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.

 

Quake Watch 2011

page: 159
203
<< 156  157  158    160  161  162 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonlover12
 


I think you're right...once it's been reviewed the depth and magnitude may change and you'd think in this case some kind of explanation would be in order




posted on Jul, 8 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
I know this is off topic for this thread but wanted to make everyone aware and could this be methane related.
www.ledger-dispatch.com...



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 01:04 AM
link   
I know it was a few days ago and I'm a bit late looking at the data for the Kermadec 7.6Mw but having trouble with our modem again.
Anyway looking at the aftershock spill, I wrote up this for my MajorWorl EQ's 2011 map



In the 48 hours following the main shock there were 8 aftershocks of magnitudes 4.7mb to 5.0mb and 6 between 5.0mb and 5.6mb before a larger magnitude 6.0Mw then a further 7 aftershocks 5.1mb to 5.5mb


then I looked at that 6.0Mw itself
All the other aftershocks are mb but this one is Mw, how come


because its actually listed as a 5.6 mb in the phase data.
why make it Mw?

and assuming there is some logical reason (like 5.6 is a threshold or something) why isn't the other 5.6mb converted to Mw too?

aaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnnddddddd

the other 5.6 has actually got a higher Ms reading than the one that they posted as a 6.0
the 6.0Mw (5.6mb) phase data (5.6Ms)
the other 5.6mb phase data (6.5Ms)

Crazy

edit on 9-7-2011 by muzzy because: confusion reigns


FWIW, GEOFON gave that 6.0 as 5.6Mw
edit on 9-7-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by megabogie
 

looks like a programme error on the site the map is on, rather than USGS feed, see how all the other popup tags point directly to the circles when you click on the circle, whereas the one in question is off to the side away from the circle.



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   
I'm glad most of you like studying the big quakes. That means I'll take up the slack and look at the small ones.
Over the last few months, I've noticed the northeast United States has had many small quakes in many different states. And some along the St Lawerence in Canada. On the map right now, we got some in Vermount, Maine, and New York.

Here's why this has caught my attention. At the same time that there's been regular activity in the Northeast. There's been very little around the New Madrid. And adjacent oil drilling zones.

Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas are really quiet. The Guy/Greenbrier swarm has been silent for over a week. There's been a few in northeast Arkansas, and few near the New Madrid, but overall it's been quiet in general.
I'm not pretending I know what I'm talking about. It's just a little curious. And something to keep an eye on.
There's five quakes in the Northeast, and only three around the New Madrid.

And for those interested in Yellowstone, there's been a tiny bit of activity there in the last day. Which is usually insignificant, except for the fact that it's been incredibly quiet there for some time now. I quess the two massive swarms over the last few years has really taken some steam out of the pressure cooker.



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


I'm just curious why they could not delete it off the map knowing how folks might react to seeing such a huge circle on there. Thanks for your input Muzzy...I know you definately know the ins and outs of earthquakery



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


If you could understand the workings of the providers of earthquakes data and the range of magnitudes they have to pick from and why one quake is Mb and another is Mw and another is ML and many of them are GS (?!!) then you would probably be well on the way to understanding women! It is just about as unfathomable!



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Look closer muzzy. That was not the only difference.

Someone in IRIS sent me a link to a web page (that I have now mislaid) and [url=http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17582872/Changing%20Plots.pdf]this PDF document is simply an image of the information.

I have posted this here before but there you go. There are some excellent things there. I use the day and day before ones on the QVS blog to allow people to look at current/yesterday plots.

IF I find the link again I will re-post it.



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by megabogie
 


Well I have to say first that I am very touched by your faith in my abilities, or am I just very touched?


Regrettably I am fallible. I am not Pope Puterman. I did see the quake when I was on Google Earth, but it actually said 3.6 so i ignored it, although I was a little curious about the location. Had I had more time I would have investigated.

Anyway, it did not register anything on this seismo HRV.IU.00.LHZ.2011.188 which is here: Adam Dziewonski Observatory (Oak Ridge), Massachusetts, USA and very close to the two potential epicentres!!

Nothing on BHZ for that one either: HRV.IU.00.BHZ.2011.188 or on the plot of the time series.



US.PKME shows nothing on all channels BUT there is a 'bend' in the time series at just about the right time.



Nothing you could pin down as being solar interference either really: www.lmsal.com...

There was no quake sent out and subsequently deleted in the USGS data - which may be a red herring as it depends where this quake occurred.

It IS however listed in the Canadian quakes list.

2011/07/07 23:27:54 47.69N 70.07W 11.5 -0.3ML CHARLEVOIX SEISMIC ZONE,QC.

