Whats going on at yellowstone?

Originally posted by LwSiX
But isn't the earthquake data automated? As in a seismogram picks it up and transfers it to a central server and then it gets outputted to the web page and other places?

This is definitely the case for the larger quakes on usgs. If you actually look right when a quake hits it always says something along the lines of "unconfirmed" or "this analysis is subject to change pending seismologist review" etc.

Now I don't know about the three sensors around Yellowstone. Maybe they were disconnected from the USGS site for some reason.

One last thing ... it is the weekend too. I mean even people with a love of this stuff need a day or two off. Could be no one's really around to review hundreds of smaller quakes.

loll the 4.3 of nevada is in straght line between long valley caldera and yellowstone...even nearly in the middle of it...

its also a holiday weekend... end of the year use or loose leave for government workers as well.

Originally posted by ChrisCrikey
The shadows of the trees at the live web cam at old faithful are much too steep. It's 11:05 SM MST. No way the shadows from the trees could be that steep.

link as supplied here a little while ago.
www.nps.gov...

The sun angle is much further to the south during the winter months. Come spring and summer time, check those shadows of the trees again at the same time frame and they will be much shorter.

The sun sets up here around 4:30-4:45. By 5pm your driving around with headlights on and streetlights are on.



Cheers!!!!

okay, 11:23am mountain time, Live cam just panned (motorized) a few times to get back on to Old Faithfull - confirmed
end of that discussion

Originally posted by Realtruth
RSOE is saying 4.3 and volcanic activity nearby. I know they are not completely accurate.

Can this be close, I don't see anything on the USGS

hisz.rsoe.hu...〈=eng

And volcanic activity in Montana.

hisz.rsoe.hu...〈=eng



[edit on 4-1-2009 by Realtruth]

What I have found in the past when comparing the RSOE info - to other source info - is that they are not reliable. However, sometimes - the ARE the ones who have the correct info when another source for some reason does not. If you read the RSOE situation info you know that the English can be poor - translation/importance is iffy.
I think this actually accounts for some of the incorrect info.
Also the info feed to and from the site probably takes longer.

[edit on 4-1-2009 by spinkyboo]

10:22 PST here and as the live streaming cam is pointed away from Old Faithful, it's showing someone setting up a tripod in the distance and looks like taking surveys. It looked like they took some kind of sample or something with a long rod prior to setting up the tripod.

Not that it means anything, just haven't noticed anything like that over the last several days.

Update: now the cam is showing a different area

[edit on 1/4/2009 by bigdog36]

Originally posted by Realtruth
We'll give them break.

That might be a good idea for now. But honestly I am really concerned that one of these bigger quakes strikes real close to Yellowstone, potentially jarring something loose and setting into motion a very troubling series of events that otherwise might not have been. But that's really a concern with any major quake near other faults and volcanoes, because of their sheer power to displace, dislodge, and move things. Big things in sensitive places.

I also have been thinking of something else. Could the sheer size of the caldera and underlying magma pools contain so much energy and pressure that scientists could be fooled into thinking that the same thickness and composition of the magma-containing rock layer which readily contains smaller pressures in smaller volcanoes can still contain the pressures here?

My point is that when push comes to shove, the pressure may be so much greater than anticipated that the same threshold that exists for smaller volcanoes may not work in a place like Yellowstone. It is just too extreme from any other place on earth. It may blow in a much more aggressive way with a lot less warning.

reply to post by spinkyboo


So all the squiggles on the seismos that look like harmonic tremors are really just wind huh??....Here, according to the USGS is what high winds look like on a seismo:quake.usgs.gov......scroll down & click on "High winds at Geyser Peak"...This is what a harmonic tremor looks like:earthquake.usgs.gov...Now go here to the UofUtah's seismo site:www.quake.utah.edu......Now look at the graphs for sites: YMP,YMR & LKWY all on jan 2nd....They sure look like harmonic tremors to me...If it's wind then a typhoon blew thru Yellowstone on the 2nd.......Do your own research people......

reply to post by bigdog36


Been watching the cam for about the last 20 mins lots more people now. Looks like it must be time for an eruption.

