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.

 

Is the world's largest super-volcano set to erupt for the first time in 600,000 years, wiping out t

page: 5
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by strato
 


Oh Arnt you smart!


Thats my current location, Not where i am all the time




posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


I woke up 2 mornings ago with a feeling of impending doom ................



I am about to ruin any chance of ever receiving that honorable ATS Spokesperson of The Year Award but......visiting threads like this, don't help!

"Doom" was on ...the moment we are born. So it's up to us to decide whether to let it become a part of our daily lives or an abstract, undefined, unknown, unpredictable part of the outside world.

I personally don't let any of this bother me. I trust in the process and thoroughly love life (it's this world that I can't stand
)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



I could be wrong but I think the BP disaster in the gulf of mexico is capable of causing an earthquake on the new madrid faultline and the yellowstone crater to erupt due to unbalanced pressures under the north american continent...especially if that oil pocket was as big as they hinted at...1 trillion gallons of oil!


Your next statement


Oh and I never said BP will cause the new madrid earthquake nor the yellowstone eruption. I implied that the lack of oil and gas pressure from that extremely deep well(also know as abiotic oil due to its depth)


Now unless my reading and comprehension skills are rather bad that looks like a total refutation of your own statement.


from that extremely deep well(also know as abiotic oil due to its depth)


I think perhaps you need to read up on the possibilities of abiotic oil. I does not necessarily have anything to do with depth, and certainly deep oil is not known as abiotic.

You could look at this: Odd Reservoir Off Louisiana Prods Oil Experts to Seek a Deeper Meaning

or this: Sustainable Oil?


reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Really, maybe YOU care to explain HOW earthquakes work then?


I have no doubt that he could. His father is a retired USGS seismologist.


edit on 25/1/2011 by PuterMan because: missing words, bad spelling - the usual stuff!




posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by lewman
 



on a slightly selfish note, does anyone know how this would effect europe as i dont want to die yet


reply to post by Theonlywoody
 



Would dallas Texas be affected?


Yes to both the above!


Wipeout!

But it is not going to happen just yet!



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Portugoal
 



Last time I checked, no science could tell us when a volcano was going to erupt. Has this changed?


This of course depends upon the time frame. Science can often tell us months in advance that a volcano will blow, but conversely it often has no clue.

I would agree with you on longer term predictions of years, but a couple of months? Yes I think that is possible.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by bluedrake
 


On my 'links' site on this page you will find links to the GPS monitors. One of the ones I have created a link for on that page is Yellowstone Lake. You can go to that link to verify it for yourself, but the image you will get is



You can see on this that the vertical channel - the height - has tailed off and is falling. This image was last updated 24 Jan 2011.


edit on 25/1/2011 by PuterMan because: missing words, bad spelling - the usual stuff!




posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 



If it was going to blow though do you think they would tell us?


I will tell you this. The answer is yes they would. Jake Lowenstern, head of the YWO, has already admitted that they cannot fool us on the Yellowstone thread as we know just as fast as they do what is going on. They also look at the tread from time to time.

There are members (not me) who watch GEE on Yellowstone and would know instantly if there was something to be concerned about.

I don't think you need to have any concerns about not being told.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   
Can we stop making 3452135253213525 threads about Yellowstone a day? Getting annoying, especially when they all mention the same thing - that its overdue for an eruption and its going to erupt. We know this already. Post a thread when something new develops. Thanks.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
on a slightly selfish note, does anyone know how this would effect europe as i dont want to die yet


The plumes would help cool Earth atmosphere down modifying the weather over there even more. Dont worry your eternal.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Secularist
Can we stop making 3452135253213525 threads about Yellowstone a day? Getting annoying, especially when they all mention the same thing - that its overdue for an eruption and its going to erupt. We know this already. Post a thread when something new develops. Thanks.


What's even more annoying are people such as yourself who come on these threads just to say they're annoying.

edit on 25-1-2011 by Human_Alien because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
This is basically a duplicate post, the last thread isn't even cold and here we are again:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I thought the Moderators were supposed to stop this kind of repetative posting. I thought people who were starting threads were supposed to research to see if another thread already existed.

So a new article has been written, does it not say the same thing and is the information just as inaccurate as it was in the last post?

Could we at least have attempts being made to respect the truth here, isn't that what this site is supposed to be looking for?



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Planet Earth Hates America.Its trying to kill you guys.No doubt.

Anyz...

