What might really be happening in Washington State?

Hello Westcoast. I just watched this vid and after I picked my jaw off of the ground and stuck my eyeballs back in their respective sockets I Immediately thought of the pics you posted a few days ago with the weird shadow/clouds. Check this vid out and see if what is caught on cam is similar to what you saw...The shadow effect is shown in the last few seconds of the vid, but I recommend you watch the whole thing....this vid also has info about our little "rumble"

Just experienced a small earthquake or something......loud rumbling and some vibration. Lasted about 3-4 sec.

Will update with any info.


ETA: Nada on the seismos.....so I don't know what to think. It most definately was NOT something local like a large vehicle, etc. My whole house shook...dogs reacted. Didn't seem like a sonic boom. *shrug*

Anyone else experience it????

reply to post by westcoast


Wasn't there a thread started about someone in New York who experienced that same type of thing earlier today?

ETA: Here's a link to the thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hello everyone,

Saw these posts and wanted to share that I was talking to a friend who was visiting someone in upstate New York, and she mentioned feeling the ground move and some shaking. She was not sure what it was, but it was this morning around 10 am Pacific Time. She used to live in LA, and from what I heard it felt like an earthquake.

Strange. I could not find any earthquakes, so not really sure what it could be..no shaking here in NW Oregon, at least not today.

Okay....so this is some interesting stuff.

Ties into a lot of what I have been experiencing here. Interesting theory at the end of the page:

Website about odd stuff in washington and resonance

reply to post by westcoast




That is really, really interesting. I remember earlier this year I kept saying I was feeling shaking, and was even keeping track of times I was feeling it so I (and others) could check the siesmos...but we never saw anything. I was frustrated because I *know* I was feeling it.

I just remembered something else...about a month ago (?) when I came home, my son said that something really loud had happened that was shaking the entire apartment building and vibrating the windows. He thought it was jets, but it was so ridiculously loud and vibrating everything that it freaked him out. I'm so use to reading reports like that on the internet that I barely gave it another thought.

Weird how fast humans adjust to changes, huh? A year ago that would've freaked me out, but now I was like, "Oh yeah...that's been going on for a bit now. No biggie."

reply to post by onthelookout


Yup...we are very adaptable. Kinda how we can learn to live with chronic pain. So much so, that end up having a hard time even answering the question: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how much does it hurt?" If asked that the first day of the pain we may have said a 5 or 6, but after months of it we are hard pressed to answer. Probably give it a 1 or 2.

Still no quake recorded around that time, but I swear my house keeps 'settling' more than usuall and I found this mess on my local seismo. Although, it isn't showing up on any others. Unfortunately, the next nearest is about 30 miles away, so its hard to rule out local noise this way:

local seismo cmw on the pnsn network

main source for when that link times out

reply to post by westcoast


Yes! The adaptability to chronic pain...that is so true. It becomes the new baseline to which you compare anything new, so deceiving as to the reality of what is truly happening.

You got me thinking about that Longitudinal Scalar EM Waves link that you supplied in another thread.

It's interesting that they use filters on the seismographs (I just realized that the "i" before "e" except after "c" rule doesn't seem to apply in the word "seismograph"...moving along) to cut out these energy bursts before an earthquake when it is potentially a precursor to a quake that could be used to our advantage. (Of course, it could be expensive not to since it permanently damages the seismos.)

Could those weird markings that you've been noticing on the seismographs be energy bursts that are so HUGE that they bypass the filters they've put on them to protect them from that very thing?

reply to post by onthelookout


Yup....my thoughts. I mean, no one has been able to figure out what they are. They seem to be some sort of elecrical surge...possibly solar..what about scalar? I think there is just as much possibility. The other place I've seen that is in Arkansas and mammoth Lakes.

Yes....I know. A moderate quake in the Seattle area. *sigh*

Not too concerned. These are not common, but also not all that rare. Given the location and depth, this would most likely be originating from the same fault as the previous 6.7 nisqually quake over ten years ago. (NOT the subduction zone....but that is all guess work. )

Magnitude

3.2



Date-Time

Thursday, September 22, 2011 at 20:22:06 UTC
Thursday, September 22, 2011 at 01:22:06 PM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones



Location

47.450°N, 122.081°W



Depth

24.5 km (15.2 miles) set by location program



Region

SEATTLE-TACOMA URBAN AREA, WASHINGTON



Distances

1 km (0 miles) NE (55°) from Maple Heights-Lake Desire, WA
4 km (3 miles) SE (141°) from East Renton Highlands, WA
6 km (4 miles) WSW (250°) from Mirrormont, WA
17 km (11 miles) SSE (160°) from Bellevue, WA
27 km (17 miles) SE (136°) from Seattle, WA



Location Uncertainty

Error estimate not available



Parameters

NST= 59, Nph= 59, Dmin=12 km, Rmss=0.26 sec, Gp= 22°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=2



Source

Pacific Northwest Seismograph Network



Event ID

uw09222022

Hmmm....last time I saw a spread like this with the deep tremors, there was soon an earthquake in the middle of it.

deep tremor map

It would actually make sense....in that area, we could see a large quake as large as 7.5 (possibly bigger)....from the nisqually fault, that generated the 6.8 in 2001.

