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.

 

Japan 9.1 Unprecedented: Causes Experts to Rethink Fault Lengths and Magnitudes

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 03:32 AM
link   
In the following video, one tsunami expert from the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC) discusses how scientists may need to rethink fault lengths and magnitudes of earthquakes. Apparently they did not think a 9.1 earthquake could occur there, because the known fault length did not make it appear so.

But this has considerable implications. He states that previous areas that are not believed to be a threat for such large earthquakes will now have to be considered. And this includes places like Central America, Tonga, and the Marianna Islands- as he states.

And naturally that brings about the question: How large could an earthquake be now with this information in the Cascadia Subduction zone off the coast of California? Or what about the New Madrid? How about Alaska? China? Russia? Or even New Zealand and Australia, and Mexico?

But worse, what could a place like Chile really be capable of? A 10? One simple video that can change the way science has been qualifying potential earthquake magnitudes, with far reaching implications:



Now with the current nuclear situation in Japan, and other points being brought up about nuclear reactors in the US and elsewhere close to seismic areas, are we really in more danger than we previously thought? It is so true that science is just beginning to understand what this planet is capable of, and how to quantify it.

Part of the problem lies with zones that have segmented faults, and zones in which segments of the faults are still undiscovered. The recent case in Arkansas of a newly discovered fault illustrates this point. Magnitudes can be difficult to predict on these faults.

And when the fault is at the bottom of the ocean, access to mapping and seismic tomography is more complicated. Maybe that was the case with Japan, that there were things that they just could not see down there to take into account when calculating the potential magnitude of its quakes. I am all about giving them the benefit of the doubt whenever I can.

But perhaps this should be considered most by scientists monitoring Japan, especially considering THIS.
edit on Tue Mar 15th 2011 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:08 AM
link   
nice post dude , althought i have not watched the video yet.

was the earthquake not a 9.0 ?? and not a 9.1 ?



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by boaby_phet
nice post dude , althought i have not watched the video yet.

was the earthquake not a 9.0 ?? and not a 9.1 ?


Please see this:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


cool and thanks for link, althought when clicking on the CMT link my brain decided to completly freak out at the stats i know nothing about


i was going on the USGS measurements ... i had not seen the upgrade to 9.1 ...

9.0 - 9.1 is quite a jump!



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Australia ???
What issues do we have ?
I thought we were safe from fault lines etc..



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Australia ???
What issues do we have ?
I thought we were safe from fault lines etc..


Oh?

Then what's this?

cooberpedyregionaltimes.wordpress.com...

Besides, that's just part of it. With Indonesia, the Banda Sea, and New Guinea right there, that can considerably affect the picture for you guys as well- even if you don't look at your on land faults at all.
edit on Tue Mar 15th 2011 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:36 AM
link   
TA, thanks for the awesome threads you've been putting up! You must be buggered at the moment!

Is it even possible to have a Mag 10? I can't imagine the scope of damage one would cause - wouldn't that be more of a worldwide event, or am I over dramatising it? Reminds me of that cheesy movie '10.5'

Stagged (Stole the phrase from Big Raging Loner ;p)



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Interesting but reading the report it seems Australia has been very very quite for the 150 years of records..
I hope it stays that way..



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by bkaust
Is it even possible to have a Mag 10? I can't imagine the scope of damage one would cause - wouldn't that be more of a worldwide event, or am I over dramatising it? Reminds me of that cheesy movie '10.5'


Well, if you watch this video, they didn't believe that Japan could have a 9.1 there, where it occurred. A 10 has never been recorded, and the highest ever recorded was a 9.5 in Chile. But it certainly does beg the question, doesn't it.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Well, some say that's the worst case, cause pressure builds over time. I hope so too for your sakes, but I wouldn't bet on it.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by backinblack
 


Well, some say that's the worst case, cause pressure builds over time. I hope so too for your sakes, but I wouldn't bet on it.


A little bit of fear mongering there TA seeing as you have no facts..
Not like you at all mate...



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
A little bit of fear mongering there TA seeing as you have no facts..
Not like you at all mate...


