 6.5 off coast and a second one of undisclosed magnitude, with ruptured gas mains and power outages.



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
RSOE EDIS

Prepared Citizens - Prepared Communities
About
Preliminary Earthquake Report
Notice! This is a computer-generated report - this event has not reviewed by a seismologist!
EDIS Number: EQ-20100110-165045-US Common Alerting Protocol
Magnitude: 6.2
Mercalli scale: 7
Date-Time [UTC]: 10 January, 2010 at 00:27:43 UTC
Local Date/Time: Sunday, January 10, 2010 at 00:27 at night at epicenter
Location: 40° 51.000, 123° 52.200
Depth: 12 km (7.46 miles)
Region: North America
Country: United States
Distances: 10.17 km (6.32 miles) of Blue Lake, California

This quake info is odd if its real but I'm betting its just picking up the 6.5 because of the time stamps being almost the same.




top topics



 
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join