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: 402
203
<< 399  400  401    403  404  405 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzy
I find those graphs harder to guess the distance unless they are biguns


Yes, me too. Not crazy about webicorders other than just to see that something happened. Is why I much prefer GEE. Zoom tools for close quakes. Amplitude measurements on a scale more understandable (to me). Consistency and good reference. No way I could be as mildly accurate guessing magnitudes if I had to use just webicorders. No way.




posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Thanks Puterman and Muzzy for taking time to type all that you did on the last page.

It was a good read.

...So many pairs!!

MAP 2.8 2011/12/16 20:31:03 19.146 -66.805 16.0 PUERTO RICO REGION
MAP 3.0 2011/12/16 19:59:30 19.141 -66.850 32.5 PUERTO RICO REGION
MAP 4.8 2011/12/16 15:47:27 7.724 94.045 52.0 NICOBAR ISLANDS, INDIA REGION
MAP 4.8 2011/12/16 15:12:45 7.790 94.085 46.5 NICOBAR ISLANDS, INDIA REGION
MAP 5.5 2011/12/16 12:54:25 -45.852 -76.264 10.0 OFF THE COAST OF AISEN, CHILE
MAP 5.2 2011/12/16 12:02:57 -45.852 -76.075 9.9 OFF THE COAST OF AISEN, CHILE
MAP 2.5 2011/12/16 11:21:00 63.588 -147.454 0.0 CENTRAL ALASKA
MAP 3.1 2011/12/16 11:10:56 63.576 -147.537 0.2 CENTRAL ALASKA
MAP 4.8 2011/12/16 06:12:02 36.343 140.059 71.2 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU
MAP 4.8 2011/12/16 05:27:31 38.436 142.118 34.2 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU
MAP 3.7 2011/12/16 00:22:11 19.329 -155.348 31.2 ISLAND OF HAWAII, HAWAII
MAP 2.6 2011/12/16 00:17:17 19.331 -155.344 32.0 ISLAND OF HAWAII, HAWAII
edit on 16/12/11 by murkraz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


this is interesting. do you think this has anything to do with 2012?



posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Magnitude
3.2
Date-Time
Saturday, December 17, 2011 at 03:16:54 UTC
Friday, December 16, 2011 at 08:16:54 PM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
36.912°N, 104.943°W
Depth
5 km (3.1 miles)
Region
NEW MEXICO
Distances
44 km (27 miles) W of Raton, New Mexico
48 km (29 miles) SW of Trinidad, Colorado
79 km (49 miles) NE of Taos, New Mexico
164 km (101 miles) NNE of SANTA FE, New Mexico
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 11.2 km (7.0 miles); depth +/- 3.1 km (1.9 miles)
Parameters
NST= 26, Nph= 31, Dmin=258.3 km, Rmss=1.45 sec, Gp= 65°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=8
Source
Magnitude: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Location: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Event ID
usc00077lc


earthquake.usgs.gov...



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Man! a 5.1 in this area......seems a little larger then usual


earthquake.usgs.gov...



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   
I call Tsunami on the Mona Passage Quake....

God be with the Puerto Ricans....

Too shallow, and too large....

edit on 17-12-2011 by freetree64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by radpetey
 

And now a 5.3?



MAP 5.3 2011/12/17 06:09:09 18.126 -67.303 23.2 MONA PASSAGE, PUERTO RICO
MAP 5.1 2011/12/17 06:06:11 18.101 -67.350 15.0 MONA PASSAGE, PUERTO RICO


earthquake.usgs.gov...
edit on Sat Dec 17th 2011 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)


ETA: Very unlikely that is strong enough for a tsunami.
edit on Sat Dec 17th 2011 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Holy c#$%!!!! Stand by Puerto Rico, God be with y'all.... hope that's an echo...



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 02:15 AM
link   
1st AP news out

2 strong earthquakes strike Puerto Rico
The Associated Press


www.palmbeachpost.com/news/world/2-strong-earthquakes-strike-puerto-rico-2037365.html


SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — Two strong earthquakes have struck Puerto Rico within minutes of each other.