Study: fault under seattle bigger than thought

The Nisqually earthquake that rocked the Northwest eight years ago was a 6.8 magnitude.

The quake, centered deep in the Earth, caused a lot of shaking and some damage.

But the ground didn't rise up like it did 1,000 years ago. That's when scientists believe a 7- to 7.5-magnitude earthquake hit the more shallow Seattle fault zone that runs from Sammamish, through Seattle and out toward Bremerton.

Scientists believe some areas rose 18 feet during the quake, that the southwest tip of Bainbridge Island rose out of the Puget Sound, and so did much of Alki Point in West Seattle, which is now full of homes.

The quake also generated a tsunami - a wave possibly six feet high - when it hit Elliott Bay in Shoreline.

And now Martin says she's gathered evidence that the Seattle fault zone could be much bigger than we think, and a quake could spread damage much further west

This is something that I would bet you most people around here know NOTHING about. Scary.

That quake I linked in the post above this one very likely came from that fault, and I do not believe there have been any other quakes from it since......

Thankfully that quake didn't happen!

There are some very large microseisms around the area right now. Here is just one example from Mount Baker:

Baker


ETA: wow. I thought Baker was impressive! Click on any of these other seismos...some of the biggest I have ever seen:

NW broad-band


Look at this one on the peninsula

Ok - I might as well throw this out there -

I had a dream last night that I got hired at some agency (not publicly known about) that monitored Mt St Helens specifically, and some changes were being noticed that made them decide to send someone personally there (which in the dream was a serious action they hadn't taken before). It seemed to be the signs of the beginning of something that was the very reason the team was assembled.

Just take it with a grain of salt, but personally, if I start seeing any changes with Helens....

reply to post by westcoast

Tara, somewhere I recall you posted a linky to a blog by one of the scientists involved in the project that studies the episodic tremor & slip activity in the PNW. I recall he (??) said that they were in a panic because the episode started much earlier this year than they expected. They thought it would roll along around Oct (if I recall) but it was already underway at the end of July and finished in early Sept. (I'm working from memory here.)

Two things: firstly, could you please re-post that blog link? I'm sure I have it but cannot find it amongst my hundreds of bookmarked links -- even though I have them categorized. Secondly, I've been watching GEE, with a special eye on SoCal and the PNW and I've noticed that TA.A04D (Lummi Island -- not far from you) has been pretty active. Nothing huge, but lots of bumps all day long.

The Lummi Island seismo was a bit "bumpy" yesterday as well, but today, pretty well every time I've checked it during the past 13 hours or so, it's showing at least one micro quake. Okay, most of the quakes aren't reading amplitudes much over 10 to around 15 microns/sec, so they'd unlikely be noticed by people in the area, but all the same, they are tremors.

I'm beginning to wonder if a new period of ETS is beginning. I understand that cross-comparisons between several seismos and preferably a study of data from a large array are needed to confirm such a thing, but it's my feeling that it might be the case. I also know that originally, it was believed that there was a regular, 14-month interval between ETS events, but that idea got thrown out the window when the last one arrived at least a couple of months early. And then there's the factor of the fifth-largest quake in a century occurring back in March on the other side of the ocean in Japan.

I can't help thinking that last factor alone would be enough to change the "regularity" of the ETS events in the PNW. But what concerns me more is that frankly, scientists have been studying ETS for such a relatively short time that they are not even sure what all its causal mechanisms are or what it might mean if the events come sooner than expected, or later.

What's your take on it?

Best regards,

Mike

reply to post by JustMike

Hey justmike! I'll be back home tomorrow and I don't know how to post links from my phone ...but if you look here up just a few posts you'll see a link for the tremor map. Looks like zero tremors today and just 42 yesterday. I think I saw the same activity you are talking about though. I checked the seismos on Thursday and saw some odd stuff. Probably not deep tremors .... but there was some major microseisms going on at the time. I have had spotty access to computers but I'll be back 'on-line' tomorrow and dig into it more then!

reply to post by JustMike


Good Morning Mike, Here is the link for the main page for the on going observations of deep tremor.

It would appear to me that the Japan Quake could have triggered the early arrival of this years tremor. I think a way to maybe study this would be to see if the Boxing Day Quake in 2004 altered the arrival of the tremors. I will have a look at that later in the day - off to work now.

reply to post by westcoast


and also to post by Anmarie96


Thank you both for your replies.

Yes, there have been lots of microseisms going on. I have not been able to follow GEE much today due to work committments but at least over the weekend things were pretty busy. ETA: Right now, it seems fairly quiet up and down the coast. (End ETA)

Anmarie, thank you for the link. That's precisely the one I was after. Very glad to be able to re-read what was written there.

I agree with what you say: it certainly is not unreasonable to consider that Japan's huge quake could have upset the applecart a little on the US side of the Pond. Perhaps not totally, but at least to some degree.

