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: 25
203
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Looks like they decided it was actually 2 quakes: 1.8 & 1.5, six seconds apart. 2.1 and 1.6 km deep. (Argh, long day, edited to say they are actually 6 minutes apart.)

Northern CA has been busy for the past hour.
edit on 4-2-2011 by quakewatcher because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 03:03 AM
link   
Magnitude
3.4
Date-Time
Saturday, February 05, 2011 at 08:59:35 UTC
Saturday, February 05, 2011 at 01:59:35 AM at epicenter
Location
44.552°N, 110.922°W
Depth
12.4 km (7.7 miles)
Region
YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK, WYOMING
Distances
19 km (12 miles) SE (130°) from West Yellowstone, MT
34 km (21 miles) E (80°) from Island Park, ID
56 km (35 miles) SSW (197°) from Gardiner, MT
430 km (267 miles) N (10°) from Salt Lake City, UT
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 0.6 km (0.4 miles); depth +/- 6.1 km (3.8 miles)
Parameters
NST= 6, Nph= 6, Dmin=29 km, Rmss=0.07 sec, Gp=140°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=0
Source
University of Utah Seismograph Stations
Event ID
uu00005626



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by berkeleygal
 


and ofcourse deleted by USGS as never existed.... nothing to woory about...its save...:-(



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Why would they delete the Yellowstone quakes - whats behind that?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Small earthquakes are common in the Yellowstone region. With the reduced magnitude threshold for web posting of automated earthquake locations and magnitudes, it will no longer be practical for seismologists to continue the practice of reviewing all of this information immediately after posting. Users of these data should be aware that an unreviewed earthquake report can be significantly in error and might even be a false alarm, regardless of the reported magnitude. The University of Utah Seismograph Stations will continue its policy of including only reviewed events in its finalized earthquake catalog.
reply to post by crazydaisy
 


Source



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Anmarie96
 


yes right... sweet words of comfort...
never forget that it took YVO a coupple of years to admitt that the swarm (wich started this thread) was magnatic of nature....politics rules !

All other events in the today's USGS list are NOT revieuwed either...! still they are listed...
only the yellowstone events were deleted.....they must use 2 standarts...


edit on 5-2-2011 by ressiv because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2011 by ressiv because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Anmarie96
 


Although I have been a visitor to ATS frequently in the past, it was the deletion of the 2nd Yellowstone (3.4 mag on Feb 5) that finally motivated me to join the discussion. (So I am new, this is my 1st reply)

I had been monitoring solar activity and earthquake activity and was showing my son how, even on a purely superficial level, that there appeared to be an undeniable correlation between the two. Both the Yellowstone earthquakes were shown on the list & then when I refreshed - the 3.4 at 12+ km was gone.

Since the Yellowstone Caldera is one of, if not the largest caldera on US soil and since there has been extensive seismic monitoring of the site since 1923, it seemed sufficiently strange that a 3.4 mag @ 12km could have registered when apparently, by its deletion, there was no 2nd earthquake at all. I might have been able to accept even a small incidence of error but when I began reading this thread I came across postings by "Mike" who indicated that, according to his records, more than 200 Yellowstone earthquakes have been deleted in recent years.

Obviously there is a need to review data for accuracy before it is officially catalogued but has anyone offered an explanation as to why an area that is extensively monitored with a massive amount sophisticated technology seems to had such a high incidence of "false" alarms?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by JED11
 

my opinion is that couse of economic and infrastructure problems YVO will never warn for an eruption untill it really erupts......
considering that even FEMA issent capable to organise an mass evacuation of all humans in the effected zone...
and the lack of incoming money if yellowstone would be in an state off alert...
shortly said:
if its blows than it is bad luck for many...
YVO would only say that they were surprised with the event and diddend see it coming...



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Meanwhile ................

In the battle of the Strong quakes of 4th Feb UTC the score in the aftershocks is

Vanuatu 7, Burma/ India Border 0

kind of strange a 5.7 has spawned so many aftershocks while a 6.4 has had none


4.9, 2011/02/05 12:37:04 , -14.044, 166.524 , 35.0 , VANUATU
4.9, 2011/02/05 08:37:21 , -14.107, 166.590 , 35.4 , VANUATU
4.9, 2011/02/04 19:48:12 , -13.695, 166.821 , 31.2 , VANUATU
4.9, 2011/02/04 18:51:37 , -14.370, 166.588 , 32.8 , VANUATU
5.0, 2011/02/04 16:21:12 , -14.227, 166.641 , 14.8 , VANUATU
5.2, 2011/02/04 15:23:18 , -14.173, 166.707 , 24.0 , VANUATU
4.8, 2011/02/04 14:59:51 , -14.194, 166.499 , 35.6 , VANUATU
5.7, 2011/02/04 14:21:00 , -14.214, 166.507 , 40.6 , VANUATU

unless USGS got the magnitudes wrong
although the other networks had different magnitude numbers, the difference between the two quakes was the same



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ressiv
 

My understanding is that if the Yellowstone caldera erupts with the fury it has the potential for, it would, soon enough, kill everything in about a 1,000 mile radius so there is no point to evacuation. This is typically the case for other large calderas such as those in and around the South Pacific / Indonesia area. However, it does not seem that there is the same frequency of deletions of small and/or major earthquakes (see "Meanwhile....") in other similarly dangerous geography and equally, if not more so, densely populated areas.

