It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Earthquake Swarm in Arkansas Intensifies. Memphis, Tennessee could be epicenter for the next big one

page: 14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 05:22 AM
reply to post by Pharyax

Looks as if it is about 1 m deep according to Google Earth.

That aside, has anyone noticed that these ARE starting to creep now. The 3.2 and the 4.0 today are further SW than before.

edit on 17/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

OK, the 4.0 vanished as I looked. It is still in my database.

Date/Time UTC,Latitude,Longitude,Magnitude,Depth(Km),Location

Now it has turned up in the deleted table but the original is still in the text data file and in my database. The Google Earth marker has gone,
edit on 17/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

Ah ha! They moved it!

edit on 17/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 05:34 AM
reply to post by UtahRosebud

I'm sorry angelwrangler, but you are incorrect. "Little quakes are good" is a lie that they led us to believe for way too many years.

It is not a lie. Many small quakes do relieve stress. That is not to say as you point out that it will remove the possibility of a big one entirely, but to call it a lie is wrong. As Tesco says - every little helps.

You might want to have a read of this article (PDF) because this is an up and coming field of study and depends on generating many small quakes to relieve stress.

edit on 17/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 05:36 AM

Magnitude 4.7 ARKANSAS


* Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 10:49:48 UTC
* Thursday, February 17, 2011 at 04:49:48 AM at epicenter

Location 35.236°N, 92.360°W
Depth 3.5 km (2.2 miles) (poorly constrained)

* 3 km (2 miles) ENE (74°) from Greenbrier, AR
* 9 km (6 miles) ENE (65°) from Wooster, AR
* 10 km (6 miles) SSW (193°) from Guy, AR
* 56 km (35 miles) N (357°) from Little Rock, AR
* 421 km (262 miles) SSW (207°) from St. Louis, MO
edit on 17-2-2011 by MoorfNZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 05:40 AM
reply to post by MoorfNZ

What on earth is going on? They put it up as a 4.0, they moved it - still a 4.0 and now it is a 4.7????????????


edit on 17/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 05:42 AM
reply to post by PuterMan

Yup, watched it happen ... baffling...

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 05:45 AM

Edit: And now the 4.0 is a 3.8!

I don't think I've ever seen them fanny-arse around with the list so much. Makes you think there are some nervous seismologists out there being uber-attentive.

edit on 17-2-2011 by MoorfNZ because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-2-2011 by MoorfNZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 05:51 AM
reply to post by MoorfNZ

now its dropped to 3.8

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 05:53 AM
reply to post by shikori

Going once.............

Going twice..............

Sold to the lady in the pink hat for 3.8

Actually I have to say that when I looked at the trace (see post above) I did not think it was a 4.7.

3.8 seems about right.
edit on 17/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:07 AM
CNN HLN just a a small blurb about it and "Robin" said it was a 3.8. She also mentioned that there had been hundreds in the area since fall up from the normal of about 12 a year. I love mainstream news

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:10 AM
On they keep changing the numbers or show a quake from Arkansas or Jellystone and remove it 10 min later.....

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:12 AM
Just came across this. Bear in mind that this was written in 1994

Source: SRL94.pdf

Perhaps we should be looking further back to see if this has happened before. I will see what data I can get.

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:12 AM
Wow now it's 3.4. What are they doing? This is totaly going to ruin peoples perception of the usgs. First yellowstone now Arkansas?
edit on 17-2-2011 by shikori because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:16 AM
This is from another forum. It discusses the possibility of volcanism:
I am not convinced that all of these recent earthquakes in Arkansas and Oklahoma are from fracking. While studying the geology of the region I noticed something interesting. There is a pattern starting to form suggesting that the recent earthquakes are a result of increasing volcanic activity. You are probably thinking, if there were a volcano in Arkansas we would know about it. Although unproven and highly speculative, the following information shows evidence of active volcanism in the state of arkansas. I plotted all of the evidence I found on google maps and may have found the reason for the recent rise in seismic activity. The map is at the bottom of the post.

First and foremost I would like to point out The hot springs National park south of little rock

[link to]
the hot springs are located above the western edge of a large pluton (an igneous intrusion) with an upper surface about 4,000 feet below land surface that extends eastward from an igneous outcrop near Magnet Cove (fig. 1). Bergfelder suggests that the meteoric water percolates through a fracture zone (location unspecified) associated with the margin of the pluton and then (because the heat source is unknown) either takes in heat from the pluton, percolates below the pluton to depths of about 8,000 to 12,500 feet and takes in heat, or percolates below the pluton to a lesser depth and takes in heat from underlying magma. The Bigfork Chert and the Arkansas Novaculite outcrop areas, which may serve as recharge areas, primarily lie north and northeast of the hot springs (Bedinger and others, 1979).
This area is teeming with evidence of volcanic activity. one example is called Magnet cove.It is consisted only of Igneous rocks which can only be formed by volcanic activity.
Cove. [link to]