Well a lot of strange things have been going on whether it means anything only time will tell.Though I hope Yellowstone's volcano doesn't erupt.Can't imagine how many people will lose their lives if it does.

True what you said about all these doomsday predictions making people numb.I try and stay away from doomsday threads and every time the history channel has another Nostradamus documentary I wanna go nuts.Was fun in the beginning but now it's just getting old.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
[Now unless my reading and comprehension skills are rather bad that looks like a total refutation of your own statement.


Indeed your reading comprehension skills must be lacking because you don't know the difference between COULD and WILL! True science evolves constantly but some scientists stop keeping up with the times after they get their college degree...because they think they know everything.

What was acceptable knowledge 50 years ago may not be acceptable today and vice versa.


Originally posted by PuterMan
I think perhaps you need to read up on the possibilities of abiotic oil. I does not necessarily have anything to do with depth, and certainly deep oil is not known as abiotic.

You could look at this: Odd Reservoir Off Louisiana Prods Oil Experts to Seek a Deeper Meaning


Thanks for links but apparently you don't understand what abiotic oil is if you say "does not necessarily have anything to do with depth and certainly deep oil is not known as abiotic. Maybe not for american scientists, who always lag behind the russians in everything, including the space race.

Scientists Prove Abiotic Oil Is Real!---Notice the bolded text---

The abiotic oil formation theory suggests that crude oil is the result of naturally occurring and possibly ongoing geological processes. This theory was developed in the Soviet Union during the Cold War, as the Union needed to be self sufficient in terms of producing its own energy. The science behind the theory is sound and is based on experimental evidence in both the laboratory and in the field. This theory has helped to identify and therefore develop large numbers of gas and oil deposits. Examples of such fields are the South Khylchuyu field and the controversial Sakhalin II field.

In its simplest form, the theory is that carbon present in the magma beneath the crust reacts with hydrogen to form methane as well as a raft of other mainly alkane hydrocarbons.
The reactions are more complicated than this, with several intermediate stages. Particular mineral rocks such as granite and other silicon based rocks act as catalysts, which speed up the reaction without actually becoming involved or consumed in the process.

Experiments have shown that under extreme conditions of heat and pressure it is possible to convert iron oxide, calcium carbonate and water into methane, with hydrocarbons containing up to 10 carbon atoms being produced by Russian scientists last century and confirmed in recent US experiments. The absence of large quantities of free gaseous oxygen in the magma prevents the hydrocarbons from burning and therefore forming the lower energy state molecule carbon dioxide. The conditions present in the Earth's mantle would easily be sufficient for these small hydrocarbon chains to polymerise into the longer chain molecules found in crude oil.


Later down the page comes the theoretical abstract:


Methane-derived hydrocarbons produced under upper-mantle conditions
Anton Kolesnikov1,2, Vladimir G. Kutcherov2,3 & Alexander F. Goncharov1

Abstract

There is widespread evidence that petroleum originates from biological processes1, 2, 3. Whether hydrocarbons can also be produced from abiogenic precursor molecules under the high-pressure, high-temperature conditions characteristic of the upper mantle remains an open question. It has been proposed that hydrocarbons generated in the upper mantle could be transported through deep faults to shallower regions in the Earth's crust, and contribute to petroleum reserves4, 5. Here we use in situ Raman spectroscopy in laser-heated diamond anvil cells to monitor the chemical reactivity of methane and ethane under upper-mantle conditions. We show that when methane is exposed to pressures higher than 2 GPa, and to temperatures in the range of 1,000-1,500 K, it partially reacts to form saturated hydrocarbons containing 2-4 carbons (ethane, propane and butane) and molecular hydrogen and graphite. Conversely, exposure of ethane to similar conditions results in the production of methane, suggesting that the synthesis of saturated hydrocarbons is reversible. Our results support the suggestion that hydrocarbons heavier than methane can be produced by abiogenic processes in the upper mantle.




Originally posted by PuterMan

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Really, maybe YOU care to explain HOW earthquakes work then?


I have no doubt that he could. His father is a retired USGS seismologist.


edit on 25/1/2011 by PuterMan because: missing words, bad spelling - the usual stuff!



So there is a personal connection between his father and you?

Could there be a conflict of interest between speaking the truth or maybe he is just experienced in OLD STUFF and would not know the difference between fossil fuel oil and abiotic oil? I think we are going off-topic because you forced me to prove abiotic oil is real when all you had to do is research stuff yourself.


