San Andreas a subduction fault capable of a 9.5+ EQ, USGS cover up?

As a resident of southern california who has been anticipating 'the big one' for years - I have heard this theory before, but have never been able to find hard evidence to confirm it.

Anyways, as I was reading the blurb on LA Times website today regarding the 5.2 off the Oregon coast that happened this afternoon, I stumbled across a comment from an anonymous user that states the following:

latimesblogs.latimes.com...

The BIG ONE is less than 6 months away! Beware LA residents your doomed because of your stupidity believing what the USGS has been saying for the last 50 years which is totally wrong. The San Andreas is not simply a strike-slip fault with a limited intensity of 7.5 or so. It occasionally does a subduction (which is what built the Sierra Madre mountains) every 5th or 6th strike-slip cycle.

Stanford and other Universities have revealed the truth though and the USGS should apologize to all the citizens in California because the San Andreas is jammed and San Francisco is now 17 years over due, Fort Tejon is 67 years over due, and Wrightwood is 111 years over due.

Why? Because as the North American plate moves to the West it puts considerable pressure on the Pacific plate which is trying to move North but along most of that plate, as in Peru, as in Cascadia (West of Seattle), as in Alaska--it usually subducts because the Pacific Ocean is getting smaller as the Atlantic Ocean gets larger.

The pressure builds gradually over 500 years or so and then the plates do a combination strike-slip and subduction simultaneously and the resulting BIG ONE can be up to a 9.5 as over 1000 miles of the fault can slip at one time (up to 1500 miles all the way from the Gulf of California almost to Alaska).

Beware Californians you have been lied to by the USGS for decades!

Not only can the plate in which LA resides subduct but it can subduct and result in substantial drops in elevation along the coast such that many beaches will be submerged (by as much as 30 feet underwater).

LA is a ticking time bomb that is way understated the dangers of living there! San Francisco and San Diego are in the same boat as is Seattle and Portland

Posted by: mipak | February 08, 2011 at 04:51 PM

So can any of the geology experts on this forum confirm this theory/claim? I really hope it's just more fearmongering and that there is no legitimacy regarding this.

Nothing to add. Just wanted to say thanks, hadn't heard of the 5.2 off the Oregon coast at all! Great find and great way to approach it! (..)

Thanks OP for the article - its been awhile since I read anything current on the San Andreas. Is there any way of finding out who the person is that wrote the article. I hope someone comes in that can confirm or disprove this scientific theory, if thats what it is.


A 9.5 - I can't quiet comprehend a quake this large.

yeah i heard something about this before..been a few years but i think the main thing they were watching for warnings was the cascadius subduction zone (hope I spelled that right)..I Live in San Jose California And have taken all the earthquake warnings to heart so thanks for the heads up on the Oregon Quake...I just hope that if anything major ever happened the Santa Cruz Mtns are tall enough

Ok so, basically there is no such thing as a subduction fault. There are subduction zones, where plates subduct. The San Andreas Fault is actually a transform fault, which is awesome anyway because normally they are found on the ocean floor. Anyway, the San Andreas fault is connected to the Cascadia Subduction Zone. And it is believed that earthquakes in the Cascadia SB can trigger earthquakes events on the SA Fault. It is the Cascadia Subduction Zone you need to be worried about, not San Andreas. Geologists predict a 10 to 14% probability that the CSZ will produce an event of magnitude 9 or higher in the next 50 yrs. Cascadia Subduction Zone

Originally posted by crazydaisy
Thanks OP for the article - its been awhile since I read anything current on the San Andreas. Is there any way of finding out who the person is that wrote the article. I hope someone comes in that can confirm or disprove this scientific theory, if thats what it is.

A 9.5 - I can't quiet comprehend a quake this large.

edit on 9-2-2011 by crazydaisy because: (no reason given)

The comment I quoted was posted under the article itself by some random user. And apparently the LA Times deleted some other posts by the same user which adds to the conspiracy and makes me believe whoever posted this info might actually be telling the truth.

I believe we have had at least 5 mag 9.0+ in recorded history (basically since 1900), with the most recent one being the 2004 Sumatra quake that created a massive tsunami that killed thousands in multiple countries.

Scientists has also speculated that a massive 9.0+ EQ unloaded on the Cascadia subduction zone (the same place this 5.2 quake happened today) back in the 1700's and expect a similar sized one to occur in the near future. It's also been speculated that the New Madrid EQ's were anywhere from 8.0-9.0+ back in 1812.

What concerns me most right now is the recent report regarding FEMA inquiring about millions of underwater coffins and food packets. It's almost like they know it's a matter of days before a catostrophic EQ happens on one of these dangerous US faults.

Many psychics have also pointed to the 2011-2012 timeframe for the San Andreas to unleash its fury and produce the long awaited 'big one'. I'm no psychic, but I've had a bad feeling for some time and at the point where I'm trying to sell my home and get as far away from CA as possible. My friends and family think I'm paranoid but something tells me my life expectancy will be decreased expontentially the longer I stay in CA and await the inevitable....

Uh can anyone counter this claim and make us feel better? Little dire no? Let's be honest there is a lot of rich people who would be in 'the know' here. Ohhhhh the big one.....Earthquakes suck.

While no one can just predict when the "big one" is going to happen, I don't understand the remark about the 7.5 limited intensity.

Beware LA residents your doomed because of your stupidity believing what the USGS has been saying for the last 50 years which is totally wrong. The San Andreas is not simply a strike-slip fault with a limited intensity of 7.5 or so.

Why would the USGS tell anyone the above? Unless I'm thinking of a different faultline, because the Vancouver area, and all the way down the USA coastline was always thought to end up involved in the "big one", and we've always been told that it could be well over a 9.

We've always been told that the whole area could go down as one of the biggest earthquakes in history. It could happen at anytime, or possibly not for decades or maybe not even in this century. Anywhere along the ring of fire could be really bad.

reply to post by Disconnected Sociopath


Its actually very old news. However, It cannot be confirmed that its 6 months away. its one of those things that could happen tomorrow or in a 100 years or who knows. As our technology increases, so will our ability to predict earth changes. I am forced to agree, that people should not be living their.

I believe this new article is related to what the LA Times blog comment was saying. However, this article comes from scientists - makes you wonder exactly WHO that mystery blogger is. This article does not discuss the intensity of the possible quake, but gives at least gives some interesting details:

Link:
www.ouramazingplanet.com...

Southern San Andreas Overdue for Large Quake Feb 8, 2011 2:44 PM ET By Charles Q. Choi, Our Amazing Planet Contributor The valley of Coachella in Southern California is known for concerts held there every year, but new research has shed light on a more dangerous kind of rocking that has occurred there over the past millennium: quakes on a mysterious part of the San Andreas fault. The southernmost 60 miles (100 kilometers) of the San Andreas fault is the only stretch of the fault that has not ruptured in recorded history. This makes it hard to gauge when the next earthquake might strike there or how damaging it might be. This uncertainty is especially troubling considering a major quake there could severely damage Los Angeles, roughly 140 miles (225 km) to the west.........

First impression...Sounds like it was conjured up by some tweeker. Whenever someone uses numbers like 1,000+ and 9.5+ etc.... There is a good chance they are just BSing you.

The San Andreas Fault as stated above is a Transform Fault and not a Subduction Zone! If it were a Subduction Zone, there would be a line of Volcanoes all up the entire length of California, as you see in all other areas of Subduction Zones. There are many Faults that run through California though that are unaccounted for. Now, if all of a sudden a few Volcanoes popped up out of nowhere along the length of California, then, I would start to worry. As to the size of a quake on the existing Fault, I do believe a 7.5 is right in line - and let's face it really - a 7.5 while considerably smaller than a 9.5 still holds a powerfull punch!

It's really difficult to take seriously someone who misspells "you're" in their opening line...

