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.


Quake Watch 2012

page: 89
<< 86  87  88    90  91  92 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 05:33 AM
I can't tell, but is there an uptick near South Cali as of late? What the average?

Cali-Nevada Fault Map This is at 372.

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 05:52 AM
reply to post by murkraz

California as a whole over the past month, i.e. any event of 1.0+ from USGS with California in the name, is steady as a rock (nice evenly climbing straight line graph)

As above but only for events with the location Southern California if, if anything, is showing a very slight decrease.

Compliments of the Quake Watch Graphing Service.


ETA before anyone asks - here is Nevada

edit on 1/4/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 05:58 AM
G'morning, or afternoon maybe for you?

Wow, a nice straight line indeed 'til the ending point.

Thanks for posting them.

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 06:05 AM
edit on 1-4-2012 by BiggerPicture because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 06:05 AM
reply to post by murkraz

One minute past noon so Good Afternoon for me and Good Morning for you.

The energy release is a different story as always.

Southern California energy showing some bigger wallops towards the end of the most recent month, although subsided now.

Then California as a whole where in total the biggest punch was at the start of the past month.

And finally Nevada energy

Big kick (relatively speaking) in the middle but pretty flat in between.

All goes to show that energy is what matter s and not numbers, as I always maintain.

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 07:05 AM
reply to post by Oldtimer2

Don't forget that quakes can be listed many days after the event in places like California, Yellowstone etc.

You should note the time and check back anything up to 7 days after at least. Sometimes it can take longer.

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 07:08 AM
reply to post by jadedANDcynical

Guess that makes me redundant then

reply to post by dragonlover12

Good call. All the mess around 1800ish UTC is definitely that one.

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 07:25 AM
Wasn't there just a 6.0-something earthquake in Tokyo?

I can swear that I saw a headline but it may be older?

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 07:49 AM
reply to post by The Sword

Nothing on USGS or EMSC.

Nothing on JMO either.

Sorry can't help you there. Maybe it was an old report.

In fact nothing in my database for quakes from USGS in the last 3 years with Tokyo in the location!


If one happens in the next few hours maybe it was a prophetic statement by you, or maybe we know who to blame???

edit on 1/4/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 10:07 AM
Now there is, maybe.

6.3 according to Japan uStream, 5.9 JMO.

5.8 according to USGS.

This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.

Magnitude 5.8
Sunday, April 01, 2012 at 14:04:25 UTC
Sunday, April 01, 2012 at 11:04:25 PM at epicenter
Location 37.119°N, 140.985°E
Depth 50.4 km (31.3 miles)
Distances 12 km (7 miles) NE of Iwaki, Honshu, Japan
62 km (38 miles) ESE of Koriyama, Honshu, Japan
edit on 1/4/12 by murkraz because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 03:16 PM

Magnitude mb 4.5
Date time 2012-04-01 19:21:28.0 UTC
Location 39.82 N ; 15.64 E
Depth 260 km
Distances 350 km SE Rome (pop 2,563,241 ; local time 21:21:28.8 2012-04-01)
121 km SE Salerno (pop 135,054 ; local time 21:21:28.8 2012-04-01)
14 km W Scalea (pop 10,226 ; local time 21:21:28.8 2012-04-01)


posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 04:29 PM
reply to post by murkraz

Now let me see. The Sword posted on 1/4/2012 @ 13:25 (BST) and the quake was 14:04:25 UTC which is 15:04:25 BST and thus just over one and half hours AFTER the post by The Sword.

We either have a prophet or a Sorcerer/Witch/Warlock whatever.

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 05:48 PM

Magnitude mb 5.2
Date time 2012-04-01 22:23:53.0 UTC
Location 16.88 N ; 98.21 W
Depth 48 km
Distances 241 km S Puebla (pop 1,392,099 ; local time 17:23:53.9 2012-04-01)
156 km SE Chilpancingo (pop 165,250 ; local time 17:23:53.9 2012-04-01)
32 km NE Ometepec (pop 17,801 ; local time 17:23:53.9 2012-04-01)
12 km NE Tlacoachistlahuaca (pop 3,828 ; local time 17:23:53.9 2012-04-01)


posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 06:14 PM
I am going to ask either a really stoooopid question or one hich has been answered before, so I apologise in advance. Just blame my ignorance on my daughters 21st birthday yesterday

I have noticed over the last week, that much more than normal EQ's reported on EMSC are at a greater depth.
Question...take an eq of say 5.2 at 230 km does that mean at 230km it is far bigger if the seismograph was at that depth? Also ar rgar depth are we looking at magma movement.

I really do apologise if this has been explained before.


posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 08:12 PM
reply to post by angelchemuel

Happy belated Birthday for your daughter!

As far as I know, it means that the given magnitude is the one at the stated depth and not on the surface

posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 10:20 AM
reply to post by Hellas

Thank you Hellas. Much appreciated. Sooo..that beggars the question as to why we are seeing eq's at a greater depth recently doesn't it? Any thoughts explanations?

(I also want to apologise on behalf of my keyboard...some of the letters are missing/worn away and it looks like I was either drunk or couldn't spell in my last post...neither I just posted without checking as it was late!


posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 11:03 AM
Apparently, the Clintonville boom was recorded.
Was it an earthquake?

Here's one if you don't want to open a file.

This report is good because it adds the infor from the USGS.

Scooby Doo needs to stop chasing his tail. There really is no mystery. The recording is the same as the one I heard on another ATS thread. I think this earthquake is related to the Michigan crack back in 2010.
Glacial rebound.

The only reason someone would be "drilling" underground in Wisc. is water. So, maybe the government is trying to syphon off the Great Lakes without Canada noticing. But this is stupid. Since we've basically given away our rights in the "Free Trade" deal. Sorry. Ranting.

edit on 2-4-2012 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 12:47 PM
mexico is shaking! thats all i know for the moment

posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 12:58 PM

Magnitude 6.3

Monday, April 02, 2012 at 17:36:43 UTC
Monday, April 02, 2012 at 12:36:43 PM at epicenter

Location 16.477°N, 98.287°W
Depth 12.3 km (7.6 miles)

27 km (17 miles) SSE (148°) from Ometepec, Guerrero, Mexico
33 km (21 miles) WNW (302°) from Pinotepa Nacional, Oaxaca, Mexico
109 km (68 miles) SW (216°) from Tlaxiaco, Oaxaca, Mexico
176 km (109 miles) SE (133°) from Chilpancingo, Guerrero, Mexico
179 km (111 miles) ESE (103°) from Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 15 km (9.3 miles); depth +/- 7.7 km (4.8 miles)
Parameters NST=379, Nph=379, Dmin=329.5 km, Rmss=1.01 sec, Gp= 47°,
M-type=regional moment magnitude (Mw), Version=B

Magnitude: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Location: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)

Event ID usc0008ui2

Source: USGS

posted on Apr, 2 2012 @ 12:58 PM
reply to post by vister74

This would be why

6.3 2012/04/02 17:36:43 16.477 -98.287 12.3 OAXACA, MEXICO


Ah Puterman - you beat me by mere moments

edit on 2-4-2012 by Anmarie96 because: (no reason given)

<< 86  87  88    90  91  92 >>

log in