I still maintain that deep oil(wether abiotic or fossil) lubricates the fault lines and is somewhat necessary for plate tectonic stability. I cannot be sure of anything, its just a theory that I read somewhere!
edit on 25-1-2011 by EarthCitizen07 because: fixed quote



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by lewman
 



on a slightly selfish note, does anyone know how this would effect europe as i dont want to die yet


reply to post by Theonlywoody
 



Would dallas Texas be affected?


Yes to both the above!


Wipeout!

But it is not going to happen just yet!


I think you are exaggerating quite a bit. Yes it will kill a lot of people in north america but on other continents the devastation will be significantly less and a lot depends on the wind and atomospeheric conditions prevalent at the time. The real dangers will initially be the ash clouds and later a big drop in temperature which means crop failures and a possible mini ice age.

Perhaps the eruption can be delayed and/or lessened by relief holes into the ground but this probably theoretical and never done before. It would help if people actually knew what the hell was going on rather than being kept in the dark. The fact that some people cheer for something like this to happen is absolutely retarded and only the terms and conditions of this site prevent me from properly expressing myself!



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


I am not to sure about the media but I know something is different in our world, when you go outside and look at the moon it looks very strange. I don't exactly know how but sometimes she looks tilted and out of phase if that makes sense, it could just be me but I have seen videos on it on Youtube. On top of that I am always loosing my balance lately, I did go to the doctor to get checked out and was given a clean bill of health. Besides that and on top of that, something just feels different, I don't know what it is but I have had this feeling since 2010 and it has intensified since 2011.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   
So went to hisz.rsoe.hu...

And guess what i found............................

Volcano Activity Report
Service Stopped

The volcano information system has been shut down. Our information source we use has ceased, so the EDIS RSOE own information and monitoring system development has begun.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by TedHodgson
Bring it on i say, Drop kick me Jesus through the Goalposts of life


At least itll be warm for a change!

edit on 24/1/11 by TedHodgson because: (no reason given)


I thought, 'brave words indeed!'. Then i noticed your location is England, Yorkshire... Hmmm....



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien





Let's review shall we?

We have massive die-offs.
FEMA staging 'earthquake' drills this Spring/Summer
Magnetic Poles moving
Airports readjusting
Greenland & Arctic seeing Sunrise early
Land in Michigan heating up
GOM disaster causing an underwater volcano
and of course....2012 prophecies.

Your Absolutely correct, and we're not even through january yet....


I realize Yellowstone gets mentioned every once in a while and the MSM talks about 'dooms-day' so.......I think this is in an attempt of getting us numb.
If they mention potentially dangerous situations often enough, we're going to get immune to it which, is already happening.

I've posted many different threads (all sort of related) to read that some people simply don't care because, there's nothing to worry about.

Okay fine. Maybe that's true but I think we're all in agreement, MSM is playing this up a LOT lately.

Without a doubt, tptb have been executing this agenda for many years, the plot is inderd getting much thicker though.



www.dai lymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Indeed your reading comprehension skills must be lacking because you don't know the difference between COULD and WILL!


This has no bearing on the fact that you contradicted yourself plain and simple. You inferred that the BP spill would cause an earthquake at New Madrid and an eruption at Yellowstone - in your opinion of course - I will grant you that qualification. The facts are there to see.


True science evolves constantly but some scientists stop keeping up with the times after they get their college degree...because they think they know everything.

What was acceptable knowledge 50 years ago may not be acceptable today and vice versa.


And this is in relation to what exactly?


Thanks for links but apparently you don't understand what abiotic oil is if you say "does not necessarily have anything to do with depth and certainly deep oil is not known as abiotic.


You were accusing me of comprehension difficulty? "Does not necessarily" does not mean "does not". Your statement was that deep oil is known as abiotic.


from that extremely deep well(also know as abiotic oil due to its depth)


That is not the case. Deep oil is not necessarily abiotic, but it might be. Are you saying that ALL Russian scientists refer to deep oil as abiotic? If you are Russian and this is your experience than you possibly could make that statement. but only with the qualification if Russian i.e. "also known by Russian scientists as abiotic oil due to its depth"

Your statement equates all deep oil to abiotic as referenced by all scientists. Had you said "..from that extremely deep well, which may be a source of abiotic oil..." or as I suggested above then I would have possibly have agreed with you. I am not saying you are wrong by the way, just that you cannot make the statement that all deep oil is abiotic.

