West Coast USA: Pay Attention, Cascadia May Be Ready to Rupture

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 02:45 PM

Event type: Giant Wave Impact
Date/Time: Tuesday, 07 February,
2012 at
19:44 (07:44 PM) UTC

Pacific Ocean - North
Area: About 480 kilometres of Vancouver Island, BC, Canada

Coordinate: N 48° 59.400, W 132° 27.000

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 02:57 PM
reply to post by BobAthome

wow, i found a little news article on the rogue wave. www.vancouversun.com...

10 to 15 metres high. It did some damage to a cargo ship carrying logs.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by BobAthome

Bob, that was a 10-15 meter rogue wave that hit a ship way out at sea. Not a common event, but not a rare event either. They hit ships from time to time. I fail to see how that has anything to do with this topic though.

zworld and wc, interesting theory on ETS, with the slow slip being generated by slab melt and shifting. What worries me about it most definitely is the part that is not slipping. Slippage imo is good. You want that. But not all of it is slipping it seems, and that's a problem- because the part that isn't slipping is the part likely to be building up an accumulation of stress.

What I am hoping is that over time, scientists through further study will be able to identify which quake did what deposit layer, and where those quakes occurred on the zones around Cascadia. Now that information would go a long way to helping us understand what areas of the zones had ruptured in the past, with what effects, and more importantly, point us to more specific areas where bigger quakes are going to be more likely because of accumulated stress. The area to worry about may not be where rupture occurred 300 years ago, but instead, the spot where it happened several thousand years ago. More time, more stress, and much bigger quake.

On another note, while I hate to be so vague, I put in some time in retroactive study with events around Cascadia. I am still only scratching at the surface, but already I may have found something. Yes, I am being very tight lipped about what I am finding. And so far no, I am not publishing this anywhere, not even on my own site (to answer a question posed in this thread.) They'll have to do voodoo mind extraction on me to get any more than that out me. Why? Because all my study has been on my time, with my own techniques, and I am not publicly funded in any way, shape or form. I can't afford to do this, and yet still I persist. That is worth something, much the same way huge investments in seismo networks pay off for oil and mineral investment companies. And it is tedious work.

Hopefully this thread was a waste of time, and so far it appears that way, thank God. The last thing I want to see, for real, is a massive quake out there. But again I say, I don't like it when things deviate from the norm.

Vital Signs.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 04:43 PM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
..... Why? Because all my study has been on my time, with my own techniques, and I am not publicly funded in any way, shape or form. I can't afford to do this, and yet still I persist. That is worth something, much the same way huge investments in seismo networks pay off for oil and mineral investment companies. And it is tedious work.

What does this mean?
Are you going to be charging a fee for your study results at some point in the future? Or are you planning on submitting your findings for publication? If the latter, I get why you would be tight lipped, but then why bring it up? If the former, good luck with that. Or maybe I have completely misunderstood your post--"knowing me" that is entirely possible.

In other news, I just noticed that USGS added another quake from February 4th:

Here is a link to the map page. USGS source

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 05:36 PM
reply to post by Olivine

I am really glad you caught that 4.8, cause I have been wondering what the heck that was, and why no accounting for it in USGS records until now.

So the real deal is this:


Now considering that some experts believe a major rupture would start at the ends of the fault, and we are seeing quakes near the fault ends, in a very short period of time relatively speaking to "normal" seismicity, umm, all I can do is say "Yo people, observe." And just point it out.

Even Mr. Grumpy is over there in Quake Watch arguing that a 9 mag is overdue. I don't know how many more people, both experts and amateur alike, can say it.

Now as whether to move because of that (another question raised), I don't know. But heck, if you've got both gut level instinct telling you "something real bad is on the horizon here", and experts, as well as amateurs, all reaching the same conclusion- then pulling a kid out of school seems to be the least of one's problems, to me. I attended 4 different high schools during my last four years, so what. You gotta do what you gotta do.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:
Find A Place

As to my own studies, you're right. There really is no point in bringing it up. As to what I hope to achieve with them, I want to become one of the most accurate big quake predictors there is. They tell me it can't be done. And I think it can, much like we can tell what the weather is going to do for the most part within a couple days.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 06:05 PM
I'm a bit mixed on this.

