Whats going on at yellowstone?

Nothing to see here people. It's just the wind! Move along please.

No really, Who has the scientific information, (historic back ground on supervolcanos)..........NO ONE!!!!!

reply to post by questioningall



USGS is actually ahowing 3 quakes within minutes of eachother, 2.4 1.4 3.3 respectively.

reply to post by rigel434


On Jan 2 there was a 2. NE of this 3.
At that time I threw out the thought of 'What if these Q's and their northerly direction circumvented the high-point of deformation directly north'.
Thinking out loud here.
What if -and it is early on here- if we are starting up again , all the readings pointing to a slow build( for me , my analysis) up again from last EQ fit, what if the Eq's peel around and up to the NE.
It would be like pulling that lead thread band off of a bottle.
Not trying to upset anybody. I am a realist and plot plausibility of events.
Analytical not emotional.
Noting Shirakawas last dot vid, the northerly direction had a signature of a channel format. Fracture.
Geogeek, you have been superb on the instrumentation reading and instruction.
Both on math.

Please no need for any body to come in and give the ultimate catastrophe scenario-we all know its potential.

I have been on and following all graphs, charts and comments.
For any who may not know , I have been active on this thread from just short of the beginning.
I am looking for others and thoughts on the plot and plausibility side.
Any body ?
RFBurns you on?






[edit on 9-1-2009 by Mushussu]

[edit on 9-1-2009 by Mushussu]

Originally posted by JustMike
reply to post by Cedrica

 

Forgive my insistence but I strongly recommend that you review my posted reply to you, which is just a little ways up the page above your latest post (which I'm replying to now).

As I said, it's important to to consider default depths in any analysis that you are doing and my post gives details and links as to why.

Regards,

Mike

I did read your original quote. Unfortunately, I read it after I posted the one you are replying to here, lol. It was wrt to your original response that I posted the "Bless you Mike!" response.

Clear as mud, huh?

Whoever said it was more than one was right. It's three showing now.



[edit on 9-1-2009 by PuterMan]



I am only looking at 1.0+ however

[edit on 9-1-2009 by PuterMan]

sorry meant to say the last 1 is 2 days ago

[edit on 9-1-2009 by PuterMan]

reply to post by Mushussu

ah this is showing up 4 quakes with an hour of each other
www.seis.utah.edu...

good god every time i refresh the page on uscs there are more quakes , now iv counted 5

[edit on 013131p://1318 by alysha.angel]

Originally posted by alysha.angel
reply to post by Mushussu

 

ah this is showing up 4 quakes with an hour of each other
www.seis.utah.edu...

Try 5 LoL

1.5 2009/01/09 11:57:16 44.666N 110.335W 1.0 50 km (31 mi) SW of Cooke City-Silver Gate, MT
3.3 2009/01/09 11:17:31 44.678N 110.254W 3.1 45 km (28 mi) SSW of Cooke City-Silver Gate, MT
1.4 2009/01/09 11:10:39 44.669N 110.265W 2.4 46 km (29 mi) SW of Cooke City-Silver Gate, MT
2.4 2009/01/09 11:08:13 44.669N 110.254W 4.2 46 km (29 mi) SSW of Cooke City-Silver Gate, MT
1.1 2009/01/09 11:06:02 44.669N 110.256W 2.2 46 km (29 mi) SSW of Cooke City-Silver Gate, MT

6 Anyone? LoL



[edit on 1/9/2009 by Hx3_1963]

[edit on 1/9/2009 by Hx3_1963]

Lets not try to one up each other on quake counts lol.

It is just the wind.. The wind is down deep in the Earth, past middle earth, and sometimes these earth clouds bump together, and make noise under Yellowstone.

(Sarcasm)

reply to post by Mushussu


don't forget to check for deformation changes ... its equally or even more important than earthquakes ... problem is u need a week or so of GPS data to be sure U have enough statistics to see a trend line change (i think error bars are +/- about 4 mm, or so, and probably depends on current GPS constellation @ time of reading) .. i say trust the professionals on Yellowstone website wrt their plots, rather than jumping/freaking on a possibly "outlier" GPS measurements ...

and U guys should also keep an eye on Long Valley Caldera in California, like i said before, deformation went through some kind of "inflection event" about 2 months ago .. and now we are starting to have earthquakes again on the "resurgent dome" .. Long Valley Caldera ain't that much smaller than Yellowstone ...