Well GEE (my favorite), I was just trying to help you out by finding that article.


Australia is not as geologically stable as many think. Despite popular belief, Australia is a geologically active continent with moving fault-lines, regular seismic activity, and a long history of mountain making, said internationally respected geologist, Associate Professor Malcolm Wallace from the School of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne.


That's just the first paragraph. Just cause you've been quiet for a while doesn't mean you're immune. Ok, then how about this- forget Australia. You are the one place on the earth that has been granted exemption from God on all things seismic. Happy?



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by backinblack
A little bit of fear mongering there TA seeing as you have no facts..
Not like you at all mate...

Well GEE (my favorite), I was just trying to help you out by finding that article.

Australia is not as geologically stable as many think. Despite popular belief, Australia is a geologically active continent with moving fault-lines, regular seismic activity, and a long history of mountain making, said internationally respected geologist, Associate Professor Malcolm Wallace from the School of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne.

That's just the first paragraph. Just cause you've been quiet for a while doesn't mean you're immune. Ok, then how about this- forget Australia. You are the one place on the earth that has been granted exemption from God on all things seismic. Happy?


Touchy aintcha...
This is what you said, sounds gloomy with little proof is all I said..


Well, some say that's the worst case, cause pressure builds over time. I hope so too for your sakes, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Maybe I should move to California where it's safe...



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Come ON black, you're taking what I said too over the top. And I wouldn't move to Cali. You'll probably be fine. What part of Aussie are you in?



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by backinblack
 


Come ON black, you're taking what I said too over the top. And I wouldn't move to Cali. You'll probably be fine. What part of Aussie are you in?


About 10klms from Mornington,Victoria where it says a bad area is..

Though we had one tiny earthquake last year..Think a 3....
Only time in my decades here that I've felt any movement...

edit on 15-3-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


You do realize that this just happened today?


a 4.0 right off your coast.

edit on Tue Mar 15th 2011 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 05:24 AM
link   
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 




Australian Seismicity: www.ga.gov.au...

Mag 4 quake in Oz today:




Interesting but reading the report it seems Australia has been very very quite for the 150 years of records.. I hope it stays that way..
A small offshore earthquake has rattled far north Queensland, sending a tremor through Cairns and surrounding areas. Geoscience Australia confirmed a magnitude 4.0 earthquake took place about 30km off Innisfail, south of Cairns, at 4.08pm (AEST) on Tuesday. Residents to the north and south of Cairns reported feeling a tremor, but no damage was reported. Advertisement: Story continues below Cairns resident Kathy Brown said the sensation experienced by those in her office at Smithfield, north of the city, was similar to that caused by a passing heavy vehicle. "I was just sitting here and I felt it through the floor and then my computer started to shake," Ms Brown told AAP.


news.smh.com.au...
edit on 15-3-2011 by MoorfNZ because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-3-2011 by MoorfNZ because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-3-2011 by MoorfNZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 05:30 AM
link   
With this information it may be time to give earthquakes that cause tsunami's a completely new name and a whole new scale revised for them.

Okay, maybe its not the greatest idea but, these events certainly need their own field of study so we can understand them more and prepare accordingly.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
While were at it maybe we should rethink our burgeoning nuclear power industry too.....
It has always seemed a little freaky to me that the older movements of earths mantle were of so much greater magnitude than we have on our records.
The idea that wredont get the larger cataclysms nowadays is plain wishfull thinking imo.
The records we have just do not cover sufficient timescale to be accurate to any degree in making predictions or assumptions as to what magnitude of quakes the earth can expect in future.
To never anticipate a "TEN" in our civil engineering is folly....



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 



You are the one place on the earth that has been granted exemption from God on all things seismic.


No you got that wrong TA. That privilege belongs to Ireland, God's Emerald Isle and possibly the true Atlantis

Here we don't have quakes, well there was one in Clare a while ago and one off the Dublin coast a whiler ago. Most are basically the English trying to get us!

I call that pretty much an exemption.

Thanks for the thread TA, this has some serious implications.

Once again it proves that scientists are men in white coats making guesses.




top topics



 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join