Everyone knows I am am for thinking outside the box, exploring all possibilities and discussing/sharing the knowledge.

I have lived most of my 40 yrs here in Washington State, over 20 of them here in the NW corner. I have two kids in school, a home, job and a husband with a job. While I know it is a matter of when not if for the mega quake and everyone here is familiar with how I follow things....I am nowhere NEAR even considering 'pulling my kids out of school' and running. Frankly, I think that would be a bit ridiculous.

I am aware. That is all any of us can do...and not just in regards to cascadia. I am as prepared as I can be. In less than ten years I plan on moving, after my husband retires. We have discussed where we want this to be and why. Natural disasters/threats and social/economic factors all play into where we will chose. But that isn't happening for awhile because it simpy isn't realistic until then. There is absolutely nothing indicating a mega quake is about to happen....if it were, I would act accordingly.

Heck, the next 'big' one may be hundreds of miles down the zone from me and the affects not devastating.

I could move to wyoming and get anhilated by yellowstone. I could move to california and fall into the ocean. I could move to Florida and get taken out by a hurrican, Oklahoma and swept up by a tornado.

It is what it is. While I enjoy discussing all the possible indicators and raise awareness and educat; I surely do not want to panic anyone and cause them to uproot their lives based on nothing more than theories.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 06:22 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

You may recall in the Bandah Ache quake . . . they were shocked to see a sudden undersea cliff had formed . . . IIRC, a few hundred feet high--instantly--!BOOM! there it was exactly where just before, there was none . . . which was felt to be a MAJOR cause of the size of the Tsunami.

I'm wondering . . . looking at the Pacific NW situation . . . do you imagine that such a sudden drop/rise as that cliff face might happen there?

And if so, more likely where than other places?

Anyone more experienced at such guesstimates than I is welcome to chime in.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 06:29 PM
reply to post by westcoast

Reasonable assertions about moving and theories and what's realistic and what's not.

Easy for me to say . . . I live in a Mountain State with a good probability of being an above average safe place.

I have lived in San diego 10 years and Taipei 14 and Spokane 10 . . . when it turned dark from Mt St Helens at midday.

I've felt a fair amount of quakes in Taipei.

Given the geopolitical scene more than anything else . . . I think it's past time to be in safe haven places.

My own personal OPINION, bias, impressions is . . . that the geopolitical WW3 is likely to get kicked off in roughly the same time frame as terrorist nukes and attacks on schools in the USA . . .


that for some reason or set of reasons . . . whether nukes going off or spiritual forces or HAARP or whatever . . . some nasty 'natural' disasters are going to be unprecedented in roughly the same horrific time frame. Maybe weeks will separate main events. Maybe a month. It won't be much more, I don't think.

I think it will be more like one overwhelming thing after another seemingly escalating in degree of disaster and trauma.

I wish I didn't feel this way and was not so convinced . . . but that would not be the truth. I am so convinced.

Therefore what, I don't know. Certainly folks, imho, have to take their personal situation to God themselves and ASK HIM what HE wants them to do, how and when.

I just am increasingly convinced that apathy or timidity or rationalizations are just not going to end up feeling very . . . comfortable once things start rolling.

It used to be said, of folks in California--pray about whether God would have you leave if at all possible.

Now, it's commonly said in Christian prophetic circles--pray and be sure that God wants you to stay or get out, otherwise. That's been a shift in the last year.

Certainly the best place for any of us to be is in the will of God--regardless of where that is.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 06:48 PM

Originally posted by BO XIAN
I'm wondering . . . looking at the Pacific NW situation . . . do you imagine that such a sudden drop/rise as that cliff face might happen there?

It MUST have happened there, to what degree I don't know, but the Orphan Tsunami in Japan on Jan. 26th 1700 is the clincher. And judging by the size of the waves that hit Japan in that one, I am thinking waves as high as a hundred feet or more probably hit the PNW coast. 5 Miles inland is a pretty good bit. And there may be even worse in store. Because you gotta figure, there was a 9.1 (9.1!) in Japan and it only caused waves like what, maybe a meter high on the west coast USA, if that?

