Is another Mag 8+ due like in 2012?

reply to post by PuterMan


I think I would have felt that one . Seriously though this is something I have wondered for a while is what would happen if there was a quake on the great lakes, would they swash like a fish bowl and how big could a wave get? I live on the north shore of Lake Erie, a relatively shallow one and it seems they happen across the lake south of here in Ohio occasionally.

reply to post by whatnext21


Something of that magnitude could well cause a tsunami on the lakes and yup slosh around like a fish bowl would be a good description.

I believe there are a few nuclear power stations around the lakes. Not sure what effect something like this would have on them.

reply to post by PuterMan

Oops! Sorry

Thanks for the polite but informative retort.

Punctuation, my dear friend, is, like, important.

Like in 2012.

Originally posted by piequal3because14
reply to post by PuterMan

 

Oh you mean like here?

Magnitude
8.1
Date-Time
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 11:45:27 UTC
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 11:45:27 at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
45.096791,-83.853149
Depth
10.5 km (6.9 miles)
Region
near Lake Huron
horizontal +/- 3.2 km (1.1 miles); depth +/- 0.2 km (0.0 miles)
Parameters
NST=121, Nph=121, Dmin=128.0km, Rmss=0.68 sec
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=6
Source
uncertain

Uhhhh.....today is the 30 of April 2013...How can the time stamp above be May 6 2013?

reply to post by piequal3because14


Magnitude
8.1
Date-Time
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 11:45:27 UTC
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 11:45:27 at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
45.096791,-83.853149
Depth
10.5 km (6.9 miles)
Region
near Lake Huron
horizontal +/- 3.2 km (1.1 miles); depth +/- 0.2 km (0.0 miles)
Parameters
NST=121, Nph=121, Dmin=128.0km, Rmss=0.68 sec
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=6
Source
uncertain



Sorry for the double post...didn't do it right the first time....the time stamp is May 6, 2013....today is April 30th, 2013....somebody want to explain that one to me?

reply to post by maddog3n8


I saw that on your first post and assumed you were making a prediction, but w/ your second post I must say that is very strange???

SaneThinking

I watch this guy daily PuterMan and he made a new video today that, I dunno may have some sort of connection to your fear of a big one coming.

Bouy off Indonesia

This bouy is right in the area of the two 8 pointers previous and has experienced massive shifts ever since it was put online. How much seismic activity would have to take place to create this annomaly, and displace that much land. And could this much displacement happen without a major shake. So a series of small tremors like the canary island volcano that grew this past year..

SaneThinking

Think this relates to the 188-day earthquake cycle?

(Yeah, I went there.)

This was one of those thread titles where
I was ready to go after the OP for sensationalism...

Then I noticed who the OP was...uh oh

This is also on of those examples where the reputation of the OP
figures greatly into how many grains of salt to take with it.

So pour out the salt because with PuterMan,
we had better heed any warnings he gives.
Always a fantastic thread writer-researcher and EQ's
are his thing.

So now we can hope that if there is an 8.0
It hits away from populated areas.

reply to post by SaneThinking


To displace 1200 metres of land, which is just about 3/4 of a mile, is an enormous amount when you are talking about the sea bed. I am not au fait with the maths but many thousands of cubic metres of land would required seismic forces that I believe we do not encounter. Remember the Mag 8.8 in Chile That moved the whole town of Conception 10 ft. To move such a mass upwards 1200 metres (3700 ft) would need a mind boggling amount of energy - but it does happen on Earth when orogenesis is taking place. After all the Himalayas have been raised up.

Unfortunately it is also a fact that many of these buoys are unreliable and have glitches, drop-outs and bad readings.

reply to post by sealing


Thank you for the faith in my abilities. I really am only asking if anyone else thinks the lull, particularly in the energy, is significant enough to be of concern.

I am still working on the incidences of this in the past, if any.

reply to post by PuterMan


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/63feed86146a.jpg[/atsimg]

To generate the tsunami which resulted from The Great Tohoku Earthquake of 2011 you would had to have been able to displace approximately 125 cubic kilometers of water within a few seconds.


If PuterMan perks up his ears I do as well.

Not being hasty but watchful is never a bad thing.

reply to post by PuterMan


That is why I referenced what took place last year and is still ongoing in the Canary Islands with the formation of a new Subsurface Volcano. The thing hardest for me to grasp as you said would be the mass amount of energy released when this happend. I figure it would be one hell of an EQ, yet the deviations come without huge shocks. That being the reason I would bring it to a resident expert, I myself have only started to dabble more recently. Thanks for the reply, something I will keep my eye on regardless, bouy has been going crazy since they turned it on.

