posted on May, 4 2010 @ 07:03 PM
Originally posted by bigspud
it doesnt matter how big the eruption is, its how long it erupts for that can cause extinctions.
That's true, and larger longer lasting eruptions are more likely to happen at a supervolcano hotspot like Yellowstone than at Mt St Helens.
Originally posted by bluemooone2
reply to post by bobski
If the caldera at Yellowstone (super volcano) goes it might be the end of us but some life would survive. In fact , mankind would most likely
come thought it also , but not easily.
I agree a Yellowstone eruption will cause a lot more problems than Mt St Helens, but probably not a global extinction. Yellowstone erupts fairly
regularly, about every 700,000 years, and the last eruption was about 700,000 years ago I think so we're about due for another eruption, most likely
some time within the next 100,000 years.
Here is a good map showing the ash fallout from Mt St Helens in the upper left, in comparison with the ash beds from the last 3 eruptions of
yellowstone. The map gives you some idea how much more massive the Yellowstone eruptions are:
That site predicted Yellowstone would erupt in 2004, but obviously, it didn't. It is due for an eruption but I think we'll see signs in advance of
the eruption like we did before Mt St Helens erupted. As far as I can tell the next eruption of Yellowstone could be in one month, or in 95,000 years,
so the eruption may be imminent on geologic timescales but that doesn't necessarily seem imminent on human time scales.
Global extinctions are a real threat, but the biggest threat comes from impactors from space (asteroids/meteors/comets) and not from volcanic
activity. So don't worry too much about Mt St Helens. You can worry a little more about Yellowstone, and worry a little more about a giant rock the
size of Mt Everest falling from the sky, it's not a question of if these things will happen, it's a question of when, and they will both dwarf
anything from Mt St Helens in terms of destruction.
[edit on 4-5-2010 by Arbitrageur]