Whats going on at yellowstone?

reply to post by Nidwin


Thanks for the explanation Nidwin.

As usual, just as I am about to hit the sack, she starts warbling again!

Originally posted by Robin Marks
This is for Shirakawa, What do you account for this rapid shuttering? That's they best way to put it. What's the official seismic explaination for what we are seeing? and seeing. I know were not looking at regular faults. Do you know of any study to explain the different ways fault move within a caldera?

To be honest I don't know. But something like in 1985 could have happened: an impermeable layer of rock could have been breached, and now underground trapped gasses might be moving to upper permeable and fragile layers of rock where active faults are. If this is the case then earthquakes could continue for weeks. But again, I'm not sure.

And while I'm going. 1985 is coming up more and more in my mind. Everytime we think it's over it ain't. Close to 1300 quakes now, another couple days and we'll be half way there. And if there's no end for weeks, this could potentialyl be the largest swarm ever, if nothing changes and it continues in a 1985 timeframe. How's the culmulative Shirakawa? We must be closing in on total energy.

The cumulative energy is still lower than the 2008/2009 lake swarm.
That swarm simply had more powerful earthquakes. The M3.87 alone almost did all the job in releasing seismic energy. About the 1985 swarm, I think it's still unbeatable as it had a M4.9 which alone was worth 32 times the energy of the M3.87 of the 2008/2009 swarm.

No matter how many small earthquakes occur, their cumulative seismic energy is almost insignificant in comparison.

How long until we get there? In this day and age when there's really nothing on television except sniping talk show hosts, the world is missing out on the most exciting show. The one with the highest stakes. While we watch, the world for the most part is oblivious.

Many more M3.5+ or a single M3.9-4.0 are still needed.

Originally posted by Nidwin
the rumble-like stuff could be a lot of things.
wind, traffic, herd of bison moving and so on.

Also the "mine" stuff, as already explained by Shirakawa, shows up as rumble-like on the graphs. There was one at 16:00

Hope this is what you meant with rumble-like, sorry if I am wrong :-(

In addition to mine blast signals and teleseisms there is more, which shows up evidently even during night, but only on YMR. My guess is that those "rumble" signals are from very small earthquakes occurring just beneath the seismometer. When they occur, some nearby stations (YMC for example) report at the same time a great amount of extremely small earthquakes occurring in fast sequence (you can see this only with spectrum/audio analysis though).

An other possibility is that they could be local avalanches. Until I get to analyze YMR data though (which is not available through the IRIS DMC) I cannot say for sure.

[edit on 2010-1-26 by Shirakawa]

reply to post by Shirakawa


Re local avalanche - good thought - whatever it was it was very local to YMR as not showing on any others as far as I can see on isthisthingon

Dear Shirakawa,

Peter Cervelli from the YVO has requested that you email him. He wants to ask you some questions.

And to the rest of us, the YVO is interested in what we say. Peter Cervelli has been reading ATS to gauge the public's perception and opinion.

I almost feel I should tone down my criticism. But I can't. In a real democracy, a citizen needs to hold it's leaders accountable and discent so that a debate is balanced and all sides and viewpoints are given voice. I know I'm hyper-critical, but that is what I do.

So crew, tell the folks over at the YVO what you think. Some one is listening. People with the power to affect real change are lurking among us.



[edit on 26-1-2010 by Robin Marks]

Peter,

If you're reading this... This forum is IMO the most intellectually honest in trying to analyze data and temper untethered wahoos... But I've noticed on other forums that there are Generation Y'ers too lazy to engage in methodical thought or read serious research. As a result, they tend to start with the worst case in mind and jam data into the picture they think is most exciting and provocative... There lacks any kind of rational perspective amongst these people, who tend to throw tons of complicated data with unsubstantiated theories about, the end result to confuse and rile others seeking information about the event...

What I would suggest is that you provide something more accessible to the novice knowledge seeker that shuts down the reactionaries who distort data and cause anxiety... Instead of occasional press releases, it would be nice for you to provide a running Q&A either in a forum like this, or on your own site... Your press releases tend to be rather passionless and irrelevant when it comes to the way that normal people think... Let's face it... Normal people want to start with the question "is there doing to be an eruption" and filter everything through that lens... An expert who could start from that vantage and break down historical data, educate about the science and how to properly collect and read data and offer sane perspective would be a tremendous asset... (Or just have a representative post here.)

Anything to take some wind out of the sails of the influential cult leaders of provocation and doom would be wonderful in my book... And as a novice myself, I'd really enjoy engaging on a productive path of learning rather than being influenced or tainted by provocateurs who are not intellectually honest or rooted in a sound thought process.

[edit on 26-1-2010 by pantangele]

[edit on 26-1-2010 by pantangele]

[edit on 26-1-2010 by pantangele]

Originally posted by Robin Marks
Dear Shirakawa,

Peter Cervelli from the YVO has requested that you email him. He wants to ask you some questions.

Oh my, that's unexpected.
Should I write to the email address appearing in YVO information statements? (pcervelli@usgs...)
Could you send me a private message with more details about this matter?
Thanks.

[edit on 2010-1-26 by Shirakawa]

reply to post by Shirakawa


Ya, just email him at that address.

If there's anything to this temperature pattern thing, here is what we would expect this week according to the forecast:


- today, like yesterday would not see a large amount of higher magnitude activity. high: 22 / low 9

- tomorrow would see an increase, as temps plummet at night. high: 22 / low -6

- thursday, friday, and saturday would all be slightly warmer than wednesday but still colder than today and yesterday. (So more active than yesterday but less active than tomorrow)

Let's see what happens. The other question would be "why?" of course. These aren't anywhere near historic lows, certainly the temps didn't cause the swarm, but if this pattern holds true maybe there is some factor involved which responds to surface temperature.

reply to post by pantangele


Peter,

Per my earlier suggestion, here is an example of the kind of post (from another forum) that I think is worthy of address by an expert...

THE POST:

QUIET...

Sure for now, but another poster on another thread pointed out very well how quickly the swarms have gotten closer together (more frequent) since 1985. Specifically:

Here are the notable swarms since 1985:

Nov. 85
Jul. 95
Apr. 04
Dec. 08
Jan. 10

They are getting closer each time:

116 month wait for next then
105 month wait then
56 month wait then
13 month wait....

The next wait calculates to less than 0 months if you chart this.

So clearly pressure is building and reaching the point where it will blow soon.

END POST

IMO, this is someone drawing sweeping conclusions based on a small sample, but the STORY they build is compelling, and as a result this kind of post will sway novices to believe that Yellowstone is like a mother about to give birth...

It would be nice if an expert could calmly and rationally address this, perhaps by giving a brief overview of the cause of the individual swarms and providing a different perspective than the one offered.

reply to post by pantangele


I think it's a great idea to have a forum on the YVO site. Ask a geologist. Different members could take turns moderating Q&As. And I'm sure any alarmist proclaimations will be met with members who will have much research to counter exaggerations and baseless claims.

However, I must disagree with you and say there is a place for those that have alternative, even fantastic views. It happens right here. But among any 2012 linkage and spiritual belief, there are people who've done their research and can give this thread balance and perspective.

I must insist that provocators have a place at the table. I have stated the boldest, wildest claims and ideas that come from way out in left field. But I am completely and 100% honest. Intellectually I will concede to any established scientfic fact, but I will not cede to the notion that the authority has all the answers. This closes debate and creates a climate where ideas and hypothesises which fall outside the norm are not considered valid. I am 100% intellectually honest. My experiment was honest. My hypothesis honest. The only thing I can honestly be accused of is being different.

Sorry, I'm just being oppostional. I think your idea's great. I just want to make sure there's room for my kooky, honest, ideas too.

reply to post by Robin Marks


We don't disagree. As I stated, I think this forum has pretty good balance and rock star studs like Shirakawa who shut down ravers with hard data and serious analysis...

I came to this forum last year after hearing of the swarm and googling. I ended up a couple of places first... Those places had me browning my skivvies before I came here and figure out the difference between those engaged in an honest appraisal of the situation and those looking to support their preconceptions...

In a world which has confused data and hype, I think it would benefit the interested public in general -- and certainly those in other communities -- to have a conduit to a trained scientist to pose the kinds of reasonable questions like the one I posted above... A succinct, prompt reply could prevent tens of pages of wild speculation that stem from uneducated responses...

What I've noticed elsewhere is that a small group of posters tend to take questions like the one I posted and pepper it will data that make it seem as if calamity is imminent... Those posters tend to have the most influence and suddenly the hornet's nest is buzzing and people are making wild accusations about the YVO, USGS, University of Utah, your mother, my uncle and everyone else.

Unfortunately for most communities, they don't have the quality of sane posters that we have the luxury of enjoying here.

[edit on 26-1-2010 by pantangele]

Ok, my turn.

Peter,

I think the FAQ section on the YVO site could be expanded by answering topics not only for the general public but also for a more technical/educated audience. What I mean: the section could include several sections depending on the intended "skill level", and answer not only general questions about Yellowstone Volcano, but also about geology/volcanology/seismology/etc, as long as they are relevant to the volcano or its monitoring.

I also think that questions asked by people who sent emails directly to YVO/UUSS scientists and answered in private should be included somewhere in the YVO website, maybe in the FAQ section - even if they're rather technical. For example last year I asked several technical questions (on seismology topics relevant to the ongoing Redoubt Volcano activity at that time) myself to the Alaska Volcano Observatory staff, and most of them got replied, but I cannot help but feel that many would benefit from such discussions if they were made public (names taken out and content reworked for public consumption of course).

[edit on 2010-1-26 by Shirakawa]

Dear All,

What I would like to see from YVO, UofU & USGS is honesty and information!

