Over FIFTY earthquakes in the last several hours in Alaska and still counting

I counted 76 in the Rat Islands. This appears to be unusual activity. I understand that Alaska is the most seismically active state in the country but this does seem like a lot. Lots of 3.0+, 4.0+.

Hey guys, not to burst any bubbles, but I don't really believe this is all that unusual. Check the statistics for the event in November 2003 in the same area: 182 quakes in 17.5 hours.

www.giseis.alaska.edu...

At 9:43 p.m. AST (06:43 11/17 UTC) on Sunday evening, November 16, 2003, a major earthquake occurred in the Rat Islands region of the Aleutian Islands. This earthquake was situated 95 kilometers (59 miles) south-southwest of Amchitka. The epicenter (red star) was located at 50.7487N and 178.4427E, the estimated moment magnitude is 7.7. This earthquake is the largest to occur in North America since the magnitude 7.9 Denali Fault, Alaska earthquake of November 3, 2002, and the largest in the Aleutian Islands since the June 1996 magnitude 7.9 Adak earthquake. The AEIC located 182 aftershocks (open circles) in the 17.5 hours after the main shock. This page will be updated as more aftershocks are located. The largest aftershock occurred at 10:50 p.m. AST on November 17 (7:50 UTC, 11/18) and had a moment magnitude of 5.7. The main shock generated a small tsunami of about 50 cm (1.64 ft) at Shemya and 12 cm (0.39 ft) at Adak (Alaska Tsunami Warning Center).

[edit on 14-6-2006 by surfinguru]

[edit on 14-6-2006 by surfinguru]

Originally posted by Communication_Burger
If it's not usual for that region, then it obviously is unusual in terms of Earthquake activity, isn't it?

No. Its not an ususual amount of activity for along the Ring of Fire or on the Aleutian Arc. It might be unusual for this subregion for this year. Maybe I am just splitting hairs, but there is a difference. One indicates a great potential for a problem, the other, perhaps it warrants further investigation, but isn't alarming.

hey thanks for this finding.

I was also reading on another forum that someone spoke with spokesman from USGS that the shocks of today are not aftershocks, but induvidual shocks/ seismic events and have nothing to do with the big two we had today. Makes it more confusing.

Don't know if I can quote this other forum.

Interesting Post d1K.

As of 12:16 pm CST I counted 76 recorded entries on the USGS site. Same as Darkelf reported. When looking at the page it is impressive to see the same name over and over come up.

On 6-13-06 only 2 were recorded in Alaska
On 6-12-06 there were 5.
On 6-11-06 there were 8.

These were from the North to the South part of the state.

Most of the ones today are from the Rat Island region.
Two of these were over 6.0 in magnitude.

They are rangning from 2 to 15 minuets apart.

Surfinguru, good statistic and information for this discussion on the one from 2003.

That one was a 7.7 magnitude with 182 aftershocks, and it generated a small Tsunami.

No one knows if this is something or not, but it is interesting.

This is a reaction I got from someone from USGS

According to him nothing special is happening.

No, nothing major is happening...that's just the regular occurrence for Alaska. Alaska gets a lot of earthquakes. The southern border of the state, the whole length from
Southeast Alaska out the Aleutian chain sits on the boundary of the North American plate and the Pacific plate, most of that length with a subduction zone type boundary.
Besides that plate boundary, there are some major fault systems in the interior of the state too (Castle Mtn., Denali and Tintina to name a few). There are many active
volcanoes here, and they can cause seismic activity. Alaska is also a large state, 1/5th the size of the lower 48 states combined. Add up all these factors and the
earthquakes can pile up pretty quick.


Ken Dixon
USGS Earth Science Information Center - Alaska
alaska.usgs.gov...




[edit on 14/6/2006 by rai76]

Can the clue be that the biggest quakes were very close to KISKA Volcano?

Even though, the number of quakes is really amazing.


Wonder what will happen next...

Has anyone checked the areas where all the quakes have taken place in order to trace a line, faultline or to locate them? I have read the thread from page 1 and someone mentioned them being on the Ring of Fire...

Originally posted by caineunholy
on the iland you can see traces of LOTS of buildings?
and holes that look like target practics.
51.5742 177.32
it looks like their was a city there!
and roads. WW2 base?
that was bomed?

Its probably a bombing range since the place is uninhabitable obviously. Could this be the source of all those seismic readings? (Except the 6.X)

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Originally posted by caineunholy
on the iland you can see traces of LOTS of buildings?
and holes that look like target practics.
51.5742 177.32
it looks like their was a city there!
and roads. WW2 base?
that was bomed?

Its probably a bombing range since the place is uninhabitable obviously. Could this be the source of all those seismic readings? (Except the 6.X)

yes it looks like a bombing range.
but very old, WW2.

Not sure if this has been mentioned - but if you search around the area where the stronger earthguakes are located- using Google Earth - you will find this.

Would be interested in hearing your thoughts.


Coords are

52.7319 174.1012

Base near the 6.2 Quake

It looks like an island with a few airports. Thats normal no ?

Is this real? Updated? Usual?

Can it be related with all these quakes?


USGS Seismic Monitor





[edit on 14-6-2006 by Ptolomeo]

Originally posted by ProjectChaos
always pleasent to read right before you go to bed, really hope it isnt anything serious..

I too hope it is nothing serious. It would be a shame if it is.

Actually it's already allmost 90 and still counting. But nothing to worry about

Originally posted by krossfyter
any earthquake experts? what the hell is sapinning?

should i put my cat inside?

What, you're not blaming the earthquakes on Bush along with everything else? That's amazing in itself.

Leave the cat outside where it can survive ...

I've skimmed over this thread, mostly immediate concerns about California.

Isn't Mt. Ranier south/southeast of that part of Alaska? Long dormant, perhaps long overdue volcano. Think Seattle and lots of people enjoying a molten earth or hot ash rinse...such wonderful chaos I can hardly stand it! (read sarcasm here, NOT real glee)

Not sure if the eastern part of the state would be affected, my tectonic knowledge extends only as far as the word "tectonic". Still, St. Helens is/was recently active.

I know there is no way to predict volcanism with any accuracy, but does this activity increase the odds of an event, or is this all just scare-mongering?

Your thoughts...your expertise.

Increases in earthquakes could be a signal of an impending eruption. On the volcano itself, there will be more quakes as the magma dome moves and shifts.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by krossfyter
any earthquake experts? what the hell is sapinning?

should i put my cat inside?

What, you're not blaming the earthquakes on Bush along with everything else? That's amazing in itself.

Leave the cat outside where it can survive ...

Al Gore is right!!! It's Global Warming! Where's my coat?

Originally posted by imbalanced
It looks like an island with a few airports. Thats normal no ?

that is Eareckson Air Station . formerly [ WWII era ] Shemya Army Air Base .

rather than babble on , its better to just direct you to the :wikipedia

APE OUT

Originally posted by l0ngsh0t
Not sure if this has been mentioned - but if you search around the area where the stronger earthguakes are located- using Google Earth - you will find this.

Would be interested in hearing your thoughts.


Coords are

52.7319 174.1012

Base near the 6.2 Quake

I see it!
but why dos it have 2 big radar domes & 2 small domes.
its a forwould listening base.