The quakes, with magnitudes of 5.1 and 5.3 respectively, occurred three minutes apart just after 2 a.m. local time Saturday in the Mona Passage, just to the west of the island. A smaller aftershock was reported a few minutes later.

There were no immediate reports of damage.

___

December 17, 2011 03:06 AM EST

edit on 17-12-2011 by txhutos because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 02:37 AM
link   
Minor quakes hit Puerto Rico, no report of damage

17 Dec 2011 07:11

Source: reuters // Reuters


www.trust.org/alertnet/news/minor-quakes-hit-puerto-rico-no-report-of-damage


(...)

The tremor was felt at a hotel on the northwestern coast of Puerto Rico, said Jose Caro, an employee at Marriott Courtyard Aguadilla.

"Everything is OK. Some people went out of their rooms, but everything is back to normal," said Caro, reached by phone from Washington.

(...)

edit on 17-12-2011 by txhutos because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   
UK slurps in quietly with a little rattle

2011/12/16 05:31:22.4 54.354 -2.180 13 1.3 HAWES,NORTH YORKSHIRE

www.earthquakes.bgs.ac.uk...

Rainbows
Jane



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 06:11 AM
link   
Since Puerto Rico, and while we slept

Magnitude mb 5.2
Region SOUTH OF KERMADEC ISLANDS
Date time 2011-12-17 10:18:20.0 UTC
Location 33.10 S ; 178.20 W
Depth 30 km
Distances 723 km NE Tauranga (pop 110,338 ; local time 23:18:20.9 2011-12-17)
694 km NE Whakatane (pop 18,602 ; local time 23:18:20.9 2011-12-17)
617 km NE Ruatoria (pop 897 ; local time 22:18:20.9 2011-12-17)
Source parameters not yet reviewed by a seismologist
www.emsc-csem.org...

Rainbows
Jane



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by angelchemuel
 


all this and right after comet lovejoy stayed intact from close call with sun and seems to be recharging its tail. hmmm



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by youwontfindme
 


Hi youwontfindme and welcome to ATS and to QuakeWatch 2011. Looks like we did find you!

Here you will find some of the best information about earthquakes on the Internet. Why do I say that? Because the members who frequent this thread, and those who lurk and occasionally stick their heads up into the firing line on the whole produce excellent work that is based on facts.

You will find some of the alternative geophysical theories on this thread: Geophysics which is hosted by Zenius who you will also see on this thread.

Anything of a speculative nature to do with Yellowstone / Fracking / Arkansas / Bird Deaths / Hudson Bay / Life / Death / Resurrection / the Economy / Politics / Religion etc you can post on the thread hosted by Robin Marks (aka Eric Blair): Robinesque Ruminations

Volcano stuff you will find on Volcano Watch and last but by no means least the giant Yellowstone thread is a BIG read all about the Park that has passed page 700.

These and more ATS links, and links to many external sites you can find in my signature block and in the signatures of others.

Never be afraid to ask a question. We will always try to answer, and no one gets ridiculed here because of a lack of knowledge on what is a complex and multifaceted subject.

Now as to your specific question I am not sure which bit you are referring to as the first post has so many elements!

With regard to 2012 however and the many theories of disaster, doom and end of the world I have to say that I think it unlikely that any of the supposed tragedies will occur as the basis of most of the conjecture is flawed.

It is far too complex to go into here and this particular thread is not the right place. Suffice it to say that I am looking forward to QuakeWatch 2013.

One of the best 2012 debunking sites is 2010hoax.org but you can find many more simply by typing '2012 debunked' into a Google search.

Relax and enjoy life as best you can with all the economic gloom. That is far more depressing than any Mayan calendar dates!!!!


edit on 17/12/2011 by PuterMan because: Darn it can I not get just ONE post without a spelling error? Humph!




posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 08:15 AM
link   
reply to post by letscit
 



all this and right after comet lovejoy stayed intact from close call with sun and seems to be recharging its tail. hmmm


hmmm? This is a member of the Kreutz family of comets (sungrazing) most of which are thought to be around ~10m in diameter and therefore completely unable to have any effect upon the earth or earthquakes even if one of then did a close flyby of this planet.