In no way did I state anywhere that abiotic oil did not exist. I do indeed understand the term abiotic oil and what it is and I believed I introduced the topic on the Fragile Earth forum, at least recently anyway. I have not 'forced you to prove it exists' since I was aware of that anyway but you have misread what I said and would appear to have a problem with the English language. Now if you are not conversing in your native tongue then I fully understand your difficulty and appreciate the fact that you can communicate in another language.


Maybe not for american scientists, who always lag behind the russians in everything, including the space race.


An unsupportable generalisation. I am not saying the American scientists are any better or worse, and I do have great respect for Russian science.


So there is a personal connection between his father and you?


We seem to have a logic problem here. Does this have anything whatsoever to do with with the fact that a poster has a geologist for a father - which is a fact. Whether or not I know the poster's father is an irrelevance.


Could there be a conflict of interest between speaking the truth or maybe he is just experienced in OLD STUFF and would not know the difference between fossil fuel oil and abiotic oil? I think we are going off-topic because you forced me to prove abiotic oil is real when all you had to do is research stuff yourself.


The reference to the poster's father was about earthquakes and not about abiotic oil. I would suggest that perhaps inferring that the poster's father is a liar is not being fair since like me you know nothing about the gentleman and that is a slur on his character. I also resent the inference that someone who is older is not capable of keeping up with modern theory. When I studied geology the plate tectonics theory had only just been invented. By the time I left college it had not been widely accepted. Does that mean I do not understand it? No. When I was at college computers were not common anywhere and certainly no one had one in schools or homes. Does this mean I do not understand them? No. I am a programmer by trade hence my handle.


I still maintain that deep oil(wether abiotic or fossil) lubricates the fault lines and is somewhat necessary for plate tectonic stability. I cannot be sure of anything, its just a theory that I read somewhere!


I have a feeling after that last statement that you are flying around on the surface of a subject about which you know and/or understand little. If you maintain that because you read it somewhere then please provide a reference to that to back up your statement as this is a particular area of interest for me.

The lubrication of faults is an interesting subject and at times controversial. Various things can lubricate a fault from powders to melt created by friction during thrust movements. Melt may actually inhibit fault movement, or damp it I should say, but either way it seems that the lubrication is effective during the thrust and not in the static state.

Some further reading for you:

Nano clay coatings provide key lubrication at earthquake faults

Natural and Experimental Evidence of Melt Lubrication of Faults During Earthquakes

Fault lubrication and earthquake propagation in thermally unstable rocks
This abstract by Nicola De Paola of Durham University which unfortunately I cannot get the full detail for was research carried out by De Paola et al backed by a £566,000 research grant.

That is just a few to keep you going. By the way with the AAAS document you can sign up (free) and get the full document.

Oh by the way, thanks for the link on abiotic oil. I shall add it to my ongoing studies of the subject. Of particular interest in that was the theory of diamond production.

The link to Scribd requires payment to download the file so perhaps people may prefer a free alternative. This is the same article as a PDF

The Non-Organic Theory Of The Genesis Of Petroleum



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



I think you are exaggerating quite a bit. Yes it will kill a lot of people in north america but on other continents the devastation will be significantly less and a lot depends on the wind and atomospeheric conditions prevalent at the time.


Please do not display your complete ignorance. If Yellowstone blew completely it would indeed be wipe-out for Europe and Texas, the two areas referred to. That is no exaggeration and I am additionally not prone to making portents of "doom". I answered the question - possibly with too much brevity - but that does not make the statement untrue.

I suggest that before you make rather pathetic attempts to mitigate the effects of a full eruption you do some proper research into the potential.

In line with your statement below people should be aware of the possibilities with this super-volcano. The only continents where the effects might be less could be Australia and Antarctica, but significantly? Not so sure about that.


Perhaps the eruption can be delayed and/or lessened by relief holes into the ground but this probably theoretical and never done before.


Exactly where/how did you come up with this completely insane idea? Yes why not create a trigger to spew the contents out, if in fact a large enough hole could be drilled. Perhaps they could drop a nuke or two down? Maybe that would do the trick. Good idea - NOT!


It would help if people actually knew what the hell was going on rather than being kept in the dark. The fact that some people cheer for something like this to happen is absolutely retarded and only the terms and conditions of this site prevent me from properly expressing myself!


In that respect I fully applaud what you say.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join