Whats going on at yellowstone?

Originally posted by lernmore

Use

, not ... that will embed your own hosted images..

[edit on 16-1-2009 by lernmore]

Thank you! That, indeed, seems to be the answer. With that syntax, I can embed an image directly from my Flickr account.

May I ask if there's someplace on this site where I could have learned that tidbit for myself? I really would like to read any FAQ or tutorials about all of this that are available.

Again, thanks! I tried that in a test post, and it showed up fine in the preview, so that's all I needed to do to make it work and to test it.

Originally posted by VX-7R


May I ask if there's someplace on this site where I could have learned that tidbit for myself? I really would like to read any FAQ or tutorials about all of this that are available.

Scroll to the top of the page, lean your nose right up to the center of your monitor, and close your left eye. I believe it's spelled..FAQ

I found it in there somewhere. I just happened to stumble right into it when I wanted to add my first pic.

Peace

[edit on 17-1-2009 by lernmore]

Originally posted by RFBurns

Dont forget us degreed EE's sitting in Casper still watching all this in the shadows.

Noise in the data graphs? From a CB? I doubt that. CB is 27Mhz, these sensors are not looking at the 27Mhz band, or anywhere near that.

Compressor noise...how close are those sensors to any air compressor btw? And wouldnt the engineers who planned and installed these things know that if placed near any kind of man made noise apparatus that it would have the potential to interfere with a wanted reading vs unwanted reading? I would hope so otherwise those engineers need to find another line of work!!

BTW, has anyone heard from Sageturkey??? Did he run away or give up on us??

Cheers!!!!

I'm sure we're boring most of the folks reading this, but I just had to respond to that.

Surely, as a degreed EE, you are well aware that various electronic devices often end up picking up unwanted signals due to failures, corroded connections, or just plain bad design.

In my 35 years of designing, troubleshooting, and integrating telemetry, data acquisition systems, laboratory instruments, radio links, telephone modems and interface equipment, etc., I've seen quite a bit of badly designed or improperly functioning equipment which, unfortunately *does* pick up RF when it's not supposed to do so.

I've seen alarm system PIR detectors respond to police band (150 band FM) transmissions. I've seen tank-level monitors go nuts when company personnel were in the area yacking on their business band radios. I've seen gas chromatographs in a mud-logging truck go bananas when someone keyed up a CB. And I've seen inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometers interfere with their own selves

None of that was the design intent. But it happened nonetheless.

The point is that just because a device is designed to monitor one type of signal does not guarantee that it's impervious to unintended interference from all manner of signals.

In fact, if you look at the paperwork that comes with just about any piece of consumer electronics, you'll often see the required Part 15 labeling specifying:

§ 15.19 labeling requirements.

(a) In addition to the requirements in part 2 of this chapter, a device subject to certification, notification, or verification shall be labeled as follows:

(3) All other devices shall bear the following statement in a conspicuous location on the device:

"This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation. "

So if my properly operating, licensed ham station, putting out 1500 Watts next door to you makes your TV, VCR, Computer, cordless phone, or electric drill go nuts, that's too bad, and it's your responsibility. And if that device causes harmful interference to my ham station (licensed service), then you've got to cease and desist in using it or get it fixed so that it doesn't interfere.

My point with that is just to show that "undesired operation", caused by interference from nearby RF sources is so common that how it's dealt with is even codified in the CFR.

My comment about it being a CB was meant mostly tongue in cheek. But the fact is that it very well *could* be RF interference we're seeing. I'd vote more for the air sampling pump, but....

Anyhow, I'm sure we're driving everyone nuts with this.

And if people want to believe that this is a top secret geyser or harmonic tremor. That's fine. But I'm just offering what my many years of experience in this field tells me is the most likely scenario.

And to me, that's that it is man-caused in some way.

reply to post by lernmore


Believe me, I tried that. All I found was the recommendation to use [img][\img], and that didn't work.

Thanks, though. You nailed it, and you must have found that someplace ;-)

reply to post by quakewatcher


Too Kewl

Originally posted by TNAfan121

...i honestly don't think this is anything to worry about.

Because

...2.There have been no odd animal behaveior...

If these events are man-made, e.g. HAARP, animals might not react in the same way they would to a natural event, and therefore their behavior might not be a good predictor of what could be unfolding.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by Spell2Speak]

Another very odd quake happened overnight:

UTC DATE-TIME
y/m/d h:m:s LAT
deg LON
deg DEPTH
km LOCATION
MAP 3.1 2009/01/17 08:24:14 41.971 -118.089 16.0 37 km ( 23 mi) W of McDermitt, NV

[edit on 17-1-2009 by questioningall]

It seems an upper line is beginning to go through Utah now up to Montana. Am I wrong, or is it almost like quakes are leading and lining to Montana?

Originally posted by Spell2Speak

Originally posted by TNAfan121

...i honestly don't think this is anything to worry about.

