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 2011

page: 13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:08 AM
I know that this may be common knowledge to you guys on here but i thought i would put it here anyway. Feel free to delete but

I certainly didnt know about these

Four 9.0+ Earthquakes
Thursday, January 13, 2011 7:29

1960 May 22 19:11:14 UTC
Magnitude 9.5
The Largest Earthquake in the World
Approximately 1,655 killed, 3,000 injured, 2,000,000 homeless, and $550 million damage in southern Chile; tsunami caused 61 deaths, $75 million damage in Hawaii; 138 deaths and $50 million damage in Japan; 32 dead and missing in the Philippines; and $500,000 damage to the west coast of the United States.

Prince William Sound, Alaska
1964 March 28 03:36 UTC
1964 March 27 05:36 p.m. local time
Magnitude 9.2

This great earthquake and ensuing tsunami took 128 lives (tsunami 113, earthquake 15), and caused about $311 million in property loss. Earthquake effects were heavy in many towns, including Anchorage, Chitina, Glennallen, Homer, Hope, Kasilof, Kenai, Kodiak, Moose Pass, Portage, Seldovia, Seward, Sterling, Valdez, Wasilla, and Whittier.

2004 December 26 00:58:53 UTC

1952 November 04 16:58:26.0 UTC
Magnitude 9.0

Is it fair to say that theres an increased chance that history could repeat itself in or around these locations?

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:17 AM


* Friday, January 14, 2011 at 06:48:58 UTC
* Friday, January 14, 2011 at 05:48:58 PM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 49.469°S, 163.908°E
Depth 26.3 km (16.3 miles)


Distances 210 km (130 miles) NW of Auckland Island, New Zealand
475 km (295 miles) SW of Invercargill, New Zealand
1245 km (770 miles) SW of WELLINGTON, New Zealand
1980 km (1230 miles) SSE of CANBERRA, A.C.T., Australia

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:55 AM
I've posted this on Volcano Watch but also on here as quakes largest recorded in a long while at Grimsfjall...

Two earthquakes were recorded in Mt. Grímsfjall by the Grímsvötn lakes on the Vatnajökull icecap, the largest glacier in Europe, this morning, measuring 4.2 and 3.5 on the Richter scale.


posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:08 AM
reply to post by jazz10

You did not know about those? I am amazed. Anyway, of course the answer has to be yes. Yes they could occur again at those locations for the same reasons that they occurred at those locations before. Chile probably not for some years yet since I think the 8.8 qualifies as a repeat of the 9.5

Sumatra, probably not for a while yet. The fault needs time to build up large stresses yet but it is believed that the fault did not completely exhaust it's energy and anyway it is a looooong fault so another section could 'go'.

The others? Who knows? C'est la vie. Sh1t happens.

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:11 AM
reply to post by MoorfNZ

Thanks for posting. It would seem neither were volcanic

Hekla heli (JF) is so swamped by the other goings on that it is impossible to see what is going on.

This image is only good for 12 hours or so.

edit on 14/1/2011 by PuterMan because: To add another image

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:21 AM
@PuterMan and MoofNZ

I responded on the other thread.
I think both quakes were just the 2x 2.7 as mentioned on the Icelandic Met site, just bau in Iceland.


posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:31 AM
reply to post by Anmarie96

As regards the You Tube video I think the guy got his wires crossed. He is showing the 'blip' on the 11th....

The he says it is the same time as the world wide helicorder problem - except that it is not.

Epic fail number 1 for the You Tube video

Then on the magnetometer thread some one was saying that it is crazy and he has gone back a long way and can't find anything like this (blip)

Try this and this

Epic fail number 2 for the magnetometer thread.

I am afraid that thread is basically much misinformed self scaremongering. I am working on a section on this right now which will form a part of my links. Quite a co-incidence it should come as I was doing this.

