Was going over the original EQ data, this from Harvard seismo labs. This is what concerns me and it concerns me alot. I pray people take the time to
understand this as the situation at Dai-ichi is more dangerous than initially thought. Many times more. We need to do something fast world.
(I didn't realize the importance of this sequence when first posted ions ago. Its best to watch the whole enchilada at the above site as the Quicktime
animation of the whole thing is too big to post and clearly shows the rupture path when viewed as a whole. This is from a future chapter but too
important to wait.)
First, the quake was a series of quakes, none far above an 8+ if the following from Harvard is correct, as they state that the three main ruptures
that are considered the mainshock occurred over a several minute period, and these three totaled up to being an 8.4, not 9.0.
The first rip in the tectonic fabric came far offshore as the first pic shows (yellow circle) and occurred two days before the Great Tohoku EQ. It was
The Great Tohoku Eartquake (GTE) actually begins however to the west of the March 9th EQ and the epicenter given to the GTE. From there the pics are
self explanatory as the plate ruptures then moves southwest.
Now for the part that needs understanding. All localized historical quakes of mag 7.5 or better have occurred northeast of the recent rupture.
The GTE moved the rupture line down. As Harvard states quite clearly;
Earthquakes that break parts of the region that has not previous slipped typically start at the edge of a previous event as expected for triggered
If triggered EQ's move in a linear fashion, triggered from the spot of the most recent rupture point, than the NEXT TIME IT RUPTURES WILL BE
OFFSHORE DAI-ICHI MOVING FURTHER TO THE SOUTWEST FROM THERE.
WTF is Tepco and the Japanese government doing. They must realize this data. The danger of a big EQ striking are much greater than they are letting
Now knowing this and all the rest of the nuclear threat, I take back what I said about staying on land near the plant if it was ancestral land. That
no longer applies as the situation presents now a condition that may not be escapable from if it indeed ruptures again.
edit on 30-6-2012 by
zworld because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-6-2012 by zworld because: (no reason given)