So for the reverse to be true, then what size was the quake on Cascadia that caused 8 to 12 meter waves all the way in Japan? They must have been HUGE on the PNW coast, is the point. And that's just the one case they have been able to pinpoint through the historical record. I mean you really start thinking about it, and there is no telling what may have happened thousands of years ago, even before the Japanese started keeping records. What if there is a locked spot in Cascadia that has been accumulating stress unseen for over 25,000 years? Or even 100,000 years? It could still be quite shallow, like below 50 km, and be undetectable. If that was closer to shore, as I suspect, that could be a catastrophe the likes of which no one has ever witnessed.

The Japan 9.1 is not only a warning, but a hard lesson learned. Unknown, deeper, dormant fault extensions could indeed rear their ugly head, and add another order of magnitude to what is currently thought possible.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 07:07 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

TA, I believe we are getting closer every day to having the capability to predict quakes. Maybe even more quickly if you combine "hard science" with more esoteric approaches. I certainly don't think it impossible.

I wish you complete success.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 07:56 PM
reply to post by westcoast

Hey Westcoast! We have had a concrete plan to move back to mexico early 2012 for quite some time now. However, with recent events (economical as well) plus just that 'gut feeling', I was putting the question out there simply because I feel torn about making a decision to leave earlier than planned. We lived there before and want to return...it's a real tough call as a mother to make. I have followed and made most of my life's BIG decisions based on my instinct and this one seems to be one of the toughest of them all! Thanks for the support guys!

Also want to give props to TRUAMERICAN! I've added you to my special list that includes westcoast and puterman. I appreciate your knowledge!
edit on 7-2-2012 by twistedroots because: added last paragraph

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 08:18 PM
TA - you mentioned early on that most of your focus has been on New Madrid. Do you have a thread somewhere that sheds light on that.

I have family in that area and am interested in any info I can find.


posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 09:02 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican



Do you have a 1st, 2nd and 3rd guesstimates about WHERE

on the Juan de Fuca etc. plates such an instant cliff face might arise/fall?

I suppose it's a moot issue once it happens . . . the proximities are so close . . . Still, it is a curiosity of mine and I'd love for y'all so much more experienced and wise in such matters to guess so I could ponder your guesses.

posted on Feb, 8 2012 @ 01:24 AM

Originally posted by westcoast

It is what it is. While I enjoy discussing all the possible indicators and raise awareness and educat; I surely do not want to panic anyone and cause them to uproot their lives based on nothing more than theories.

My problem is that Ive lived 95% of my life on either the San Andreas or MTJ, and the more aware I become, the more I wonder about where I live. And it's no longer quakes that scare me, it's tsunamis. I have had that image of the black wall of water eating up houses and cars stuck in my mind. I think Im going to move a couple of miles to higher ground.

posted on Feb, 8 2012 @ 06:21 AM
The day before March 11, 2011 (Japan 9.1), I could have walked up to any seismologist, and asked them if it was possible that a 9.1 quake could occur where it did. They would have probably said something like "We might see a bigger quake in southern Japan, but even then I couldn't imagine it would ever be THAT big. And especially not there. Anything over much more than a 7.5 on the northern east coast region would be unthinkable."

And see, scientists get to play the paid, maximum magnitude guessers all the way up to the end. That's such a comfortable spot, to have that authority and be able to scoff at anyone who says otherwise. All the way up to when it happens. And after it does happen, they get to scurry away back into the "See? We told you no one knew for sure" part of their diagnosis, unaccountable and unrepentant for their very own scoffing at people who thought outside their paradigm.

So here you scientists, scoff at me some more, with your noses held high, smelling the stench of a supposed fearmonger who dares to think bigger. AGAIN. And this time, I don't want any flap, see?

Just about EVERYTHING in this universe seems to occur in escalating scales. Start with the smallest molecule, and work your way up from there. The bigger the event, the rarer they occur, but the problem is...they DO occur. And just cause we're here doesn't change that one bit.