AND IT HAS ERUPTED in the last 600 years, and MAYBE ONLY 150 Years ago

[edit on 9-1-2009 by geogeek]

[edit on 9-1-2009 by geogeek]

Originally posted by dustystrings
It is just the wind.. The wind is down deep in the Earth, past middle earth, and sometimes these earth clouds bump together, and make noise under Yellowstone.

(Sarcasm)

Sweet heart , That is called gas!
Does anybody know of a pharmacy with a TUMS Large enough for Y!

beanno?
sigh

[edit on 9-1-2009 by Mushussu]

reply to post by geogeek


I'm with you...seen a trending N of LA on USGS Ani Maps...I'm also looking into my mirror theory...so...Eastern Europe & Asia region is on my list now LoL

So would 5 quakes within one hour of each other in the same area signify as a "swarm" - or the beginning of a swarm?

Kind of following the hot spot track North, eh?

If this continues, Chris Saunders is going to piss his pants.

Originally posted by geogeek
reply to post by RFBurns

 

your an EE, eh ... I get it now : "RFBurns" (tee hee ... )

[edit on 9-1-2009 by geogeek]

It really does!!


2nd line


Cheers!!!!

I would like to say I can only handle so many disaster zones at a time, but I hear you.

Originally posted by geogeek
reply to post by Mushussu

 

don't forget to check for deformation changes ... its equally or even more important than earthquakes ... problem is u need a week or so of GPS data to be sure U have enough statistics to see a trend line change (i think error bars are +/- about 4 mm, or so, and probably depends on current GPS constellation @ time of reading) .. i say trust the professionals on Yellowstone website wrt their plots, rather than jumping/freaking on a possibly "outlier" GPS measurements ...

and U guys should also keep an eye on Long Valley Caldera in California, like i said before, deformation went through some kind of "inflection event" about 2 months ago .. and now we are starting to have earthquakes again on the "resurgent dome" .. Long Valley Caldera ain't that much smaller than Yellowstone ...

AND IT HAS ERUPTED in the last 600 years, and MAYBE ONLY 150 Years ago

[edit on 9-1-2009 by geogeek]

[edit on 9-1-2009 by geogeek]

that last eruption at long valley was a single vent event but it would be scary as hell if both blew at the same time. i got a daughter in cali

Originally posted by Aphelion
So would 5 quakes within one hour of each other in the same area signify as a "swarm" - or the beginning of a swarm?

Kind of following the hot spot track North, eh?

If this continues, Chris Saunders is going to piss his pants.

or its part of the same swarm

reply to post by Cedrica

When a thread picks up some steam these things can happen. I found your reply post after I posted that one, so I've edited it to be an apology. It's the last post on the previous page.

Keeping this germane to Yellowstone, it's actually quite remarkable to see how quickly the seismologists are reviewing the auto-generated data and correcting it as needs be to fit with their best analysis. Normally, it can take up to some hours before smaller-mag quakes have their data reviewed and revised, so for them to do this so quickly is really something and it shows they are really very focused on Yellowstone right now.

To save an extra post, here's one for

Mushussu, who asked for opinions on any possible trend for a new series of quakes, so I'll offer my humble 2 kc (Czech crowns). If we do see a trend in the NE direction then we should still keep an eye on the lake discharge rate, because it is still trending upwards and now barely settles at less than 500 cu ft/sec, with the Yellowstone River level at the gauge earlier today recording the highest level it has shown thus far. It also showed its highest outflow today: 525 cu ft/sec at 4:45 am and again at 9:00 am, significantly above the mean for this date (at 399 cu ft/sec). While we can't really determine what the reason is for the lake's above-mean discharge it's something that can't be ignored or glossed over.

Point I'm making is that if we observe "spikes" in the discharge rate that correlate with peaks in activity on the webicorders -- and by activity I don't mean just clearly-delineated quakes -- but spikes like we saw back on Dec 29 and to some degree on Dec 31 (some graphs were not tracing then), then it would suggest the rate of the lake's outflow is related more to some form of subterranean activity (including eg hydrothermal venting, ground movement) than to purely surface/atmospheric affects.

Mike

[edit on 9/1/09 by JustMike]

Just butting in for a second.

USGS and UofU are updating the lists.

Count is now up to 8 (1.0 and above) since 1600 UTC.

USGS USA quakes above 1.0

Firstly, wow with the effort, and the humor. I've been plugging along mostly lurking since the beginning. Forgive me if this has already been covered as I really can't remember the beginning of the thread, but...does anyone understand how Utah and the USGS can vary so greatly - i mean 3 EQ's v. 9 EQ's ..I could grasp a differential of a couple, but 300%?