"Magnet Cove is a 100-million-year old igneous intrusion (mass of igneous rock) of some rare and unusual rock types - all derived from a melt that was originally a CO2-rich basaltic liquid in the earth's upper mantle. The intrusion's piercing style resulted in a steep, near vertical contact with the country host rock, Paleozoic shales and novaculite. It is likely that the intrusion never reached the surface. Only one geologist in the 1930's described anything like a vent. It is probable that what he described, though volcaniclastic in appearance, was a steep-walled breccia pipe or explosion zone as has been noted in the smaller pipe at Potash Sulphur Springs." Magnet cove is a type ring complex, or ring dike, found commonly at the center of a volcano. [link to] [link to]
Next, there is Potash sulphur springs which also contains uranium. [link to]
"Arkansas's Uranium:1
In Arkansas, several uranium anomalies were discovered during the 1950s.The Potash Sulphur Springs igneous intrusion in Garland County is probably the best known and perhaps the first site where uranium was discovered in Arkansas."
Novaculite is also found in the Hot Springs area."Novaculite is the rarest and finest abrasive stone in existence". This mineral is only found in two places in the world, Arkansas and in the Marathon Uplift in west texas. [link to] [link to] [link to]

Finally the strangest place in this volcanic area is called "Hells half acre". It is a small area of land in the middle of forest where nothing can grow and animals, even hunting dogs will avoid. Apparently it is believed by some people that "the devil lives down there" [link to] Picture: [link to] Notice that the trees surrounding the area are all dead. This suggests that some kind of activity is producing something very toxic.

More evidence of a volcano lies in the northeast corner of the state that is directly connected to the New Madrid fault called Crowley's Ridge.
The ridge is primarily composed of sediment as loess. It contrasts greatly with the flat table land around it and with the black soil that makes up the delta. It varies from half a mile to 12 miles (19 km) wide and reaches an elevation of 550 feet (170 m) near its northern extremity. There is evidence that the area's elevation has increased over the years, suggesting that uplift took place and is still taking place. This alternative explanation posits a link between the ridge and the nearby New Madrid Seismic Zone."[1] [link to]
Crowleys ridge map: [link to]

Since there is evidence that this area is still rising in elevation, it may be the ridge to the caldera.
[link to] "If the magma is rich in silica, the caldera is often filled in with ignimbrite, tuff, rhyolite, and other igneous rocks. Silica-rich magma does have a high viscosity, and therefore does not flow easily like basalt. As a result, gases tend to become trapped at high pressure within the magma. When the magma approaches the surface of the Earth, the rapid off-loading of overlying material causes the trapped gases to decompress rapidly, thus triggering explosive destruction of the magma and spreading volcanic ash over wide areas. There is a type of lava in explosive calderas called A'a. Further lava flows may be erupted. If volcanic activity continues the centre of the caldera may be uplifted in the form of a resurgent dome". Arkansas ranks first in production silica, producing one half of the worlds supply. [link to]

This site from USGS states that The Arkansas delta sloped west toward the mississippi river and south toward the Gulf of Mexico at a rate of 0.5 feet per mile. [link to]
"The land surface generally slopes toward the Mississippi River from both the eastern and western sides of the Study Unit and to the south toward the Gulf of Mexico."
So far facts show that we have a ridge, a dome-like valley sloping east, west and south, and the most silica in the world, Not to mention much of Arkansas is in a Rift valley. All of this points to the area being an explosive Caldera.
This is Reelfoot rift. [link to]
To tie is all together I plotted all of the recent earthquakes in Arkansas and Oklahoma along with certain hot spots in the state and found a disturbing pattern.

[link to]
Notice that even though the quake in Guy, Ar, it lines up directly with the earthquakes in Norman, Oklahoma through an area known as the Arkansas River Valley.

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:18 AM
reply to post by shikori

Really? That's odd.... As of this minute it's still showing as a 3.8 on the USGS maps and data page. I just refreshed to make sure and it hasn't been changed to a 3.4. Not from where I'm accessing USGS, anyway.


posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:22 AM
reply to post by JustMike

My mistake that was alaska it seems. The program apparently placed the 3.4 marker over arkansas, i refreshed it and its not there again.