I would like to note however that the GIF files done by AlienProbed are absolutely FANTASTIC and will aid in some research I am starting. For that post in the thread a huge

edit on 14/1/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 12:35 PM
I just started a new Topic called Hurricane/Cyclone/Typhoon Watch 2011

and noticed that TC Vania passed right over the location of that New Hebrides Trench 7.0 Mag quake (Loyalty Islands) at the time of the

I have long thought that weather does play a part in triggering earthquakes, its to do with "pressure drop" and have seen some cases here in NZ where there was a connection between a deep Low weather system and a series of quakes.
edit on 14-1-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 03:24 PM
reply to post by PuterMan

Thanks for setting that strait PM

Today’s Earthquake Fact
Landslides triggered by earthquakes often cause more destruction than the earthquakes themselves. During the 1964 Alaska quake, shock-induced landslides devastated the Turnagain Heights residential development and many downtown areas in Anchorage.

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:27 PM
reply to post by muzzy

Agreed and this is something I have been trying to find time to take a look at after I noted it some time ago in the Yellowstone thread and attempted a calculation that showed that even a minor difference in atmospheric pressure can means many tons on the land surface.

It is on the back burner, but i seems to have lost sight of the cooker!

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:12 AM
reply to post by muzzy
Sure, weather can influence. "Normal" pressure at sea level is around 6.4 kg or 14 pounds per square inch. That means that each square inch of the surface has 14 pounds of atmosphere above it.

6.4 kg per 6.5 cm² (Lets round it to 1kg per 1cm²)

If we just for fun use that for Yellowstone, then there are a total of 38250000000000 kg atmospheric pressure on the whole caldera or 38250000000 metric tons.

That is Thirty-Eight Billion Two Hundred & Fifty Million metric tons.

Not much air pressure change needed to change this.

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:58 AM
Magnitude 5.8


* Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 11:23:53 UTC
* Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 06:23:53 PM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 2.314°N, 96.155°E
Depth 36.6 km (22.7 miles)

Distances 300 km (185 miles) WNW of Sibolga, Sumatra, Indonesia
310 km (195 miles) SW of Langsa, Sumatra, Indonesia
625 km (385 miles) W of KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia
1515 km (940 miles) NW of JAKARTA, Java, Indonesia

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:56 AM
reply to post by Roald

You should be a journalist or a climate scientist! Nice bit of sensationalism there! I get a slightly different figure for the total at sea level, but I suppose that depends on what you take as the area of the caldera. I have used 1,520 square miles which gives me a value at sea level of 40.3 billion tons on the basis that one ton is 2240 lbs and atmospheric pressure is 14.7 lbs per square inch. This then has to be reduced because the average height of the caldera is approximately 2400m so the atmospheric pressure there is about 80%, so the figure at the caldera is 32 billion tons.

Of course the actual pressure on the land surface is not what is important as that is balanced. It is the difference in pressure and the speed at which that difference occurs coupled with the elasticity of the rock structure and the amount of lubrication of any kind that will have an effect upon the structure and thus a potential for producing earthquakes.

A change of just 0.1 kPa at sea level say from 100.0 to 100.1 kPa is a change of 0.09999% at the caldera height and translated to weight that is an increase on the area of the caldera of 32,246,398 tons, or 3.25 million tons.

If we look at a deep front coming in the pressure could change from 100.0 kPa to 97.0 kPa quite rapidly giving a weight change of -967,391,622 tons - nearly a billion tons! A really deep storm at say 95.5 kPa at sea level would create a change in weight from 'standard' of about -1,451,087,437 tons - getting on for 1.5 billion tons. Bear in mind this can happen of a period of a few hours or a day so that is quite a rapid effect on the surface.

Edit to say: Just noticed you said metric tons so that will make a bigger difference. Assuming that a metric ton is about 2200 lbs, the total at sea level would go up to very slightly over 41 billion tonnes.

edit on 15/1/2011 by PuterMan because: Bah box, can't you read?

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:06 AM
Small cluster of quakes today, on the 10 degree map with Toba (Though not immediately near it)

(Toba is that big lake with an island in the middle)

5.5 2011/01/15 16:26:08 2.373 96.328 24.3 SIMEULUE, INDONESIA
4.9 2011/01/15 11:45:20 2.346 96.279 31.1 SIMEULUE, INDONESIA
4.9 2011/01/15 11:36:07 2.354 96.297 30.6 SIMEULUE, INDONESIA
5.6 2011/01/15 11:23:52 2.424 96.308 16.2 SIMEULUE, INDONESIA

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:31 AM
Region: New Caledonia
Time: 2011-01-15 14:38:29.2 UTC
Magnitude: 4.4
Epicenter: 166.88°E 21.03°S
Depth: 304 km
Status: automatic

In the wake of TC Vania, this quake was offshore on the north side of the island
Deep though.
Isobar Map from Fiji Met office

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 06:39 PM
Great. My little dog is freaking out again. I really hope it's just hormones or something.

