Quake Watch 2013

page: 12
114
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 06:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Nyiah
 


They are infrequent but they do happen. More quakes up in Scotland on the Great Glen fault and it's extensions. 3.2 is biggish for the UK but they can on very rare occasions go up to 5.8 ML (year 1382)

I don't count the 6.1 in the North Sea in 1931, purely because it was not on land.

Actually here is the list of historic quakes which are the ones around the 5+ mark but as you can see they do not happen very often.




posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Just felt this one


Universal Time January 18 2013 at 16:00:25
NZ Daylight Time Saturday, January 19 2013 at 5:00:25 am
Latitude, Longitude -40.53, 174.39
Intensity ? light
Focal Depth 93 km
Magnitude 4.9
Location 65 km north-east of French Pass

www.geonet.org.nz...
The house creaked, then a pause then some shaking for about 10 seconds, nothing too dramatic

must be a few people up already, quite a few felt reports on the map, only been 7 minutes
edit on 18-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)


I would have called that " NE of Stephens Island", I can see that across Cook Strait from our beach.
or better still "NW of Kapiti Island", which I can see from my window
edit on 18-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)


reviewed and downgraded to 4.7
edit on 18-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   
editing time expired on post by muzzy
 


I was just thinking that one not as much "a subway train coming" as some of the 4.8's we've had from that west side, so yep 4.7 sounds about right.
Ones from the eastern hills have a "solid rock breaking" type feel.
We are on sand dunes.



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 

are you watching what is going on in the america's and canada?

Holey crap. that one really set off some motion



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
I've read that the San Andreas Fault experiences slow-slip, or creep, in certain stretches. Does anybody know of a website with monitoring? Real-time monitoring would be fun, but any recent data would be interesting. All I can find are journal articles.

The central and San Bernadino sections of the SAF have been fairly active today. I was wondering if these spectrograms from near Parkfield, CA are showing "tremor" similar to what we see in the Pacific NW? Or just some sort of noise?

Portuguese Canyon (southwest of Parkfield):


Middle Mountain (Parkfield):



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by crappiekat
 


Hi!

What are you seeing?
The link in your first post 404'd.
I can't seem to find anything that looks unusual.

WOQ



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 09:46 PM
link   
just felt another one

a thump, then a shake for about 3 seconds, the house "shuddered"
to the north this time

Universal Time January 19 2013 at 3:37:54
NZ Daylight Time Saturday, January 19 2013 at 4:37:54 pm
Latitude, Longitude -40.18, 174.84
Intensity ? moderate
Focal Depth 12 km
Magnitude 4.2
Location 35 km south-west of Whanganui


www.geonet.org.nz...

don't usually feel those Wanganui ones.unless they are 5+



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:23 AM
link   
ran over the edit time again on post by muzzy
 

interactive map showing the location of todays (NZDT) mag 4 quakes in the Wanganui Basin/Cook Strait area ( purple icons)
Wee swarm of 8 smaller quakes at Pouawa, between Gisborne and Tolaga Bay as well.


edit on 19-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 


Quake 15 km west of Christchurch, intensity strong, approx. M4.6, depth 10 km ..

Time: 2013/1/19 8:15:00 UTC, Region: 20 km west of Christchurch, ML 4.6, Depth: 10km,

geonet.org.nz...


While Jesse Prescott of Avonhead said tonight's quake lasted about ten seconds. "It was very sudden. It was quiet - and then all of a sudden - boom!" he said. Prescott said the shake caused books, paintings and glasses to hit the floor.


tvnz.co.nz...

Probably coming stronger shakes in New Zealand and Christchurch in next days-months ..

edit on 19-1-2013 by MariaLida because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by MariaLida
reply to post by muzzy
 

Probably coming stronger shakes in New Zealand and Christchurch in next days-months ..


What makes you say that?
3 mag 4's in 17 hours is not unusual for New Zealand, even as background activity, its all about location, and depth, 2 of those quite shallow (above 8km) and all 3 near enough to civilization to be felt.
It has been quiet here so far this year, the only 5 has been offshore up South of the Kermadecs.
Its so quiet I haven't even started my NZ Mag5+ map yet and we are 20 days into JAn.

I think those 4's are a result of the Pacific-Antarctic quakes earlier in the week, rotataion of the Ant. Plate must be anti-clockwise.



this is the table I use to make the graph (thumbnail, click to see larger image)

edit on 19-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MariaLida
reply to post by muzzy
 



Probably coming stronger shakes in.....Christchurch in next days-months ..

edit on 19-1-2013 by MariaLida because: (no reason given)


Not necessarily. We can expect a few aftershocks related to this shake, but I don't think we'll see any increase in activity here v(i.e. larger magnitude).

