10% change of Yellowstone eruption this century?

Fox News has an article discussing research which concluded certain activities at Yellowstone were occurring at a faster pace than previously ex expected and estimated it had a 10% chance of erupting this century.

According to National Geographic, the researchers, Hannah Shamloo and Christy Till, analyzed minerals in fossilized ash from the most recent eruption. What they discovered surprised them – the changes in temperature and composition only took a few decades, much faster than the centuries previously thought.

According to the researchers, this is not cause for panic. NASA is among several entities working on a method to reduce the impact of such an eruption, and that we would have warnings before such an eruption giving people time to evacuate. They say it is no reason to panic, although having some basic preparations is always recommended and is never a bad thing.

Despite some sensationalist claims seen in the media, the supervolcano is not expected to erupt anytime soon and if it did, the events would not be catastrophic. "There's no reason to think it could impact mass transport the way the Iceland eruption did nor would it have any effect on crops," Till told Fox News. "There is no evidence to suggest it could destroy mankind."

Source: Fox News

a reply to: JBurns

What? Scientists say 10% chance? What scientists?

Fox News making sh*t up outta thin air again, doom porn sells.

a reply to: JBurns

"There's no reason to think it could impact mass transport the way the Iceland eruption did nor would it have any effect on crops," Till told Fox News. "There is no evidence to suggest it could destroy mankind."

That's odd. From one of the sources provided in your source:

The ash would be devastating for much of the United States, and temperatures could drop significantly all around the world. It’s hard to estimate what the net effect would be, but it’s safe to say that it would be massive.

If something like this happened today, it would be catastrophic,” said Hannah Shamloo, a geologist at Arizona State, speaking to the American Geophysical Union. “We want to understand what triggers these eruptions, so we can set up warning systems. That’s the big-picture goal.”

www.zmescience.com...

The "Till" in the quote is Shamloo's partner.

When people studying the problem say things like, "there's no need to panic", "nothing to worry about", "We have things under control", then it's actually time to get seriously worried. Also they're saying, "even if it does blow, it won't be that bad", that is a huge red flag for me, that's like emergency flashers going off with all the bells and whistles too.

If Yellowstone even coughs, much less has a full on eruption, it will cause some big problems. The people in that report seem to be totally down playing what could happen if it blows, things like a huge area blasted off the map, sun blocking clouds that form a world wide nuclear winter, deadly ash fallout over nearly the entire continental Untied States. The ash will choke off most of the plant and animal life with the nuclear winter killing off any survivors.

10% chance in this century... hmm... don't think I'm going to worry about it. There's still 80 years left in this century and I don't expect to be here for most of it anyway. Bummer though if it goes off just when I decide to retire.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

That's not entirely true. The Yellowstone system has produced regular sized eruptions in the past that are no more troublesome that other eruptions we currently see around the world.

The only kind of eruption that would cause widespread, world wide catastrophe would be an actual supervolcanic eruption.

Chill, everyone. People tend to forget a few things about Yellowstone - it's not an all-or-nothing place. Yes, occasionally you have a caldera-forming eruption. Other times you get phreatic eruptions or eruptions of magma that simply form some new hills here and there.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JBurns

"There's no reason to think it could impact mass transport the way the Iceland eruption did nor would it have any effect on crops," Till told Fox News. "There is no evidence to suggest it could destroy mankind."

That's odd. From one of the sources provided in your source:

The ash would be devastating for much of the United States, and temperatures could drop significantly all around the world. It’s hard to estimate what the net effect would be, but it’s safe to say that it would be massive.

If something like this happened today, it would be catastrophic,” said Hannah Shamloo, a geologist at Arizona State, speaking to the American Geophysical Union. “We want to understand what triggers these eruptions, so we can set up warning systems. That’s the big-picture goal.”

www.zmescience.com...

The "Till" in the quote is Shamloo's partner.

I like that part where Shamloo says they want to set up warning systems....yes....lets warn everyone they should prepare to die...that will surely make them calmed.

Personally, if it is going to be a world ender, I wouldn't want to know before hand.