On the geologic timeline, for all we know, the fact that we've had many 9+ quakes in the last couple hundred years could be indicators of bigger events yet still to come- and that happen even more rarely. So rare that when they do, it takes a very long time for the earth to recover from them. And so rare that humans may not live through them at all. The Siberian Traps, for example, erupted for 1 million years. One MILLION years.

Buried way down below the deepest ocean bottoms, and hundreds or thousands of feet of sediment, there could be the remains of entire civilizations lost to such events. Heck, they could have even invented space travel, and some of us may have gotten off this planet to somewhere else for that very reason- never to return again. Or maybe they HAVE returned again in UFOs, and don't want to mess with our evolution. So they don't contact us outright in the open. The scenarios presented in Warehouse 13 may not be too far from the truth in some cases. The Regents- they look like humans, because, umm, maybe they ARE humans!

But the bottom line is: this place is dangerous. And if you dare tempt fate by living in known very dangerous places, such as Cascadia or Sumatra or Japan, then I can help you no further. Your choice, and not mine. 100 miles inland from the west coast and I would still be nervous living there. Cause when it comes, there is no telling HOW big it's going to be. After Japan, frankly my dear, "I just don't give a damn." The Earth's power is subject to no man's definition, except in man's own brain. The Earth, she does not care what we think.

But at least some of us are willing to concede this.

posted on Feb, 8 2012 @ 06:28 AM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

Rogue waves are actually very common TA, so much so much so that they are can be tracked from space - they have even identified the hot spots around the oceans were they occur most commonly. Nothing to do with this topic though!

posted on Feb, 8 2012 @ 09:52 AM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by BobAthome

Hopefully this thread was a waste of time, and so far it appears that way, thank God. The last thing I want to see, for real, is a massive quake out there. But again I say, I don't like it when things deviate from the norm.

Vital Signs.

Well this thread kind of IS a waste of time. It's well known that a big one is on the way, when the signs start to appear(if they haven't already) there still won't be any certainty and even if people speculated that it's gonna happen soon very few people would actually do anything about it. That's how humans tend to act, we have a hard time accepting a negative possibility until SHTF, even if we THINK otherwise. If people want to be sure that they won't be part of the next Fukushima then GTFO of the area.

posted on Feb, 8 2012 @ 01:49 PM
reply to post by violence=answer

Hi. I just happened to come across an answer to your question about the I5 in relation to a tsunami in the Cascades. I did not answer before because I had no idea even where the I5 was located.

Utilities and transportation in the I-5/Highway 99 corridor will be disrupted for months


Hope that answers your question.

posted on Feb, 8 2012 @ 02:15 PM
Puterman's link mentioned CREW. This is a very interesting site with good information. Here is the link to CREW-CREW Ahead of the wave

posted on Feb, 8 2012 @ 05:00 PM

A suite of 15 Episodic Tremor and Slip events imaged between 1997 and 2008 along the northern Cascadia subduction zone suggests future coseismic rupture will extend to 25 km depth, or ~60 km inland of the Pacific coast, rather than stopping offshore at 15 km depth. The ETS-derived coupling profile accurately predicts GPS-measured interseismic deformation of the overlying North American plate, as measured by ~50 continuous GPS stations across western Washington State.

When extrapolated over the 550-year average recurrence interval of Cascadia megathrust events, the coupling model also replicates the pattern and amplitude of coseismic coastal subsidence inferred from previous megathrust earthquakes here. For only the Washington State segment of the Cascadia margin, this translates into an Mw=8.9 earthquake, with significant moment release close to metropolitan regions.


Visit link to see some charts.

In other words, there are good reasons to believe a future big quake could occur either very close to shore, or under land itself. The good news is that the further inland it occurs, the deeper that it is likely to be, because of the dip angle of the subducting slab.

The worst case scenario in my opinion is a very big quake, literally right offshore, making it quite shallow, and allowing only minutes or seconds reaction time to a very big tsunami. That's why it is critical to not second guess the size of a quake if you happen to live in Cascadia. If you are within 5 miles of the ocean, get the heck out of Dodge immediately and go east and/or to high ground. Do NOT wait for authorities to make determinations at that instant. Your life may depend on you acting very fast.

new topics
top topics
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum