Whats going on at yellowstone?

reply to post by Selahobed


agree 100%.. there is only data of the aftermath of an supervolcano eruption...nothing about it wat triggerd it...
simply couse we never were withniss of it...
BTW is Toba monitored????? and data of webicorders on internet ?

could be good comparising material...



[edit on 25-1-2010 by ressiv]

reply to post by Robin Marks


Policy and actual application are two different beasts

Many Yellowstone earthquake watchers and geyser gazers, including some on ATS, have noted a change in web posting of small earthquakes. Prior to the swarm of 2008/2009 it is correct that more ‘small’ events were immediately posted – perhaps even nearly all. Unfortunately there was a change in reporting but not a change in policy.

It is my understanding that until some time around 2008 the ‘policy’ was to immediately post only earthquakes greater than 3.0. As equipment became more reliable the ‘policy’ was changed to immediately reporting earthquakes greater than 2.5. There is wide acceptance that automated postings are reviewed and that through more accurate evaluation new reports of event intensity are provided. This supports that presented opinion of the USGS that automatic reporting systems do have reliability issues.

The existing policy (2008) was perhaps fortuitous in dealing with the said individual impersonating USGS and issuing false warnings. USGS and its partners were able to immediately act within policy and filter ‘small’ earthquakes.

Rather than attack USGS for application of preexisting policy it may be appropriate to politely request reconsideration of the policy statement, which in consideration of ongoing upgrades to existing equipment and instrumentation that is thereby allowing greater accuracy in automated locations, to again consider policy revision to allow automated updates for earthquakes greater than 2.0 (maybe even 1.5, but how consequential are the smaller events - perhaps more than acknowledged due to the unknown nature of the Yellowstone system) to be automatically posted. This would be a demonstration that taxpayers are receiving benefit from their increased investments in this fascinating science experiment in a natural laboratory which interests them on a personal level.

It is undeniable that there are many who would again like to see all lower magnitude earthquakes all immediately and automatically posted but this may not be forthcoming. Pursuing something more realistic and incremental may allow more information to be made available in a more immediate fashion. I do not believe USGS or the partners are providing misinformation. There are too many interested parties in the professional circles that wrong information would quickly made known.

On another note. It has been said that monitoring of Yellowstone activity is occurring by seven staff on a 24/7 basis. I do not believe this indicates seven staff are working round the clock, but that seven individuals are now spreading their time into 24 hour coverage for the duration of the event. The majority of staffing may occur only during ‘normal’ business periods and limited coverage for periods outside those hours. Again, I believe this indicates they are taking the current event seriously and attempting to learn all that is possible. This may partially explain why certain time periods appear to have more timely reporting of events.

Magnitude 2.5 Yellowstone Park

Magnitude 2.5

Date-Time

* Monday, January 25, 2010 at 21:29:26 UTC
* Monday, January 25, 2010 at 02:29:26 PM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 44.570°N, 110.967°W
Depth 9.4 km (5.8 miles)
Region YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK, WYOMING
Distances

* 15 km (9 miles) SE (133°) from West Yellowstone, MT
* 31 km (19 miles) ENE (75°) from Island Park, ID
* 56 km (35 miles) SSW (201°) from Gardiner, MT
* 431 km (268 miles) N (10°) from Salt Lake City, UT

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.3 km (0.2 miles); depth +/- 0.7 km (0.4 miles)
Parameters NST= 27, Nph= 27, Dmin=11 km, Rmss=0.12 sec, Gp= 83°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=0


* University of Utah Seismograph Stations

reply to post by Selahobed


Do I take it that we have an expert among us? Your posts have always sounded informed. What were you reading at Uni?

BTW if anything does go off it will get us in Ireland before it hits Blighty!

Re the posting of smaller quakes folks: Let's not get too worked up about this! After all the ones we really need to worry about are the larger ones surely? If it takes a little while to verify the smaller ones then so be it. I for one would not be losing any sleep over that.

reply to post by Arluk

I do not believe USGS or the partners are providing misinformation. There are too many interested parties in the professional circles that wrong information would quickly made known.

Well said that person - take star! There are far too many interested parties for them to get away with hiding anything as you rightly say.

reply to post by ressiv


It is if you can read japanese lol... But thank G-d for google huh?

reply to post by Robin Marks


Well written letter, at least you got a reply, if not al the answers.

I, like so many others here have been thinking about this today. I really don't think it is dis-information, so much as lack-of.

Now think about this: This is at least the largest swarm in almost 30 years, maybe recorded history. You don't think the geologists aren't lining up to get a chance to study/monitor this up close? It is the chance of a lifetime. I'll bet the park is swarming with scientists as well as quakes.

Having said that, you can't tell me that every single tremor isn't being scruitinzed and studied by many specialists 24/7 right now. To indicate that everyone is just going home for the weekend while this is going on is just beyong ridiculous. Look at us, and we (for the most part) are just amature remote viewers.

I believe there are two reasons why we are not being kept up-to-date or informed on all that is being cataloged/observed:

1. This is too important. To get anything wrong at this point and have someone run with it, would be career ending. The other ramifications are much greater than someones job. I think that there is just too much at stake here to have it be made public until it has gone through all the filters.

2. Think about it. News gets out that the caldera MIGHT be building to an erruption. What do you think would happen? Did any of you see the movie 2012? I didn't, but I was told Yellowstone errupting was part of it. It could cause panic on a world-wide scale. Stock markets could be affected and things could go very badly. I think the government, at this piont, would rather take their chances with the few hunderd or thousands that are keeping themselves educated (ATS'rs) to make a wrong observation and maybe even start panicking among themselves, than cause a large scale reaction, with HUGE ramifications.

So what do I think this means? Either it's just a matter of being careful with very sensitive data, or the Government trying to avoid panic. Maybe both. I am hoping it's just the being careful bit because I live just two states over!

On another note, I SWEAR that is still looking like more HT on the latest recordings, especially in the NE portion of the park.

reply to post by PuterMan


I do not work in the field but have post grad degrees in geophysics... And have a vested interest..

reply to post by PuterMan


double post

[edit on 053131p://f18Monday by Selahobed]

Okay, check out from 23:02:40 to 23:06

It's on GEE right now PB.B207

Tell me what that is, if it isn't Harmonic Tremor????

Originally posted by westcoast
On another note, I SWEAR that is still looking like more HT on the latest recordings, especially in the NE portion of the park.

Those are not HTs.
We discussed about that yesterday. They're probably mine blasts as they originate from a coal mine area about 400 Km east of Yellowstone. This is why they look bigger on the eastern portion of the park. Mixed with them there are occasional teleseisms.

[edit on 2010-1-25 by Shirakawa]

It wouldnt be too hard to find out what time the Mining Blasts occured, then look back at the Seismic data and see if they correspond. If not then it rules out that theory.

I'm wound up, really wound up.

First off, he didn't answer the question. The honest answer would have been the Chris Sander's affair, and the fact that the alternative media had the story before mainstream because of holiday. Let's examine the Chris Sanders Affair. He said he was a Geologist. He did not say he was from the USGS. At no time did he suggest it. He even listed the jobs he did have and businesses he owned. What he did was show the Most Recent Map from a computer screen. He scrolled down the massive list of quakes. On the list there was the USGS symbol. How did the USGS react? They claimed he was a fraud, misrepresenting him self as part of the YVO. He did not. The USGS overreacted. Theu threatened him with legal action. I've searched the web and found no charges ever being filed against him.

The purity of the data argument: pure malarky. Shirakawa is a witness and knows that quakes where listed immediatley and on the weekends before the swarm of last year. The change took place in February after the USGS butted heads and decided what they should do with the whole affair. Jake Lowenstern made a You Tube Video and quakes were dropped from the data until they were seen human eyes. Or run up the chain of command? Before February, they weren't worried about the standard. It stated on the quake maps that it was version (0), not reviewed and subject to change. If the problem was that people were not understanding this fact, alterations could have been made to make it more clear and keep the information flowing. After all we're in an internet web connect world and get instantaneous information everywhere. Except in this case. Well they're professionals and they want perfect and flawless data. Bull malarky. The standard is that all insistutions with sieigraphs and webicorders realease all their information without any delay. There is one other except, it's a station in Alaska, Shirakawa will correct me if I'm wrong. It's arrogance to think they need to be that more precise or accountable than everyone else.

The whole idea having webicorders is to involve the public. To educate the public. If there is an issue about the transistional nature of the data, and that corrections need to be made, educate the public as to why it is the case. Part of the idea of the webicorders is to involve the public so they foster an interest, so when it comes time for the federal budget, they want the public's support so they will get those dollars to have sufficient funding. THe equipment- that's another issue all together. By delaying the data and mangaing it so closely to the chest, it gives the preception of unethical motives, whether they exist or not.

At the moment, there's a hell of a lot of things Happening At Yellowsone. I know that I, and many of you, are completely rivettedm, and maybe obssessed. What good scientist isn't. This is a perfect time to take avantage of that increase in interest. Capitalize on it. Educate. Inform. Ask the what ifs. Are we prepared? Educate. And in the process the attention attracts dollars for reseach equipment and more researchers so they have time to post the quakes. Instead, we get, nothing to see here folks, "relatively normal", keep on moving, back to your minding your own business. Go back to sleep. That's dumb. I don't see it as some evil plot. It's just bad public relations. I want to know each and every hiccup in the volcano and so do you. And we don't want to wait up to three days at times to have the voids filled in.

Shirakawa wonders why since they are working 24/7, since it's a historic swarm, and if they are monitoring it closely and have mountains of data to analayse. Yet that's not the impression there give to the press. Even with the overtime, and the fact the quakes have been reviewed by a siesmologist on the weekend, why are they are not entered into the system. Even after the weekend on Monday there are long delays. Why? And that's the problem. With folks out here like myself, folks with the wildest imaginations: we fill in the voids with any idea. We float them because that's all we got. When I wrote to ask why there a delay. I get an answer I would expect from a politician, or beuracrat, but not a scientist. Do scientist like waiting for their data? Hell no. So why must the lowly amatuer scientist suffer as a second class citizen? Why no complete openess in this scientific arena?. I may be unwinding. But damn it, if I gave a few moments I'd go off again. It aint' right and that's the truth. All explainations are excuses and smokescreens.


And I'm damn mad. I got that predict dead on. It was the moon no question about it. Plain and simple. Call it coincidence and I'll tell you all life is random, and yet in the DNA there is a design and a method. My method is madness.


ps. I'm copying this and sending to the YVO and informing there a lengthy debate about the subject and they should investigate.
Corporations have listening officiers to track what the pulic is saying about them. Maybe the YVO needs a lurker to absord so of this sounding wall, and even step in and give us a slapped when are facts are factual.

Mondays over and we only got one quake for Jan 23.
Off to email the YVO
[edit on 25-1-2010 by Robin Marks]

[edit on 25-1-2010 by Robin Marks]

[edit on 25-1-2010 by Robin Marks]

reply to post by ROBL240


Already done Yesterday

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[...]the source of those signals is indeed about 400 Km east from Yellowstone, and it's between TA.I23A and TA.J23A stations

So where are those stations?

Look here:
Link

More in detail from Google Maps (zoom out for more):
Link

Also Wikipedia:
Link

Gillette is a small city centrally located in an area that is vital to the development of vast quantities of American coal, oil, and coal bed methane gas. The city calls itself the "Energy Capital of the Nation".

Enough?

Originally posted by ROBL240
It wouldnt be too hard to find out what time the Mining Blasts occured, then look back at the Seismic data and see if they correspond. If not then it rules out that theory.

Right on - great idea. How do we go about that then short of ringing the coal mine? (Not being sarcastic BTW )

bssa.geoscienceworld.org...

Delay-fired mine blasts, which consist of a series of individual shots arranged in a grid pattern and detonated in sequence, can introduce spectral modulations into recorded seismograms. We can exploit spectral modulations to separate delay-fired mine blasts from the remaining event population, which includes single- fired mine blasts and earthquakes. Here, we enhance an existing algorithm (Hedlin, 1998) for the automatic discrimination of delay-fired mine blasts. A total of seven separate discriminants are computed, based on the spectrograms of recorded events. A feature-selection procedure is used to ensure that each discriminant is significant and contributes to the overall performance of the discrimination algorithm. The effect of input parameters on the methodology is explored. The choice of input parameters is made to maximize the mean Mahalanobis distance between the earthquake and delay-fired mine-blast populations. The technique is then applied to a dataset consisting of regional earthquakes and delay-fired mine blasts recorded at a station in Wyoming. The results show that the larger delay-fired mine blasts, the cast blasts, can be identified successfully by using this technique. The smaller mine blasts are not identified with this technique, although such events are of less interest in a nuclear-monitoring perspective. In a drop-one test, 89.5% of the events studied are successfully identified. Of the events that are misclassified, one is a cast blast and seven are earthquakes. The cast blast is misclassified because of noise on one component, which biased the value of a single discriminant. The earthquakes are misclassified because of a greater variance of the seven discriminants for the mine-blast population. The results suggest that this methodology is very successful at identifying cast blasts in Wyoming, and would be an extremely useful method to use as part of an integrated set of discriminants for the identification of small-magnitude regional events.

Does this help?

Sorry not sure how you get to make this external. It did not seem to work.

[edit on 25/1/2010 by PuterMan]

Rather than copy various items try this search:

www.google.ie...

There is some interesting stuff there.

[edit on 25/1/2010 by PuterMan]

reply to post by ROBL240


Another thing that has to be taken into account is the instrumentation.. They have to be callorbrated regulary.. And humans being humans, we dont want to do stuff like that when its cold, especially if we become jaded or complacent... If not properly callorbrated they can become too sensitive... That is a major wory lol ......

Originally posted by Robin Marks
[...]The purity of the data argument: pure malarky. Shirakawa is a witness and knows that quakes where listed immediatley and on the weekends before the swarm of last year.

Wait, I never said that, before the Lake Swarm, earthquakes were listed immediately. My deeper interest in volcanoes and seismology began at that time. It's true though that in that period earthquakes in the UoU list were posted much quicker than they are now. If I remember correctly at a point more than 500 together were listed.

[...] The standard is that all insistutions with sieigraphs and webicorders realease all their information without any delay. There is one other except, it's a station in Alaska, Shirakawa will correct me if I'm wrong. It's arrogance to think they need to be that more precise or accountable than everyone else.

I'm sorry, but in the world the standard is that very little data ever gets publicly released. USGS volcano observatories though are unique in that they make most of the important data, even raw seismic waveforms, public. If you were referring to them, you're right that the standard is that all institutions release [almost ... ] everything. They usually do it in a quality controlled way (they don't dump everything they have to the internet and they care that things are suitable for public consumption).

About the Alaska exception, unfortunately I'm not sure of what you're referring to. The Alaska Volcano Observatory is generally very open. In the 2009 Redoubt eruption they posted many detailed information releases, and hourly status updates often even with apparently insignificant information (for example also things like "[...] the field team reported they sampled good data [...]" or something similar), contrarily to YVO's concise and very formal press releases which don't usually tell very much.

[edit on 2010-1-25 by Shirakawa]

Here is the Black Thunder Mine in relation to Yellowstone

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f7a613c799ae.png[/atsimg]

You may have to right click it. I have not worked out how to get the scroll bars

And here is a search for it:

www.google.ie...


[edit on 25/1/2010 by PuterMan]

And Shirakawa:

I'm sorry, but in the world the standard is that very little data ever gets publicly released. USGS volcano observatories though are unique in that they make most of the important data, even raw seismic waveforms, public.

Spot on! There are actually very few where you can get your hands on the data easily.

[edit on 25/1/2010 by PuterMan]

And finally, any one near here and can ring the mine?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1f8a0356cea0.png[/atsimg]

[edit on 25/1/2010 by PuterMan]

There are no graphs to be found for Toba - According to those in charge "IT IS NOT MONITORED BECAUSE THEY CONSIDER IT IS EXTINCT"
I'm not sure I believe that either. Maybe someone else could find some and share the much desired information.

Robin I must say your post of your letter and reply was the first good laugh I had in awhile - typical response from them. Sorry for your distress. I try not to get myself so worked up over them anymore because it's like beating your head against the wall - been there many times with them. Maybe they should change the policy if they are uncertain of events to state so in their list - that would mean they give a little we get a little.

I have a gut feeling according to the goings on we are in for one active night! Peru had a large quake just a short time ago followed by a large quake in Alaska.

Oh and how nice of UofU to give us their bland update - now I wonder, why can they commit to giving us an exact number of quakes in their updates if they are not monitoring around the clock - and then they tell us oh we don't have that information reviewed and don't want to post un reliable/inacdurate information?????? - They should at least get their own story straight!!!