Quake Watch 2016

Muzzy, awhile back, you gave me a link for Mexico. It broke. Now I can't find it or much else. Do you have anymore links to find lists? I started to look but remembered why I get frustrated with these lists and the other bs.

noticed alittle uptick in eq in the Puerto Rico area. Could be nothing but caught my eye.

2.8
90km N of Isabela, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 08:02:39 UTC-05:0028.0 km
3.2
74km NNW of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 07:27:21 UTC-05:0073.0 km
2.9
99km NNW of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 07:19:43 UTC-05:0013.0 km
3.4
90km N of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 07:16:31 UTC-05:0038.0 km
3.4
91km N of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 06:51:46 UTC-05:0024.0 km
3.2
85km NNW of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 06:50:36 UTC-05:0061.0 km

3.0
102km NNW of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 05:45:20 UTC-05:0032.0 km
3.0
90km N of Isabela, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 05:35:25 UTC-05:0028.0 km
3.3
88km N of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 04:36:47 UTC-05:0014.0 km

2.6
93km N of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 04:20:23 UTC-05:0038.0 km
2.8
88km NNW of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 04:15:47 UTC-05:0012.0 km
3.3
86km N of San Antonio, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 04:09:06 UTC-05:0044.0 km

3.3
95km N of Isabela, Puerto Rico
2016-06-02 02:36:08 UTC-05:0038.0 km

USGS

a reply to: lurksoften

This was upgraded from USGS to a 6.6.

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Now did USGS always have it at Sungaipenuh, Indonesia?


AHHHH, I just noticed EMSC downgraded to a 6.4.



www.emsc-csem.org...

5.2 South of Tasmania 14.6km (9.1mi)

earthquake.usgs.gov...

The Tasmanian Devil is awakening.

a reply to: ericblair4891
Damn I hate it when that happens. I hadn't been looking so didn't notice that it went off line.
It has taken me half an hour of searching but here is the
"new improved" version (read: dumbed down for cell phones more likely)
I don't like the layout, but at least the info is there.

www.ssn.unam.mx...



here is the English version
www.ssn.unam.mx...

It looks like the Search only works in Spanish
www2.ssn.unam.mx:8080...



Looks like the big change is to Interactive Maps, which I suppose is a step forwards.

a reply to: muzzy

Thank you.

Here's the thing. When I looked at your first link, I looked at page and just tried to absorb it without having a hissy fit like a child. I decided to be a grown up and accepted it. Then I went back to your post and saw that the second link was an English version. Okay, even better, I can be lazy and use this page instead of learning Spanish. Or, should I say, Esplanade. Sorry.

Oh, the thing is, the two different version should should the same info. But they don't. The two pages show different totals. The Spanish version says there is 50 earthquakes, and the English version says there are 56 earthquakes. Oh my, I think I just had a mild stroke.

Wait, I'm going to see what it says for three days.

yup, 81 and 86 wow


When you use your third link and make custom for three days, you get 81. So, somehow, the other version has 5 extra earthquakes. I'm not going to try and figure out why.

I hadn't done any NZ or Japan downloads for 3 days and as usual I missed something
20/06/2016 UTC, 84 quakes across NZ nzeq2016.blogspot.co.nz...
Thats the largest number since 09/05/2016
mag~1= 12 , mag1= 41 , mag2= 27 , mag3= 3 , mag4= 0, mag5= 1 , mag6= 0 , total= 84
total energy released= 2120.615 TTNT
Ha! I thought, must be a swarm somewhere
well not really, sure a couple of clusters at Waiouru and to the NW of Mt. Ruapehu, but the 41 mag 1's are spread throughout the land.
What I missed was the geonet seismograph for the Central Plateau (the area mentioned above) would have been an interesting graph. Why can't Geonet do the same as NIED and archive their graphs?, geez they get $millions of yearly budget, what would it cost to keep a Dropbox type account going for a year to store the old graphs? a few hundred bucks.
* I tried to find what the GNS or Geonet budget was for 2016 but gave up, what a shambles these Govt web sites are!, I did find that $27million was allocated to some nob dept to analyze whether the budget allocation for Science was being spent properly, geez what a waste, why not spend the $27 mill on the actual department that is doing the research. F'ing bureaucrats and politicians

There are two North Atlantic quakes of 4.7 and 4.1 today showing on RSOE but they're not coming up on USGS.

I've not seen this happen before or maybe I've just never noticed it, does anyone know if this happen a lot? I don't usually pay attention to the quakes on RSOE.

a reply to: paradisepurple

True very interesting i see its showing on EMSC also.

Magnitude M 4.1
Region NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN
Date time 2016-06-03 15:53:17.0 UTC
Location 53.02 N ; 23.89 W
Depth 424 km

Magnitude M 4.7
Region REYKJANES RIDGE
Date time 2016-06-03 15:51:50.1 UTC
Location 52.73 N ; 33.18 W
Depth 10 km

a reply to: ericblair4891
yeah that's kind of weird, if you open both in separate tabs then switch back and forth between the maps you can see the ones that are missing from the English version

further to: muzzy
wow really getting tangled up in Bing Maps now.
Currently working on 1904 and I get these
Magnitude, Type, Date(y/m/d) Time(hh:mm:ss), Latitude, Longitude, Depth, Location, Source, Catalogue
7.5Mw, 1904/6/25 14:45:36, 52, 159, Off East Coast Of Kamchatka, km, P&S
7.6Mw, 1904/6/25 21:0:30, 52, 159, Off East Coast Of Kamchatka, km, P&S
7.2Mw, 1904/6/27 0:9:0, 52, 159, Off East Coast Of Kamchatka, km, P&S
6.7Ms, 1904/7/24 10:44:36, 52, 159, Off East Coast Of Kamchatka, km, AN2

[p&s] Catalog of worldwide earthquakes with Ms 7.0> 1900-1989 Pacheco and Sykes (1992)
i can't remember what AN2 stands for but I think it came from the Centennial Earthquake [ehb] Catalog 1900-1999 by Engdahl, E.R., and A. Villaseñor (2002)

Hard to say if the first 2 are the same quake, from the same source so likely there were 2 quakes separated by 6 hrs.

