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: 317
203
<< 314  315  316    318  319  320 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Just for you Mike, cause you're SUCH a nice guy!


Clicky for biggie.

That's what I had left on my screen, but shortly you can get it in full view if you can figure out how to do that in GEE, hehe.

You should be proud, PM, I didn't even start a new thread!

edit on Fri Oct 21st 2011 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

Geonet?


Reference Number: 3598132
NZDT: Sat, Oct 22 2011 6:57 am
Magnitude: 7.3
Depth: 16 km
Details: 230 km east of Raoul Island

www.geonet.org.nz...

so much for any Tsnuami Warning for NZ one way or the other, nothing on the radio news at 7:00am

spoze it takes more than 3 minutes to make up the news bulletins, even breaking news



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


USGS calling it a 7.6

Magnitude
7.6
Date-Time
Friday, October 21, 2011 at 17:57:17 UTC
Saturday, October 22, 2011 at 05:57:17 AM at epicenter
Location
28.941°S, 176.046°W
Depth
39.8 km (24.7 miles)
Region
KERMADEC ISLANDS REGION
Distances
180 km (112 miles) E (79°) from Raoul Island, Kermadec Islands
870 km (541 miles) S (185°) from NUKU'ALOFA, Tonga
2978 km (1851 miles) WSW (240°) from PAPEETE, Tahiti, French Polynesia
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 15.7 km (9.8 miles); depth +/- 10.8 km (6.7 miles)
Parameters
NST= 94, Nph= 94, Dmin=187 km, Rmss=2.44 sec, Gp= 50°,
M-type=regional moment magnitude (Mw), Version=5
Source
Magnitude: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Location: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Event ID
usb0006b6p

Tsunami anyone???


earthquake.usgs.gov...



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
I won't second guess the magnitude on this one cause I don't have a waveform from a station close enough to get a real good look at it. Station IU.RAO's BHZ channel is toast, so no good, could be the BHE or BHN channel might show something. Closest and most intense signal registered at FIJI, followed by DZM near Vanuato. And it is shaking up the Pacific pretty darn good. Propagation well into South America and Alaska.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

Thanks, matey.
That's pretty much what I was hoping. It's about the best tsunami report we can get under such circumstances. Providing the people on the nearest islands are okay then this quake might not be too serious an event.

reply to post by TrueAmerican
 

And many thanks for the GEE screenshot, mate!


I've had some issues with GEE in the past couple of days so Murphy's Law being in effect, I wasn't running it and so I missed this quake entirely.

EDIT: reply to post by MamaJ
 

MamaJ, please refer to Puterman's post (click the "reply to" link above within this post) for details of the tsunami warning report.


Best regards,
Mike
edit on 21/10/11 by JustMike because: Added reply to MamaJ



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I don't include the Kermies in my data for NZ, only going as far north as -32.056, which is the top of the Geonet search rectangle, but thats the 2nd 7.6 there this year (if USGS is correct with the Mag)

otherwise on the main islands and coastal waters
As of October 21st there have been 41 quakes from 5.006 to 5.906ML releasing 141,581.08 tonnes of TNT

and 4 quakes 6.338, 6.343, 6.351, 6.496 on land and two offshore, 6.336 (Hikurangi Trench) 6.516 (Kermadec Ridge) with a calculated energy released of 402,239 tonnes of TNT


giving a total energy release of Mag 5+ of 543,820.0867 tonnes of TNT

Map of those

and up to Oct 21st there have been;
12 quakes less than 1.0
1840 quakes from 1.01 to 1.999ML
9737 quakes from 2.0 to 2.999ML
3188 quakes from 3.0 to 3.998ML
366 quakes 4.004 to 4.994ML
with a calculated total energy release of 33,926.2 tonnes of TNT

magma.geonet.org.nz...

even Mag 4's are pretty insignificant in the big scheme of things eh

edit on 21-10-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Why?


My apologies for not looking far enough back through the pages to see putermans comment, if that is why you replied to me that which you said.....dunno.

I actually was replying to Muzzy on purpose...but....now I am quite confused.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Yup very proud of your restraint. Bet someone has though.

They are being very slow getting this data out. No PAGER info yet, no phase or travel times and only a single tensor solution.

You did say this was a 6.something!



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 

Because in your post, at the end, you had:

Originally posted by MamaJ

Tsunami anyone???



So, I gave you the link to Puterman's post where he has the tsunami report. That's all. Doesn't worry me that you missed it. When the thread moves fast anyone can miss the odd post. (I am notorious for it!
)

Best regards,

Mike



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


You said tsunami anyone???

Mike was just pointing out that I had posted a tsunami report. That is all. No need for confusion.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


Thats OK, as I was replying to Putermans question about what magnitude Geonet might call it


Confuison reigns all over



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 

I've been watching the ATS firehose and haven't seen a thread about this quake pop up yet.

I expect someone will rush to post this quake in the "breaking news" forum when the MSM finally get hold of it and it gets on Fox, CNN, etc etc... And they'll likely link to a news report from one of those networks and ask if anyone felt it...

That seems to be the way it usually happens.

You know, if we were hunting stars and flags we could make an absolute killing.


Mike



edit on 21/10/11 by JustMike because: I made a typo. How shocking.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Does not look nearly so good in the ducky!

SNZO.IU.00.BHZ.2011.294
URZ.NZ.10.HHZ.2011.294

I want some of those filters!!!
edit on 21/10/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Nah sorry no killing today.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I knew someone would be flag hunting.



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Always someone after brownie points!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Regards

Puterman's a sharper knife than I!
edit on 21/10/11 by logicalview because: Too slow!



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Oh BTW
if its a 7.6 thats 378,7985.6 tonnes of TNT
if its a 7.3 thats 134,4028.0 tonnes of TNT
released
thats a big difference

GFZ 7.3
GeoAu 7.3 (usgs data)
EMSC 7.5
RAS gone to bed?

edit on 21-10-2011 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Thanks for the linky, Puterman & LogicalView. Tarnation, that thread must have slipped right by me while I was having dinner.

Oh well, at least the OP gave the data from USGS instead of one of the less-than-reliable sites like RS (cough cough) OE (cough cough) Edis...

To be fair, a high mag 7 (if not bigger??) is pretty significant. Not like some of the new threads that frankly are posting totally ordinary events. And I don't just mean that in reference to quakes.


Mike



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
HAHA!
Sorry guys!!!!

My mind began to boggle when I saw that big un....totally caught me by surprise and I couldn't wait to see what you all were saying. I wondered why only muzzy was talking about it. Ha!! I guess my impatience to talk about it lead to all the confusion. ((((HUGS))))

Any who.....so yeah....no tsunami. That is grand!
I was concerned and now I am left to wonder...why? Is it because it was so deep and if you guys are discussing it right now.....no worries to reply I will just shut up and listen (observe/watch).



posted on Oct, 21 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Of course I cannot prove it but only yesterday I said we are about over due for a 7+ so I guess perhaps not unexpected but I would not knock someone for posting it really since unless you eat breathe and sleep earthquakes I expect a 7.6 is pretty big...a big un... per Mamaj and the knowledge of the earthquake areas is needed to determine if it was likely to be bad.

Let's face it we would not bat an eyelid at this but a 7.6 on land anywhere would be a serious affair.

reply to post by MamaJ
 



My mind began to boggle when I saw that big un...





new topics

top topics



 
203
<< 314  315  316    318  319  320 >>

log in

join