Because

...2.There have been no odd animal behaveior...

If these events are man-made, e.g. HAARP, animals might not react in the same way they would to a natural event, and therefore their behavior might not be a good predictor of what could be unfolding.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by Spell2Speak]

The site says I edited but doesn't show what I added, so I will quote my last post and say that by extension any indicators that are ordinarily used for prediction in a natural event might not apply to what is unfolding.

reply to post by Spell2Speak



I have been wondering about animal behavior around yellowstone, but I have dared not ask about it.


I would actually love to know what is happening around there from nature's prespective.

Question: What is going to happen to keeping track of EQ's and the internet site showing EQ's when California stops payments and some services on Feb. 1st? Also once the SHTF with the U.S. govt. will all services of EQ's stop? Just a thought, because Ca. is stopping payments etc. to the people come Feb. 1st.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by questioningall]

Originally posted by questioningall
reply to post by Spell2Speak

 

I have been wondering about animal behavior around yellowstone, but I have dared not ask about it.

I would actually love to know what is happening around there from nature's prespective.

Question: What is going to happen to keeping track of EQ's and the internet site showing EQ's when California stops payments and some services on Feb. 1st? Also once the SHTF with the U.S. govt. will all services of EQ's stop? Just a thought, because Ca. is stopping payments etc. to the people come Feb. 1st.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by questioningall]

Are you kidding me?
Is this part of Arnies big cut back back plan?

reply to post by Mushussu



Thread right here about it...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

To be on topic...will the EQ monitoring be affected by this?

Who controls the EQ monitoring? Fed or state? If grants are stopped - is the EQ monitoring affected by that? All questions I don't know...anyone else know?

reply to post by Mushussu


As for the line up to Montana.
There has been discussion of radial lines from the coastal plate push inwards.
But it is nt just a sliding motion up the coast line , it is also pushing in. so the land formation will get parallel hits on successive fault lines.
I am sure you know this but it is similar to placing your hand on a table cloth and warping the cloth as you move across the table
And it looks like I lost the play bet with spadeofaces.
Should have said SW of Boise.
Was not expecting it to show up in one of the first calderas

Originally posted by questioningall
reply to post by Mushussu

 

Thread right here about it...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

To be on topic...will the EQ monitoring be affected by this?

Who controls the EQ monitoring? Fed or state? If grants are stopped - is the EQ monitoring affected by that? All questions I don't know...anyone else know?

Wow. Thanks. for the site.
I am north of you in Oregon.( sorry just saw you are Tennessee..Need coffee)
Have had the JDF as my main concern.

Have been watching this site for some days now while at work
after having been on here almost the whole time.
Still waiting for info back from some Geophysisist and Siesmo sites.
Have enjoyed watching the posts of late.
Going to catch up on last few pages now.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by Mushussu]

Hey PuterMan,
Are we still having discussions about what is and what isn't man made sounds.
I like keeping an open mind and keep the understanding that it is a possibility,
but criminy .. Shall I post what the Geophysisist sent me some 20- 30 pages back, again.?



[edit on 17-1-2009 by Mushussu]

reply to post by Moshpet

OK, well it was a better stab at it than Tennessee!

reply to post by questioningall


Guess I got it wrong, but not totally wrong. At least that is not the frozen lake. That part was right. I consider myself partially shot down - lost a wing! My apologies for misleading - it was not my intent.

reply to post by quakewatcher

If someone posts asking for a thoughtful opinion of what is going to happen, because he/she is concerned about family, I'm going to give my most thoughtfully composed opinion, and I don't apologize for that.

I'm sure there are lots of places they can read about people making dire predictions based on this or that unknown quantity, but as an ordinary citizen who has spent 3 weeks completely focused on all the available evidence, that was my summary.

If you have a different one that you would like to directly address to res ipsa, then do so. What are the odds of a catastrophic eruption in the next year? Exponentially less than the odds of getting into a car accident in the process of removing family members from the area. Should that change I'll be one of the first people out there jumping up and down letting people know.

I can't see quite where this 'hurt' feeling is coming from? As I said earlier I thought you made an excellent reply to Res Ipsa, and I can't see subsequent to that where anyone knocked your reply. Keep up the good work. We need a voice of reason every now and again!

reply to post by questioningall


So much for the Yucca Mountain project not being seismicly active. I remember in 94 going to college in Vegas, my Geology Professor was part of the geology team working on the Yucca Mountain project, (Nuclear waste site in the Nevada test site), she insisted that the area was not seismicly active. One week later there was a 5.6 earthquake there and it stired up alot of question about there statement. this picture shows that it is still active in the Nevada testsite

Originally posted by Mushussu
Hey PuterMan,
Are we still having discussions about what is and what isn't man made sounds.

Hi Mushussu, not quite sure what you were responding to there? I am of an open mind on the pipecleaner and am working on a program to convert seismo data to sounds. It might help to answer the question.