Anyway they are all located at the sam Lat Long
so what I have done is add 0.00001 to Lat and Long to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th events time wise for clarity on the map, when zoom (down to 50ft) to see the split, it looks like this

Thats less than 10 metres or 25ft between the 4 quakes, I think thats an OK +/- reading don't you? especially for 1904.
I mean really how accurate are they today in 2016? usually the Lat/Long changes even for recent quakes over weeks months and years of review anyway.

further and further to: muzzy
Aieyieyi this is crazy
I have had the link for a while the SHARE European Earthquake Catalogue (SHEEC) 1900-2006 compiled by GFZ Potsdam.

This part of the catalogue represents a temporal and spatial excerpt of "The European-Mediterranean Earthquake Catalogue" (EMEC) for the last millennium (Grünthal and Wahlström, 2012) with some modifications, which are described in Grünthal et al. (2013).

But it was after I got into the 1800's so I hadn't used it. I had a look at the 1000-1899 one, but they were all covered in the AHEAD database anyway.
So doing a review, I opened the SHEEC link and you had to e-mail them to get the data. One field asks for Affiliation?
So I put "Amateur Researcher"
Boom it was in my e-mail in an instant!
So already I have 4 new references
1901 (1 additional reference Romania 7.2)
1903 (1 new event Portugal 6.5)
1904 (1 additional reference for Greece-Bulgaria Border Region 7.1 and 1 new event Romania 6.6)
I don't think Engdahl, E.R., and A. Villaseñor had this information when compiling the Centennial Earthquake Catalog 1900-1999, as the "The European-Mediterranean Earthquake Catalogue (EMEC) for the last millennium" appears to have been published in 2009.




and further still...........
While I was getting the link for GHEA I scrolled down to the bottom of the page, and in fact the data runs to 1903, not 1899 like the title says, damn. I never noticed that before.
there are 70 "new" listings I will have to check and cross reference with what I already have for the years 1900-1903 as well
I'll be stuck in the early 1900's for the weekend (a long holiday one luckily, and it COLD outside)

Quakes in the Mexico region seem ramping up.

www.ssn.unam.mx...

Deep one.

M6.3 - 132km SW of Leksula, Indonesia

4.594°S 125.641°E depth=428.4 km (266.2 mi)

Time
2016-06-05 16:25:33 (UTC)
2016-06-05 11:25:33 (UTC-05:00) in your timezone
Times in other timezones

Nearby Places
132.0 km (82.0 mi) SW of Leksula, Indonesia
299.0 km (185.8 mi) WSW of Ambon, Indonesia
348.0 km (216.2 mi) E of Katabu, Indonesia
350.0 km (217.5 mi) ENE of Baubau, Indonesia
438.0 km (272.2 mi) N of Dili, East Timor

USGS
EMSC 6.3Mw

I'm not going to comment on Mexico because I lost my mojo when they switched. I hate change. It will take me awhile to get used to the new maps and such.

I've had thoughts about the newish area of earthquakes in Nevada, but since I haven't looked at the history of this area, I was saying nothing 'cause' I don't know nuttin'.

That was until I got news on New Zealand. I'm a bit jealous of Muzzy being atop so much active geology. Yes, I understand the risks and tragedies, so, I'm not saying it's all great. But, it's rarely dull. The newest news about New Zealand is that there's a new source of magma under a town. That's not really a good thing, but it is dramatic.

It seems a town has a magma chamber filling up with fresh hotstuff, and the volcano is responsible for the swarm earthquakes.

I'll keep this brief. Nevada has a magma chamber under it that's filling up and causing swarms. It must be big. Oh, I'll post links about the New Zealand town.
phys.org...

www.theweathernetwork.com...

a reply to: ericblair4891

Interesting. I hadn't heard about that but certainly recall the massive swarms of small quakes off Matata, they mention 2004 and 2011, amazing how quickly you forget. I probably blogged about them but lost it all when Google maps went stupid. I imagine the Geonet site will still have something in their news archives

5.0 Central East Pacific Rise 10.0Km (6.2mi)

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Could this lead to something bigger?

TA is always watching this area.

a reply to: muzzy
Na it was 2005 and 2007
info.geonet.org.nz...
I remember now that it was just after I started following earthquakes in 2006 that the 2nd swarm hit, very interesting at the time, especially as they have had some M6's just outside the same area in the past (e.g. Edgecumbe 1987)

6.0 SSE of Raoul Island. 10.0km (6.2mi)

earthquake.usgs.gov...

If the reports about the earths mantle can be trusted there could be real significant ones this year.We already get 7's and 6's especially 6's out of nowhere pretty often now.