I haven't been able to find out if there was any recorded variation in the PNW ETS following the Great Asian Quake of Dec 2004. I am not even sure whether they had a full array in place at the time to observe such changes. I feel awfuly ignorant... There are so many pieces to this huge puzzle and it seems that it just keeps getting bigger and more complex.

Layers upon layers of interactions and complexity... It's like 3D chess but on a far more massive scale. No, its even beyond 3D chess. It's chess on a sphere, but layers deep and with a whole lot more variables thrown in.


Mike

Okay, regarding the intervals of ETS and possible influences of very large quakes (ie Mw approx 9), there is some good data of some previous years in the old ETS blogs, but I (or someone else) will need to go through it.

Here's the link to ETS blog reports for 2003-2009 inclusive

Crucially to Anmarie's comments, the nearest PNW ETS event following the Dec 2004 Asia quake was from Sept 6 to Sept 30, 2005. In 2004, however, there were two periods of ETS in the PNW, from May 3-18 (Sth Puget Sound Tremor) and July 8-24 (Nth Puget Sound Tremor) -- meaning in the months before the Asia quake.

Now, while there is possibly no causal link between those two 2004 events and the megathrust quake off Banda Aceh, it cannot be stated categorically that they are completely unconnected.

However, the ETS of Sept 2005 followed about 14 months after the second ETS of 2004 (in July), and this, at least, is in line with what has been observed as the "norm": according to the PNSN people, ETS events typically seem to occur about 14 months apart. So, in that case, it doesn't seem that the big Asia quake had any significant or measurable effect on the start of the next ETS in the PNW.

Now, here's something I hadn't been aware of. I don't know if any of you know this already so my apologies if you do, but in the Reports for the 2004 ETS events they say:

June 4, 2004 - TWO NEW DEVELOPMENTS: 1. The deep tremor in the Pacific Northwest seems to have died out completely. 2. We have found deep tremor in northern California. After the southwestern Washington deep tremor became weak and seemed to move into northwestern Oregon it became even weaker and died out with the last period of obvious tremor being on the night of May 27. Nothing recognizable as deep tremor has been seen since then. However, with prompting from Seth Moran of the Cascade Volcano Observatory and the help of David Oppenheimer of the Northern California Seismic Network we started examining data from northern California and see deep tremor there. Starting weakly on about May 23 with very strong bursts from time to time from May 25-29 we are still seeing small to medium size bursts from time to time today. Some of the stronger bursts could be located and are shown on a map of northern California. The colors are for events on different days (May 25,26-red, 27-yellow, 28-green, 29-blue). There is no reasonable depth control for these events yet.

(Bolding mine. I have also encoded the live link to the relevant map.)

I think this is of some significance. I repeat, I'm not sure if you all knew about this already, but if not, here's what I'm thinking: while we sometimes see tremors on the PNSN maps that extend (even in clusters) into Nth Cal, they are not the same as ETS. They are mainly microseismic events but not of an ETS character.

So, if they were already observing ETS in Nthn California seven years ago, surely this just adds more weight to the hypothesis that the subduction "line" could extend much further south than currently surmised? Westcoast holds that opinion and I humbly agree, but here's the main point: shouldn't they be doing similar array studies even further south into Cal to see if there is similar ETS? I mean, much further south?

If it can be confirmed that there is ETS well into SoCal, then this data would have to impact the current theories of how the various regions interact.

I'd like to write more but I'm losing coherence I think. Just too tired to think straight. Happens. Hope you follow all this.

Mike

reply to post by JustMike


It's all good Mike - you are perfectly fine - or I'm on the same plane as you :-)

So, if they were already observing ETS in Nthn California seven years ago, surely this just adds more weight to the hypothesis that the subduction "line" could extend much further south than currently surmised? Westcoast holds that opinion and I humbly agree, but here's the main point: shouldn't they be doing similar array studies even further south into Cal to see if there is similar ETS? I mean, much further south?

Yes, I am in complete agreement here with Westcoast and your statement! I Also think in addition there is a fracture of the plate as we have discussed in the past in the plate which leads to Yellowstone. There are many, things to think about here. But, maybe there is a certain misconception as to exactly where the pacific plate ends or if there is a whole missing plate. - The whole of the rocky mountains to me - is a boundary line - and then, there is the Long Valley Caldera and on the other side another older Caldera (forgive me for not having the name at the ready - it's late and dial up and cocktails :-) ) Westcoast posted an most excellant study of the lands as the glaciers melted long, long ago and the run off - which in my mind, water follows the course of path of least resistance = wouldn't a subduction zone create a natural waterway in times where the icesheets left nothing behind other than bare rock?

reply to post by JustMike


JustMike...that's just it. Once you are aware of the ETS and spend just a short time studying it...this all becomes obvious. I asked one of the scientist in charge of the program the same question (I posted that response again a short time ago). He agreed that the tremors extended south and needed to be studied but that it was a different system than PNSN and they were working to get an array down there too.

Here's what I think: ofcourse its already being done! It doesn't take a geologist to see the need for it...or the huge importance and implications.

Which brings me back around to why I don't think this information would be readily shared with the general public: panic.