As far as this thread and an 8 in the mix I sure hope not cause in Vancouver where I am we are long overdue and have been warned none stop for years, so I'm hoping this preminition rings true else where with little loss of life if it comes to pass. Fingers crossed

SaneThinking

reply to post by SaneThinking


I too have my fingers crossed for you. I have relatives in Vancouver so the Cascades are an interest.

I don't think that the Cascades biggie is overdue particularly, but it is certainly due or thereabouts. More likely will be a mag 8.5 at the southern end first I think, and that may set the scene for the Mag 9. As far as I can tell the stress levels are there just about, but that is just about geological time so it could be one hundred years or more!

BTW: My thoughts on a mag 8 are not a premonition, just a discussion of the possibilities based on the evidence. It may well come to nothing but I thought it worth mentioning.

reply to post by PuterMan


Sorry didn't mean to make it sound like you were "predicting" read enough of your threads to know your not going down that road should have worded that differently.

I would like to think all the action north in Massat and off the coast of Alaska would be relieving some of the stress for us down here too the south, but every couple years we get globalTV or someone else running a EQ program trying to sell emergency supplies and reminding us of the ramifications of not being prepared.

I as well as I have said frequent your threads and do find it ominous that it seems our large earthquakes have a cyclical path to them in a sense, that would be further founded if we were to have a large EQ after the lull as this thread is warning us about, so rehashing hopefully it doesn't come to pass and all is well, but if it does it certaintly adds another variable to the mechanics of Earthquakes on this planet, and a few more questions as well

SaneThinking

reply to post by PuterMan


Nice catch, PM!

The "lull" in total daily energy over this past week, looks to be even lower than the paltry energy release in the days prior to the doublet in 2012. Now, I am going to have to be glued to my compy to see what develops... (I've been trying to ween myself away, lol)

I agree that a Cascadia quake would probably only involve the southern portion of the zone.
If a large quake does strike in the coming hours, my vote of possible locations are: the southern San Andreas Fault (mag 7.6-7.8), or the Aleutian Islands (rather vague 1000's km length of fault, ).

Thanks for your diligence in crunching the numbers, Sir.

reply to post by SaneThinking


Large earthquakes do indeed have a cyclical nature and as I understand it the length of time to the next depends on the strength of the current, which kind of makes sense. The time relationship of earthquakes, sorry of large earthquakes, is known in science. The problem really is trying to determine just how long between and what the signs are.

reply to post by Olivine


I now have a spatially accurate count of the daily number of Mag 4.5-5.99 for each day from 2001 to 2012. This enables me to make a very long chart and visually identify drops.

The first one I picked at random turned out to be before the Mag 8.0 at Samoa in September 2009. Remember that I picked what looked like a dip and then identified the quake that caused the spike and not picked a quake and went to find the dip.

Click to enlarge the image

This one is masked slightly by the effect of three mag 6 quakes - Bhutan, Macquarie Island Region and Off Coast Of Jalisco. Mexico - but there is a clear touchdown before the Mag 8.

It is too late now to do any more but I can see others, which I will look at tomorrow if I get time.

PS. The touch down after the two big ones may not appear to have produced much but the rise after it is this one:

2009-10-24 14:40:44, -6.136, 130.384, 6.9, 134.2, Banda Sea

Big enough.

The touchdown right at the end was immediately before this

2009-11-24 12:47:14, -20.640, -174.068, 6.8, 10.0, Tonga

Another biggish one.

I have a funny feeling something big may happen before Friday. I don't know why I have this feeling. I don't know what is going to happen either. Just sort of an eerie feeling.

Originally posted by maddog3n8
reply to post by piequal3because14

 

Magnitude
8.1
Date-Time
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 11:45:27 UTC
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 11:45:27 at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
45.096791,-83.853149
Depth
10.5 km (6.9 miles)
Region
near Lake Huron
horizontal +/- 3.2 km (1.1 miles); depth +/- 0.2 km (0.0 miles)
Parameters
NST=121, Nph=121, Dmin=128.0km, Rmss=0.68 sec
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=6
Source
uncertain



Sorry for the double post...didn't do it right the first time....the time stamp is May 6, 2013....today is April 30th, 2013....somebody want to explain that one to me?

edit on 30-4-2013 by maddog3n8 because: add a word to complete the sentence

I wondered the same thing. I *think* that piequal3because14 was joking and then puterman joked back by making it look like he found it on a map. Not sure, though.