Originally posted by dneudecker
There have been a couple of 4.0+ quakes in Northern California in an area called The Geysers. Apparently, The Geysers is an active geothermal area within the Clear Lake volcanic field.

This area is commonly hit.

It looks like they need to send someone up into the tree to wipe the snow off of the cover over the lens on the streaming webacam. It looks calm and clear there as it is here, in Casper right now.

There are enough folks standing there watching that it makes me think that a scheduled eruption may be soon.

Yes, the earthquake data should be automated. I'm starting to get a very uneasy feeling about all of this. A lot of stuff going on right now!

Originally posted by Mushussu
Hello All,
Justmike, Sageturkey, Trusername, RFBurns and Shirakawa for starters.
My best regards to you,
About 20 -25 pages back I got indirectly called out by some one who claimed that they had talked to an expert and that the Juan de Fuca some 750 miles away had nothing to do with Y.

We have seen many disagreements on this thread, most civil, some not. Even Scientists disagree among themselves as stated before from ridicule to flat out dismissal until proven correct.

To Earthshine, I respectfully acknowledge your research and your unnamed scientific friend , but on the JDF I will have to find exception. I know of what I have read, know it was reputably published.

There was yet another publishing of similar content in one of our papers here in Oregon within the last month or so.

Please have a look all who may be interested.
'The Fate of the Juan de Fuca Plate: Implications for a Yellowstone Plume head'
University of California Berkeley USA.

seismo.berkeley.edu...

Back atcha!
Thanks for the document, I just saved it to my drive. I've been watching the abnormally large quakes off the coast of Oregon for some time now. That's another area that has the scientists puzzled and they are connected.

Originally posted by spinkyboo

Originally posted by dneudecker
There have been a couple of 4.0+ quakes in Northern California in an area called The Geysers. Apparently, The Geysers is an active geothermal area within the Clear Lake volcanic field.

This area is commonly hit.

I should say this is a commonly hit area in the 1 and 2 - but I think the point you are making is that it is a 4.0 - and this is not common. Could be the geothermal areas are heating up all over the place?

hmmm...
Seems they just changed the settings for YMR to 125 microvolts from 100.
All the others are still at 100 while LKWY is still at 500.
Seems an odd way to coorolate data having differing settings at differing stations.

reply to post by spinkyboo


I've had that feeling for a little while now. With the iffy reports we got about Mt. Baker, I have someone in Seattle looking into it. I hope to hear back soon.

In any event, yes, this is a lot of abnormal activity...

In a very spread-out region.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by Realtruth
We'll give them break.

That might be a good idea for now. But honestly I am really concerned that one of these bigger quakes strikes real close to Yellowstone, potentially jarring something loose and setting into motion a very troubling series of events that otherwise might not have been. But that's really a concern with any major quake near other faults and volcanoes, because of their sheer power to displace, dislodge, and move things. Big things in sensitive places.

I also have been thinking of something else. Could the sheer size of the caldera and underlying magma pools contain so much energy and pressure that scientists could be fooled into thinking that the same thickness and composition of the magma-containing rock layer which readily contains smaller pressures in smaller volcanoes can still contain the pressures here?

My point is that when push comes to shove, the pressure may be so much greater than anticipated that the same threshold that exists for smaller volcanoes may not work in a place like Yellowstone. It is just too extreme from any other place on earth. It may blow in a much more aggressive way with a lot less warning.

Thats what i've been worrying about also. It would be so large of an explosion, most of the precuser rules would just not apply.

I hate to sound like too much of a conspiracy theorist, but I wonder what the State Leaders are doing right now in Montana and Wyoming.
Where are your Senators at right now?

Originally posted by spinkyboo

Originally posted by spinkyboo

Originally posted by dneudecker
There have been a couple of 4.0+ quakes in Northern California in an area called The Geysers. Apparently, The Geysers is an active geothermal area within the Clear Lake volcanic field.

This area is commonly hit.

I should say this is a commonly hit area in the 1 and 2 - but I think the point you are making is that it is a 4.0 - and this is not common. Could be the geothermal areas are heating up all over the place?

Yes, that was my point. Thanks.