Either way, I'll be watching the seismos a little closer tonight!

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 07:27 PM
reply to post by PuterMan

Thank you Putterman.
My calculation was very ruff and based on sea level (1,033 Kg/cm².) and a caldera size of 3825
Did not take into consideration the altitude of the caldera or the air temperature for that matter. Just wanted to let muzzy know that the idea that weather (air pressure) influence earthquake might be possible.

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 08:26 PM
It's probably nothing but
mag 1.2 2011/01/15 19:24:45 46.191 -122.179 0.0 1 km ( 1 mi) S of Mount St. Helens Volcano, WA

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:36 AM

Originally posted by westcoast
Great. My little dog is freaking out again. I really hope it's just hormones or something.

Either way, I'll be watching the seismos a little closer tonight!

So once again my little dog was onto something. These two quakes just happened tonight less than 30 miles from my home. (closer to 20) Neither was big by any means...butd I have certainly had enough instances now to rule out coincidence.

MAP 2.1 2011/01/16 07:18:41 48.675 -122.477 0.6 8 km ( 5 mi) S of Bellingham, WA
MAP 1.9 2011/01/16 06:40:44 48.671 -122.475 3.2 9 km ( 5 mi) S of Bellingham, WA

Also of note, while again it isn't rare to have quakes around here, It isn't normal to have them so close to my home, this often.


EDIT TO ADD: I'm just sitting here thinking about it. Even though she was acting wierd...clingy, whining, staring at me and moaning; about an hour ago she was going between rooms whining like she wanted outside, but she wouldn't go out. That would have been right when the last quake was happening. I find this so fascinating.
edit on 16-1-2011 by westcoast because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-1-2011 by westcoast because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:30 AM
Okay you guys, something is off with these quakes.

First, here is the location for the last one...the biggest at 2.1:

Magnitude 2.1
Date-Time Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 07:18:41 UTC
Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 11:18:41 PM at epicenter

Location 48.675°N, 122.477°W
Depth 0.6 km (~0.4 mile) set by location program
Distances 8 km (5 miles) S (181°) from Bellingham, WA
10 km (6 miles) SSW (213°) from Geneva, WA
11 km (7 miles) WNW (300°) from Alger, WA
45 km (28 miles) SSW (197°) from Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada
82 km (51 miles) SE (144°) from Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.6 km (0.4 miles); depth fixed by location program
Parameters NST= 21, Nph= 21, Dmin=26 km, Rmss=0.31 sec, Gp=115°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=0
Source Pacific Northwest Seismograph Network

Event ID uw01160718

Go to THIS map to see the exact location and you can also click on the event info AND select the seismos. Once you start looking around at the seismos, you'll notice something odd; it doesn't match up. The quake is about 30 miles to my NW...but the quake shows up strongest to my EAST,and even SOUTH. They are all at 100 microvolts, so that isn't an issue.

The last quake was almost at the suface. Extremely shallow, and I don't think I have ever seen one there before.

Now look at THIS map and go to RPW. pull up the last six hours (or longer if you open this post tomorrow!
). Both quakes show up the strongest on this one by far...and then there is another nice little prolonged quake a short time after the 2.1, which has me wondering more.

This seismo is located just SE of Rockport, about 40 miles from my house, but I think the event was closer to me, further West of the seismo,since it also shows up so strong in Arlington. It is raining really hard here right now...we are on flood watch. The snow level has gone up to over 8,000 feet so there isn't any snow there right now. Either way,those are clearly quakes on the seismo.

My problem is that if the PNSN is is by a large amount, which you don't usually see by THAT much. I just looked at the report again and it hasn't been reviewed and the depth is preset,so I expect to see it change. I just think it is wierd that the location seems so wrong. The computer does the same thing I am doing in a way.

new topics

top topics

<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in