By the way it is still listed on that global incident site as well.

EXPLANATION:

It was a Mag -0.3 ML. Now that may seem impossible, however it is not. You can indeed have negative magnitudes although generally not less than Mag -1.0

Because it was SO small it would not have registered on any of the US recorders, however I would say that to register at all it would have to have been right under the seismo.

A Mag -0.3 is about 22.4 Kilo Joules of energy - not a lot really!

I would say in my opinion that it did happen. I would also suggest that (1) USGS software got rid of it because it was too small and (2) the Global incident software does not properly understand a negative magnitude. Obviously I don't have a clue how that was coded but that would be my suggestion.

Just my 2c

ETA



I was about to post the real location but the ats media server is not accessible at present! If it comes back within the edit time I will post.
edit on 9/7/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)




It came back.


edit on 9/7/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


You know they could have caught a radio decay wave from u know where.


Raise Eyebrow

Me.



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by muzzy
 


If you could understand the workings of the providers of earthquakes data and the range of magnitudes they have to pick from and why one quake is Mb and another is Mw and another is ML and many of them are GS (?!!) then you would probably be well on the way to understanding women! It is just about as unfathomable!


So there is no hope then



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

So it was the circle that was out of place then?, I didn't check the co-ordinates myself.
Yes I think I have seen negative magnitudes before, was it the Iceland site?



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonlover12
reply to post by megabogie
 


I just checked and the depth of the "oddity" has been changed from when I saved a screenshot this morning.
quakes.globalincidentmap.com...

it`s now listed as 178km deep.


I just copied this info about 30 minutes ago.

Type: Earthquake
43 hours ago
Magnitude: -0.3
DateTime: Thursday July 7 2011, 23:27:54 UTC
Region: Canada
Depth: 178 km

Oddly, it is gone now. So it was there about 44 hours, the depth was edited, and now it just got removed.



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


You might not be Pope Puterman but you're at least a Bishop! Thank You for explaining what actually happened. As I expected, you are the only one who knew what exactly took place and did a great job explaining it. Sometimes it's good to be predictable!



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Dont worry ,,,,when i seen this:





I live in Cape Breton N.S,,,right at the edge of that circle,,,, i was on it like u kn wht,,,,,, so yes it picked up something,,,, but no physical ripples yet,,, now if it starts to get all Philidelphia Experiment,,, well,, ill try and let people know.

hey its the crazy times..

edit on 9-7-2011 by BobAthome because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Now you're talking teeny tiny quakes. Them's what I likes.

-0.3 M. Now that's tiny. So, of course I wanted to tackle this one. From the Canadian list for the region over the last year, they have listings as low as -0.6M. One day I was reading their lists and realized they record many mining blasts. When I checked the area on Google Earth, there is at least one mine in the general area.

What I've found when looking into the teeny quakes, is that they are many times they are man-made. Water Disposal Injection,oil and gas drilling, irrigation, salt mines, all mines, under ground nuclear testing. Oh, I think they've stopped them. Giant maneating worms... wait, them tremors are a movie.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

What other difference? I see the 6.0 was twice as deep, but that shouldn't make any difference to the Magnitude should it.
The 6.0Mw was also given as 4.7 ML , the 5.6 had nothing ML

Hey thats pretty cool what you can do with the BUD graphs, I just had a play around for an hour trying out various trace height scales and different channels. Didn't find what I'm after, its either just big quakes or little ones, what I'm looking for is a clear graph that shows all the quakes across the country that are on the daily map and list on one graph like LISS has, maybe its not possible.





edit on 9-7-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Sounds too me u want an osiliscope with a stored data base of sqiggley lines , like finger print matching software on a really fast, rackmount running SunMicro boards ,,,opps sorry.,, u need to match a data base. (got carried away)

Me



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Good Morning from down under New Zealand. A lot of quake activity in the southern half of the ring of fire today.



posted on Jul, 9 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Earlier, I talked about the lack of quakes on Guy/Greenbrier. Then I thought as soon as I had written my observation, the maps showed me to be wrong with a recent addition to the list. Today's 1.9M was in Central Arkansas, but not on the "new faultline". If the location is correct it is to the east of Guy. What's curious is that it is north of Enola (location for recorded swarms) and south of Quitman. Quitman has a had few and was the location where a family home exploded. Possible natural gas leaking from ground. Not pipeline.

I think there is another faultline that runs from Enola up through Quitman. This would mean it has the same general trend as the Guy/Greenbrier fault. Sorry, thinking aloud. I can't count out Rosebud. And I think the same trend as the Marianna fault closer to the New Madrid.



new topics




 
203
<< 156  157  158    160  161  162 >>

log in

join