It was the first one I've felt for a while (months) and did get the adrenalin going again, but it was over before it got to any really worrying intensity. Wasn't bad though, the house shook reasonably.
edit on 19-1-2013 by aorAki because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Umm, whoohoo , no warning on this one, the house just started to wobble quite violently, lasted a good 10 seconds. No rattling or noise with it, thats a sign of "distant and deep"


Universal Time January 20 2013 at 0:45:57
NZ Daylight Time Sunday, January 20 2013 at 1:45:57 pm
Latitude, Longitude -39.78, 174.31
Intensity ? light
Focal Depth 135 km
Magnitude 5.2ML
Location 20 km south of Hawera


www.geonet.org.nz...

edit on 19-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)

OK MariaLida you were right.

How did you know there was more to come?
edit on 19-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)


I'll chuck a couple of graphs in here while I still have time to edit and have them on my screen now
< top is the Wanganui 4.2, guessing the 2nd one is Rolleston and bottom one is this quake.
< that one is BUD SNZO
edit on 19-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Olivine
 



Or just some sort of noise?


IMHO yes. Not really earthquake shaped and trends upwards to over 10Hz. Quakes don't normally do that.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Update
Geonet have finally reviewed that Taranaki Bight 7.148ML quake in July last year and brought it into line with the rest of the networks


2012p498491
UTC: 03/07/2012 10:36:13
NZST:03/07/2012 22:36:13
LAt/Long:-39.9684, 173.6294
Depth:253.9km
Mag: 6.4612M
Where:South Taranaki Bight-Wanganui-Rangitikei
Phases:116
TTNT: 74,166.592


They are using the dreaded "M" now, for magnitude type, since the end of 2012 in their data

GFZ are behind this SeisComP3 technology "upgrade", and they call "M" as "a mix between mb and Mw".
I'll be going back over what I have on file for some of the 5+ quakes (in ML) over the last few years and see if there is a difference, and if so we might be able to at least figure out the conversion formula for New Zealand.

edit:
hmmm............. there must have been some downgrades, I had 37 quakes above mag 5 for 2012, that I loaded during the year as they happened, latest data is showing only 24.
edit on 20-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzy

hmmm............. there must have been some downgrades, I had 37 quakes above mag 5 for 2012, that I loaded during the year as they happened, latest data is showing only 24.
edit on 20-1-2013 by muzzy because: (no reason given)


Downgrades, hey? Sounds more like the earthquakes are increasing a great deal more than someone wants to admit! But, we'll just sit back and let the experts continue to tell us they're not.
edit on 20-1-2013 by Rezlooper because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   
The Reykjanes Ridge potentially countering Carlsberg with it's own party?

5.0 Reykjanes Ridge 2013-01-20 16:26:28 54.070°N 35.123°W 10.1
4.7 Reykjanes Ridge 2013-01-20 16:25:06 54.004°N 35.083°W 10.1
earthquake.usgs.gov...

It'll be interesting to see how many more follow.

Edit: Oh yeah! And this Russian one was pretty eye-catching:
5.5 164km E of Ust'-Nera, Russia 2013-01-20 05:48:47 64.791°N 146.601°E 12.2

Not a lot of events in that area over 100 years of historical data.
edit on 1/20/2013 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 

True enough there will be downgrades, over-estimation/errors etc at the time,but 37 vs 24 is a lot of difference.
I'll have to go download some 4.5-4.999 for 2012 and see if i can see where they went to.

just looking back at 2006, there was a 6.0 not that far from me, mid way between Cape Farewell and Taranaki, gave us a heck of a fright, was just after midnight, been downgraded to 5.98.
The 6 the year prior in the same area has stayed the same 6.37, that one was early morning so not quite so bad.
I hate it when they wake you up half way through them, you wonder WTH for a few seconds.

You can't really feel the difference between a 6.0 and a 5.98 to be honest, but it does skew the figures if you get it wrong.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Rezlooper
 


Because they are not. In fact it has never been quieter in the last few years and the average magnitudes are falling. Want to know why?

The sun. Our sun is quiet and the electric universe connection is becoming more and more apparent.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Prov,Date/Time UTC,Latitude,Longitude,Magnitude,Depth(Km),Location
gfzp,2013-01-20 23:32:25, 53.840, -35.580, 5.1, 10.0, Reykjanes Ridge
gfzp,2013-01-20 21:40:31, 54.100, -35.160, 5.2, 10.0, Reykjanes Ridge
gfzp,2013-01-20 21:26:27, 53.940, -35.120, 5.2, 10.0, Reykjanes Ridge
gfzp,2013-01-20 21:25:06, 53.980, -35.140, 4.7, 10.0, Reykjanes Ridge
gfzp,2013-01-16 09:53:03, 60.990, -28.090, 4.2, 10.0, Reykjanes Ridge




Iceland having a partaay! Well south of Iceland actually but never mind, bring a bottle.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzy
 



You can't really feel the difference between a 6.0 and a 5.98 to be honest


And of course it rounds to 6 when using 1 decimal place so normally it would be displayed as a 6 unless always rounding down (which they do NOT do by the way).

GeoNet themselves say that one should not use the 2 decimal places somewhere on the old site and probably on the new, just as they say one should not use the 5 decimal places for the Lat and Lon.

In fact just don't use anything as it is all inaccurate.





new topics
top topics
 
114
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join