1) Real-time data! (I see no reason why the Seismograms which are generated instantaneously should be delayed information to inquiring minds).
2) Real-time data! (Example: lvo.wr.usgs.gov... ), to name a few.
3) Accessible archived logs for all above for comparison (earthquakes, temperatures, etc.).
4) More updates for ongoing swarms, deformation, inflation, etc. – If unsure state so. Limited people who are not capable or have limited amount of time for finding the information need to hear from you! People as stated above and who have limited knowledge need to feel “comfort and secure” that someone is on top of it and is listening and reaching out. Not updating causes panic and imaginations running wild. Information being swept under the rug comes out in dribs and drabs making people wonder what is being hidden and results in the above panic etc.
5) Honest answers to questions asked!

These are just a few of things I would like be able to access and see.

p.s. Shirakawa, you are great with research, graphs and plotting, maybe they could sub-contract you for your exceptional services :-)

Originally posted by Anmarie96

Le me answer to some of your questions.

1) Real-time data! (I see no reason why the Seismograms which are generated instantaneously should be delayed information to inquiring minds).

Seismograms are already almost near-realtime. If you have used programs like GEE, VASE, Swarm, etc, you can see that the delay is usually very short, around 2-3 minutes. Webicorders on the UoU website though, I think are updated every 10 minutes solely for performance reasons. Otherwise many people would be hammering the servers with browser refreshes.

2) Real-time data! (Example: lvo.wr.usgs.gov... ), to name a few.

There's already real-time data for Yellowstone such seismic monitoring, GPS deformation, water flow. From what I know the YVO staff currently don't have real-time gas measurements. As for tiltmeters, I don't know if they use them. A few borehole stations in YNP have strainmeters, but while the data isn't shown on their website, it's public (still through appropriate channels).

3) Accessible archived logs for all above for comparison (earthquakes, temperatures, etc.).

They have that (I don't know about temperatures), but maybe with accessible you meant "more accessible than they currently are" ?

4) More updates for ongoing swarms, deformation, inflation, etc. – If unsure state so. Limited people who are not capable or have limited amount of time for finding the information need to hear from you! People as stated above and who have limited knowledge need to feel “comfort and secure” that someone is on top of it and is listening and reaching out. Not updating causes panic and imaginations running wild. Information being swept under the rug comes out in dribs and drabs making people wonder what is being hidden and results in the above panic etc.

Here I agree, more organized data and more frequent/detailed updates/press releases would be helpful.

p.s. Shirakawa, you are great with research, graphs and plotting, maybe they could sub-contract you for your exceptional services :-)

I don't think I'm doing anything exceptional!
But thanks

[edit on 2010-1-26 by Shirakawa]

Weather data are available.

Each box on the following URL is a direct link to a weather station. Many stations are remote sensing sites similar to those used by USGS for seismic and waterflow monitoring.

Very few stations are 'real-time.' Instead the stations are uplinked periodically and made available as uploaded. Some stations are hourly, others more frequent, some less frequent, some manual input - some are even seasonal - and not all have the same sensor array or standard for measurement. For example the aviation standard for monitoring of wind speed is much different than that used in wildland fire danger prediction systems, but both monitoring systems are available on the single page.

Such inconvenience and variation between stations is a small price to pay for the volumes of information we are now able to collect with relatively little effort through remote sensing applications. It is simply important to know what and how the individual stations report and use the output appropriately.

Each National Weather Service office provides similar information in different formats under the header of current conditions. If you do not like the information from one office try a different office. You may like their format better.

www.wrh.noaa.gov...

Current Conditions

www.wrh.noaa.gov...

Western Region Climate Centre has volumes of information to wade through.

www.wrcc.dri.edu...

reply to post by quakewatcher


I too am wondering about a possible correlation between earthquake activity and air temperature. Could the actual correlation could be with air density rather than the air temperature? If the earth crust is sensitivity to the moon’s gravitational pull, which some evidence suggest it is, then would the change in the air column weight, due to air temperature, have a like relationship? Just wondering.

Back to the toba topic. I find it interesting that water was the catalyst for that eruption. I just cannot help but feel that if Yellowstone did blow, water would be the ctalyst there as well. If there were to be a powerful quake that fractured some of the plumbing, I just can't help but think that there would be minimal warning time before an eruption. Could it be almost instantaneous? Thoughts?

Toba lake is big.. one crack in the bottem there could be serious..
lake yellowstone seems much smaller..hmm do'nt now the depth...

it snot just yellowstone lake though. The whole plumbing system that feeds the geysers, and hot springs. Its the Underground water system that worries me.

Originally posted by left turn only
reply to post by quakewatcher

 

I too am wondering about a possible correlation between earthquake activity and air temperature. Could the actual correlation could be with air density rather than the air temperature? If the earth crust is sensitivity to the moon’s gravitational pull, which some evidence suggest it is, then would the change in the air column weight, due to air temperature, have a like relationship? Just wondering.

I am not admitting any correlation between weather and earthquakes. Just thinking aloud. It may be worth investigating any relationship between barometric pressure and earthquakes. Make any sense to anyone else?