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.

 

The Next Yellowstone Supereruption Is Closer Than You Think

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

The Next Yellowstone Supereruption Is Closer Than You Think


gizmodo.com

The good news: scientists have discovered that "the Yellowstone super-volcano is a little less super than previously thought." The bad news: the Yellowstone super-volcano is "more active than previously thought." That means eruptions are more frequent. So the next one is likely closer than previously predicted. Gulp.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
blog.seattlepi.com
www.ouramazingplanet.com
news.nationalgeographic.com




posted on May, 2 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   
I'm not sure if this is good news or bad news. To think it is less violent than previous thought is good but an eruption that is more frequent might be a little worse. At least we know now it won't be as bad as the movie 2012 depicted, I find a little solace in that.

It goes to show you how little we really know about this planet still. It's about as reliable as predicting the weather.

A little more from the article:


According to the the researchers from Washington State University and the Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre, the next eruption may not wipe out half of the United States, covering the rest in 3 feet of ash and pushing the world into hundreds of years of nuclear winter, challenging human civilization to a game of death and survival. That's what a previous study from the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters posited. Again, very good news.

But on the other hand, as Ben Ellis—a post-doctoral researcher at Washington State University's School of the Environment and co-author of this most recent study—says: "the Yellowstone volcano's previous behavior is the best guide of what it will do in the future. This research suggests explosive volcanism from Yellowstone is more frequent than previously thought."


gizmodo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 2-5-2012 by chrismicha77 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Hasn't the next eruption been imminent for a few thousand years now?

Sounds like they are trying to play it down now. Oh well, we'll just have to wait and see.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Yes, why not? There hasn't been a Yellowstone thread in a while. The amount of times that place has been immanent of explosion must be in the hundreds on ATS.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
I suppose it could be today...or in a couple thousand years...despite what scientists say...they really have no idea!

I went to a two hour lecture on Yellowstone two years ago...and that particular scientist thought we were no where close to the next eruption...(actually I videotaped that lecture)!

I am with some of the other members though...hasn't been a thread on Yellowstone in awhile...so why not?

And since I live in Wyoming...bring on the fear mongering!



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by jerryznv
 


No fearmongering here. Just bringing you the latest news out of Yellowstone. For me, I find it as just more proof that scientists have no idea what's going on. I love it!



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Sooner could be a thousand years from now instead of 3



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by chrismicha77
 


right, but how much is really "less" in terms of a super volcano?

I mean honestly, on that kind of scale, were talking negligible i would think...

Something that huge would still totally decimate that area and the Pacific North West, and probably most of that end of the US..........
edit on 2-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Fallout Zones

From ATS thread www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by chrismicha77
 


right, but how much is really "less" in terms of a super volcano?

I mean honestly, on that kind of scale, were talking negligible i would think...

Something that huge would still totally decimate that area and the Pacific North West, and probably most of that end of the US..........
edit on 2-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)


It is said that it's about 17% less destructive than previously thought. So yeah, it's not that much difference and now they say it erupts more frequently. So with that said, to me, it seems to be far worse than previously thought.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by chrismicha77

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by chrismicha77
 


right, but how much is really "less" in terms of a super volcano?

I mean honestly, on that kind of scale, were talking negligible i would think...

Something that huge would still totally decimate that area and the Pacific North West, and probably most of that end of the US..........
edit on 2-5-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)


It is said that it's about 17% less destructive than previously thought. So yeah, it's not that much difference and now they say it erupts more frequently. So with that said, to me, it seems to be far worse than previously thought.


I was happy there for a minute knowing that it wont be that bad... but then I noticed the - 17%.. Thats still pretty bad



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by blackmetalmist
 


You should be happy, you're in sunny Los Angeles, CA. From the looks of that map, you're going to be just fine.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
intreresting that it isn't as strong as predicted. Meaning, may not cover the sky in ploom and dust around the world



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerryznv
I suppose it could be today...or in a couple thousand years...despite what scientists say...they really have no idea!

I went to a two hour lecture on Yellowstone two years ago...and that particular scientist thought we were no where close to the next eruption...(actually I videotaped that lecture)!

I am with some of the other members though...hasn't been a thread on Yellowstone in awhile...so why not?

And since I live in Wyoming...bring on the fear mongering!


How could it be "no where near erupting?" The bubbling springs are a definite sign.
It happens every, what?. 6000 years? Last time was 6000 years ago?



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I think you guys are not getting the full picture here. This eruption can happen today or 3 thousands years from now IN NATURAL WAYS. But, have you considered the possibility of provoking it? A small bomb planted there can easilly do the job. Since it a vast wild area, its not too hard to plant it in there.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by blackmetalmist
 


Yeah, I assume normally that it would have been total destruction before the research.

That 17% brings it just under the bar of total destruction, to total devastation.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN

Originally posted by jerryznv
I suppose it could be today...or in a couple thousand years...despite what scientists say...they really have no idea!

I went to a two hour lecture on Yellowstone two years ago...and that particular scientist thought we were no where close to the next eruption...(actually I videotaped that lecture)!

I am with some of the other members though...hasn't been a thread on Yellowstone in awhile...so why not?

And since I live in Wyoming...bring on the fear mongering!


How could it be "no where near erupting?" The bubbling springs are a definite sign.
It happens every, what?. 6000 years? Last time was 6000 years ago?


Okay...first off...that was that scientists opinion...not mine!

The use of quotation marks...means that you are directly quoting something out of my post...you didn't word for word quote anything in my post...maybe you meant to do this: "... thought we were no where close to the next eruption..."!

Now to further quote my post...my opinion is stated in the first line..."I suppose it could be today...or in a couple thousand years...despite what scientists say...they really have no idea!"...did you miss the first sentence completely?

Okay...hope that helps clear things up a bit for you!



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
With the level of ground deformation about Lake Yellowstone, I'm glad I don't have property close by.

Either way, it'll be a great show.

Derek



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Viesczy
 


Woody thinks so




posted on May, 3 2012 @ 02:52 AM
link   
I live close enough that any eruption would wipe out my town. Have you ever driven through the Craters of the Moon? It's between Arco and Carey in southern Idaho. During the winter you can see steam coming up from vents all along the highway. SUPPOSEDLY, this area hasn't been active for thousands of years. I don't buy it. All along the snake river plain, there are lava flows, some as recent as a few hundred years. We just don't know enough to say for sure. But hey at least all the nuclear waste stored at the INEEL will be safe, right?







 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join