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:26 AM
reply to post by shikori

Oh, right. That's okay then... Thanks for clearing it up. And don't worry, I have made far more serious errors than that when studying various pages of data. No big deal.



posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:36 AM
reply to post by kennylee

I remember that day. I lived in Sellersburg, Indiana for two years at that time. The family got into the car and went to visit some friends. It was a Saturday or Sunday I believe. We didn't feel a thing. When we got out of the car everyone was talking about this earthquake. Cincinnati, Ohio where my realitives live now, had a quake a few years back that split the brick facing on my mother's home apart. I belive these earth quakes happen there in the Ohio valley area too.

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:41 AM

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:48 AM
reply to post by shikori

It just made the local Evansville, IN News. Said it was 3.8 at 5AM this morning and the 3rd quake in Arkansas above 3.0 in 24 past hours.

posted on Feb, 17 2011 @ 06:49 AM
reply to post by Red Cloak

The magnitude is very easy to calculate. The 2-7-1812 quake was more powerful than the 1964 Alaskan quake, the 2004 Indonesian quake, and the 1960 Chilean quake in every single barometer. You don't need to explain anything to me about New Madrid. I have been studying it for years. I spent 10 years working in the fault zone. I had not studied it for a long time, but with all the recent activity I have been going over my research data from years back recently.

If indeed you have been researching the New Madrid then you will know that, as I have pointed out to you before, your claims and suppositions are completely fallacious and your scaremongering rubbish is not fair on people who live in the area and have genuine cause for concern.

First the 1964 Alaskan Quake

Sorry but your facts are completely wrong here. There were 4 events at New Madrid commencing in Dec 1811 and finishing in Feb 1812. For the 4 main events I have taken the figures form Wikipedia rather than the latest estimates and have averaged that range given to arrive at a value for each quake. I have then calculated the amount of energy in Gigajoules for each quake and totalled it. This comes to just over 68,000 GJ. I then calculated the energy released by the Great Alaskan 9.2 quake. The figures are below and you will see that ALL 4 of the New Madrid quake together were only 1/58th of the energy released in Alaska

By the same token the Indonesian quake was between 9.1 and 9.3 so it could be considered to be the same as the Alaskan earthquake.

With a magnitude of between 9.1 and 9.3, it is the third largest earthquake ever recorded on a seismograph

Source The largest three were Chile, Alaska and Indonesia.

Adding those three to the calculations I arrive at this.

In order to get the New Madrid quakes to even show in the graph I had to really stretch it.

And you need to grasp that the info the USGS and all those colleges and such sources give about New Madrid is pure fantasy and fiction. They have been lying to the public about it for years.

Whilst I would tend to agree that there is a possibility that government agencies may not speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to suggest that they are hoodwinking the public on the scale that you say is simply delusional.

The reality is that the 1960 Valdivia quake was like a Sunday park picnic compared to the New Madrid quakes. And the 1811-12 ones were smaller than previous ones in the region. The 1450 A.D. cluster was stronger and the 900 A.D. cluster was much stronger. The last big quakes were actually small by the fault's standards.

Aside from the fact that I have demonstrated above that this is not the case, I can additionally find no estimates for the middle ages quakes, possibly because I have not searched extensively. Since you make this assertion perhaps you would be so kind as to provide your research sources?

It amazes me how people can actually think that a 7 or 8 quake could actually reverse the Mississippi River and do all the other things that happened. The 1960 Chilean quake was 1/3 as damaging at the epicenter. The 1964 Alaskan quake released 1/3 the energy.

The Alaskan quake released 58 times the energy of all 4 New Madrid quakes combined, the Indonesian quakes released 49 times the energy of all 4 combined and the Chile quake released 165 times the energy of all 4 New Madrid quakes combined.

If you consider that this information is incorrect please provide your sources and calculations.

Of course, puterman will come in here with all sorts of nonsense and fake "government data", "proving" that is all wrong.

Indeed I will and the data is not fake, but then again if you have proof that this is the case please provide it. I would be quite happy to recalculate all the figures if you can provide verifiable sources that refute the data I have found.

Frankly, in the light of the potential seriousness of the Arkansas situation I an disgusted that you see fit to come on to this and other threads making wild claims and erroneous statements without one single shred of evidence to back your claims, without one single calculation to show how you arrive at these figures and without apparently any research at all despite your claims as you seem unprepared to quote the sources.

To subject people to this sort of fear is wrong and is cruel. I have to assume that you derive some sort of pleasure from attempting to scare people like this.

I am not claiming that my figures are accurate but to the best of my knowledge they are. I present my information as factually as i can with no scaremongering and leave people to make up their own minds. I research my subject and spend many hours every day creating graphs and assessing data in order that I can keep people as informed as possible from a purely factual standpoint.

You have on other threads accused me of being some sort of government disinformation agent yet you feel that you can come on to a thread and make wild claims with apparently not one single shed of evidence. At least my supposed 'disinformation' is backed by verifiable facts.

edit on 17/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

edit on 17/2/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in