From the NASA article


“It’s absolutely astounding,” says Karl Battams of the Naval Research Lab in Washington D.C. “I did not think the comet’s icy core was big enough to survive plunging through the several million degree solar corona for close to an hour, but Comet Lovejoy is still with us.”


It is only absolutely astounding if you are stupid enough to still believe that comets are made of ice even after NASA has proved they are not.


"I'd guess the comet's core must have been at least 500 meters in diameter; otherwise it couldn't have survived so much solar heating," says Matthew Knight. "A significant fraction of that mass would have been lost during the encounter. What's left is probably much smaller than the original comet."


It might if it was rock! When Elenin broke up they could detect no ice despite so many astronomers both amateur and professional saying it was a ball of ice. Idiots all!

Anyway even at 500m wide and assuming it is made of rock the energy BEFORE atmospheric entry would be equivalent of around a Mag 10.3 if it hit us and Richter Scale Magnitude: 7.7 on impact, in other words it would not be an ELE. Have play for youyrself

If it was ice it would be equivalent to a 9.9 before entry based on 41km/sec impact speed @ 30° angle on to sedimentary rock and reduced to Richter Scale Magnitude: 7.2 at the impact.




edit on 17/12/2011 by PuterMan because: Ah, the inevitable speeling erra




posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to Mr muzzy from New Zealand


As I have atendancy to do, I checked myself


What's this? You don't believe the scientists and check for yourself? Hang your head in shame Sir! Science is the One True Religion and scientists are Gods (so we are told
). How can you question their findings?

Well, I kind of agree with you as so far the association seems fairly loose. The main problem as you have pointed out is accuracy of data. So many of the older historical quakes are based on accounts that for obvious reasons are not backed by accurate instrumentation. Was it a 6/7/8?

As with looking at global incidence I think you cannot look at anything below Mag 6.5 as the records just are not there to support it, and maybe you Mag 7 project would be an even better level. IF there is a cycle then it should show in your project.

reply to the Grand muzzy Of ATS
 




I had a search through NEIC and there was no 7's that day anywhere in the World.


But you should be looking for a 5.5 surely? You always get a good discount from the US of A



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr True Blue American
 



And oh, whoever posted that 120 micron GEE waveform at C.GO05 or C.GO09, that quake was very minor. As in not even a 4.


The post to which you refer was this by Olivine

This was in relation to the Mag 5.9 however as was commented at the time by Olivine it did seem wrong for timing and as we determined on the day the 5.9 did not show on other South American seismos.

The quake displayed by Olivine would appear to have been this one:


2011/12/07 11:00:54 2011/12/07 14:00:54 -34.537 -72.982 22.4 4.1 Ml GUC No 91 km al O de Pichilemu


Source

So whilst not under 4 it was close enough TA to be awarded.........



It is also nice to have cleared up the mystery.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 




Actually I did look at 5+ on NEIC, nothing in NZ, but thats not unusual, they miss a lot here.
Nearest 5 was Fiji area, too far out of the Geonet search area.

I'd e-mail Geonet about the mistake but with the holidays so close I doubt they would look into it.
They would probably be surprised anyone even downloads that old data, like once when I told them the there was no data for about 4 days, they hadn't even noticed, something had broken down at their web face.



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
MAG, REF, LAT, LONG, UTC, DEPTH, LOCATION
4.92, 3621377, -38.66163, 175.70877, [color=FDD017]2011/12/4 4:5:51, 156, 3335 Western Bay Rd, Tihoi 3381

This one has been upgraded to 5.035 ML by Geonet


That now makes 47 x 5's
6 x 6's
for 2011



posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Grumpy
 


Umm what is 4.1 ml converted into mw please?
About what, a 3.9?



new topics

top topics



 
203
<< 399  400  401    403  404  405 >>

log in

join