Originally posted by snowspirit
While no one can just predict when the "big one" is going to happen, I don't understand the remark about the 7.5 limited intensity.

Beware LA residents your doomed because of your stupidity believing what the USGS has been saying for the last 50 years which is totally wrong. The San Andreas is not simply a strike-slip fault with a limited intensity of 7.5 or so.

Why would the USGS tell anyone the above? Unless I'm thinking of a different faultline, because the Vancouver area, and all the way down the USA coastline was always thought to end up involved in the "big one", and we've always been told that it could be well over a 9.

We've always been told that the whole area could go down as one of the biggest earthquakes in history. It could happen at anytime, or possibly not for decades or maybe not even in this century. Anywhere along the ring of fire could be really bad.

Regardless of whether or not the anonymous poster has some sort of inside info - there has been a lot of new data available recently regarding the San Andreas and it's potential to do some serious damage.

LA Times had this article last fall aptly titled "Earthquake experts see the 'big one' getting bigger"

articles.latimes.com...

Also recently the History Channel had a 2 hour special called '10.0 Megaquake' and went through a laundry list of scenarios in which a mag 10+ EQ could happen on some of the worlds most dangerous faults, including a massive EQ that could stretch from Canada all way down to Mexico on both the San Andreas/Cascadia.

Add to that you have Michio Kaku talking about Yellowstone and warning of a massive megaquake recently and it's time to be concerned.

Honestly I don't believe any scientist or geologist in this world truly understands what these faults are capable of, especially since the earth is allegedlly millions of years old and we only have recorded data from the late 1800's as far as EQ's and their magnitudes go.

Consider the source of that statement - an anonymous internet commenter.

That being said, as pointed out in this thread, most of what that commenter said isn't correct.

San Andreas there was a story on this years ago showing how much lifting vs trying to figure how much of a snap
or when the snap will occur, was very interesting. For it turning into a lvl 10 is very plasuable, as far being a cover up not really, it's a fault line? what were you expecting.

I live in California, San Francisco more specifically, and what people bring up "the big one" that will happen in California, I always tell them about our state rock, serpentine. Serpentine coats a lot of the San Andreas Fault, and..."Serpentine can dissolve in ground water as fault particles grind past each other and then crystallize in nearby open pore spaces, allowing the fault to creep even under very little pressure," earthobservatory.nasa.gov.... This is how serpentine reacts, and though there is no actual proof of this happening in the SAF, its presence certainly makes it important for the discussion.

geology.about.com...

If you connect the dots,without any predictions involved,there's a history that is well documented. The plates are going to shift. Wrightwood is near a good shift area. (See Map)
Please don't say within 6 months and San Fransico is long overdue. So what.
Wrightwood is "wright" next to Cajon Pass,one of the largest East West connections for trains.
www.trainmaster.ch...
LOOK at the pictures with the background area's. That look stable? No
Never has been..
If you ever visit the area,you can see the water lines were actually that far inland,about 75miles from the ocean.
Will it shift again.Yes. When? NO predictions please...(borrrring)
If you want to get into electromagnetic fields creating the reason for the shifts,and what causes the electromagnetic fields,be my guest.
Predictions? Awwww takes away from the credibilty of the thread.
Science?....Yeah...good reasons to be concerned. 9.5? Whao...
I was in San Bernardino when Landers quake hit. THAT was only a 7.4.Very crazy .We rocked and rolled.
www.lbl.gov...
Landers is basically a small desert town in between Josha Tree and the back way to some other small towns.
Landers is home to the Integraton....
www.integratron.com...
If your in the area? I strongly suggest a visit. Worth the drive. You'll see and understand the area is on a plate.Period.
AND has a history of mystery.
Integraton is really interesting.

Oh, Good looking hot babes run it too. That off topic? Since when are good looking hot babes EVER off topic?
My Bad.. Worth the drive though.... Acoutics are perfect in the upper area.
Perfect. And all made of wood,and no damage from the quake.

It's always amused me that some of the most valuable real estate in the USA is also the most vulnerable to destruction.