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.

 

6.2 EQ Gulf Of California

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by UziLiberman
this is good

it's nice to see that side of the pacific ring of fire release some pressure for a change.


Its not that Im worried about, its how much more pressure it has still yet to release that gets me.




posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by sgspecial19
reply to post by violet
 


Before we jump the gun here, there was no 6.2 scale earthquake in California on the 25th, or these past few days. A 2.6 scale earthquake took place in Kernville, California on the 26th though; did you invert the numbers on purpose?

My eyes have been glued to the USGS chart while comparing to the spikes in novelty on the Watkins Timewave zero chart. The 28th of September yields a spike on the Watkins scale, so there is a chance of a significant earthquake then..

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

The OP's thread title does not refer to California. It refers to the Gulf of California, which is actually part of Mexico.

It would avail the OP nothing to "invert the numbers on purpose" when the lat, long and a link to the reference site are provided in the OP for checking. The location in relation to various cities is also given and all four listed are in Mexico.

Additionally, if you followed the link the OP provides, then clicked on the "Current WorldWide Quake List" on the page linked to, you'd find the quake is shown on the world map and also listed. The details can be viewed there. It's clearly in Mexico, in the Gulf of California. And it's a mag 6.2 (Mw). Exactly as the OP's posted data say.

Before suggesting that a member might deliberately try to mislead members about a quake, it might be worth following up on the information the member provides first.

Best regards,

Mike

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

edit on 27/9/12 by JustMike because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


I made the same mistake as you...the initial post info is all correct but it's her second post that is misleading;


So this is 3 in last few hours from here up to alaska. I made another thread on alaska. A bit concerning to be in the halfway point on coast between these two regions



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by Ericthenewbie
 

Yes, I follow what you're saying.
"Last few hours" is a bit of a stretch but it's a subjective matter I guess. However, as I go by the data provided on a quake in a post or OP and cross-check it if I'm not already aware of it, then I make my deductions from there, rather than just on what the poster might say subjectively.

My issue was with misinterpretations of both the OP's thread title and actual OP data info. To me, it was clear enough and so I responded to the member as I did, in the belief that s/he seemed to have misunderstood the info provided. We all make mistakes (I've made plenty in my time
) and if it's just a mistake then it's not a big deal.

Best regards,

Mike

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


edit on 27/9/12 by JustMike because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by violet
 


I'm not seeing this EQ on your link, nor the interactive real time EQ map

earthquake.usgs.gov...

....where did you get info from...TIA...

Des


I copied and pasted this from an email I got from USGS



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ericthenewbie
reply to post by JustMike
 


I made the same mistake as you...the initial post info is all correct but it's her second post that is misleading;


So this is 3 in last few hours from here up to alaska. I made another thread on alaska. A bit concerning to be in the halfway point on coast between these two regions

I apologize about referencing the alaska quake(s). I corrected that thread but neglected to do this one.
There was a conflict with the data not syncing as it should due to two separate earthquake feeds not naming the regions the same. I got this one in an email and copied from that and the messed up Alaskan thread was a combo of email and the quake watch app. I don't just use USGS feed.

I did wait a few hours before posting both

Anyways lesson learned re my errors.
Again I apologise.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   

edit on 27-9-2012 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
reply to post by violet
 


I believe you may have the dates wrong.

That was yesterday and there's a thread on it here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Peace






edit on 26-9-2012 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



I'm in Canada and the date was indeed yesterday in my time zone. Pacific standard time.
This came to me via email.
I copied it out of that and didn't change anything to deliberately mislead as some have implied.
It was posted a few hours after it occurred.


I never said it was in California. Gulf of California is near Mexico.


Yes I did make some mistakes re the alaska thread I made, I corrected that but neglected to fix this thread referencing it and should have edited the other one better as well.

I apologise for this.
I've been a long time member and know better than to mislead members or deliberately post false information.

As for not coming back to respond. There were no replies yet when I checked before I went to bed.
Additionally there is a time restraint on editing posts when one realizes they should.

I messaged the mod to expand on what played a part in my errors.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Originally posted by violet
[snip]
I apologize about referencing the alaska quake(s). I corrected that thread but neglected to do this one.
There was a conflict with the data not syncing as it should due to two separate earthquake feeds not naming the regions the same. I got this one in an email and copied from that and the messed up Alaskan thread was a combo of email and the quake watch app. I don't just use USGS feed.

I did wait a few hours before posting both

Anyways lesson learned re my errors.
Again I apologise.

Hi violet,

I understand and I sincerely hope we all do. Stuff happens, mistakes can happen. We're only human. And yes, when we're getting data from multiple feeds there can often be some discrepancies in such things as naming locations (according to the list-of-place-name software the different agencies use), depths of quakes, magnitudes (based on the specific scale they use and also how they interpret them), and even very small variations in quake times.

Over on the QuakeWatch thread these issues get discussed quite often.


So, don't worry too much about it.

Best regards,

Mike

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by JustMike
 


Thank you.
........

I realize it might be best to only use the USGS feed because its a preferred source for ATS. However I don't want to change my settings to only use USGS because it doesn't show any small quakes occurring throughout british columbia or close by in Washington state which is of interest to me.
There's a little known fault line in abbotsford British Columbia called Boulder Creek fault as well as the San Andreas fault that extends into BC

So in the future I will double check the feeds used before posting. I will make sure to only use USGS from now on.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ericthenewbie

Originally posted by Ericthenewbie
I don't think violet would intentionally mislead...probably a mistake...and she is probably verifying her information now....she'll be back you'll see


I guess I was wrong about violet coming back to fix the error....sorry peeps...maybe her intent was to mislead


Glad you came back and clarified violet...I retract the second statement quoted above...I should have stuck with with my gut and the initial statement I made..I apologize.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by violet
 

violet, I'd just like to clarify that we can post data from any sources we wish. There is no one source that's preferred by ATS. Naturally, we much prefer to use well known and reasonably reliable ones. And speaking as a member I can tell you that I've used a wide variety of sources, depending on the quake location.

For example, for US events I like to use USGS, if it's in Europe I prefer ESMC, and in and around Japan the JMA is probably the best. If you go over to QuakeWatch you'll see many sources used. So please continue to use the sources you prefer.


Mike

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 27 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ericthenewbie

Originally posted by Ericthenewbie

Originally posted by Ericthenewbie
I don't think violet would intentionally mislead...probably a mistake...and she is probably verifying her information now....she'll be back you'll see


I guess I was wrong about violet coming back to fix the error....sorry peeps...maybe her intent was to mislead


Glad you came back and clarified violet...I retract the second statement quoted above...I should have stuck with with my gut and the initial statement I made..I apologize.



thats quite alright and thanks for understanding.

ETA
ok
I'm really sorry this date thing of 25th / 26th is something i didnt notice until now, reading through the posts.
It was emailed to me and must have arrived a day late. I never really know what the day or date is. It seemed new to me. I was wrong on all counts.

I realise it sounds like a lame excuse and I get why you would all think what you did.


edit on 27-9-2012 by violet because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join