So, my original question was actually whether anyone had ever seen or heard an 'official' explanation for the apparent high incidence of "false" alarms in the Yellowstone region?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by JED11
 


I don't know, but its not just mistaken mags or deleted quakes, what about the ones that never even make it to the lists ie never identified ............. even mag 5's
new topic here
Whats going on with the Antarctic Plate?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by JED11
 


I replied with some detail of why this quake did not exist on the Yellowstone thread so i will not repeat it all here.

I have just had a look at my database for Yellowstone deletions and there have been 211 since 28 Dec 2008.

Now to be fair 180+ of these occurred in 2009 during the large swarm so 180 out of several thousand quakes is not such a biggie. Since that time there have been the normal amount of deletions that we get anywhere except that there was a rash of them in November 2010 very similar to the rash of them now. From mid Oct 2010 to the end of Nov 2010 there were 24 deletions, whereas in Dec 2010 there were 2. Now in 2 days we have 6 deletions so looks like we may expect some more!

As to the reason? Don't know, but it is possible that the cold - and let's face it it has been extremely cold - affects the telemetry.

This article does indicate that weather can play a part in telemetry problems although it does not specifically mention cold weather.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   
www.seis.utah.edu...

something just registered there



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Mag 3.4000 Date: 06 Feb 2011

ID: emsc208442
Mag 3.4000 ML
Date: 06-02-2011 01:07:07 UTC
Lat: 64.50000 / Lon: -17.61000
Depth: 1.0000
Number of Stns: 5
Location: ICELAND
Revised: No (Version: 1)

Not showing on Vedur yet.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by berkeleygal
 


Are you talking about the blue one?

Can't see anything on the listings relating to that.

Still nothing on Vedur re Iceland. Another false alarm?

Edit: It just turned up

Sunday
06.02.2011 01:07:07 64.501 -17.609 1.1 km 3.4 90.1 9.7 km E of Hamarinn

Not a good depth I would think. Only 1.1km.

edit on 5/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
2 more shallow quakes in Iceland not confirmed yet though.

06.02.2011 07:51:27 64,753 -17,256 2,7 km 3,0 90,05 3,8 km SV af Kistufelli
06.02.2011 07:51:25 64,689 -17,020 1,1 km 3,3 90,01 13,6 km SA af Kistufelli




edit on 6-2-2011 by Spacedman13 because: Words mispelled im sleepy



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 03:37 AM
link   
Quiet day today

Around 200km from Toba:

Magnitude 5.3
Date-Time

* Monday, February 07, 2011 at 08:08:37 UTC
* Monday, February 07, 2011 at 03:08:37 PM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 0.864°N, 98.838°E
Depth 82.8 km (51.5 miles) set by location program
Region NIAS REGION, INDONESIA
Distances 75 km (45 miles) SW of Padangsidempuan, Sumatra, Indonesia
95 km (60 miles) S of Sibolga, Sumatra, Indonesia
405 km (255 miles) SW of KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia
1185 km (730 miles) NW of JAKARTA, Java, Indonesia
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 11.9 km (7.4 miles); depth fixed by location program
Parameters NST=102, Nph=122, Dmin=149.2 km, Rmss=1.29 sec, Gp= 43°,
M-type=body wave magnitude (Mb), Version=6
Source

* USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)

Event ID usb00019m1
edit on 7-2-2011 by zenius because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Slightly off topic, would Puterman or Westcoast give me some feedback on the current June Lake St Helens seismo? I saw it recently discussed on a thread but can't remember which one it was.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 05:07 AM
link   
reply to post by zenius
 


Not off topic at all. This is why the thread exists - to discuss all things earthquake related.

I have looked at several seismos (by the way B203 seems to have gone since 12 Jan 2011) and all of them including June Lake look normal but windy to me. A couple of them have the usual PB large telemetry blips but other than that I see nothing strange.



posted on Feb, 7 2011 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Damn wind and snow. Shouldn't these instruments be below ground so less affected by the weather?

Do you have a pic of the positioning of of the seismos around both St Helens & Rainier? Topography would be interesting also. Am off to look at the weather systems happening that way now......
I hate NOAA weather maps. But ok, I see a cold front in that area. Is June on the north side?

Never mind, found the stations on Iris. June Lake is to the south east, not far from south ridge. South Ridge doesn't appear very windy. Cedar Flats to the ESE is somewhat bumpy though. So the south & east must be getting the wind turbulance? Sorry, thinking this through out loud but should be asleep.....
The West is quiet so it must be sheltered from the wind...
edit on 7-2-2011 by zenius because: half asleep



new topics

top topics



 
203
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join