Whats going on at yellowstone?

However, I myself have lots of questions regarding other ground deformations, and specifically how they pertain to the magma expansion to the west-northwest.

reply to post by Trip3


I/we noticed/discussed this sometime last year I think it was. It is interesting to look at. We had the Hebgen quake back in 59, which appeared to jump start the current events. Now, they are shaking back up to the original epicenter. But, then we have things amiss on te Wasbash Fault as well.---- looking at it reminds me of -- hmmm - motor boat and the ripples that follow after it. Or the magnetiphere. -- hmmm heat discharge = flowing current - Yup - throw that one out to them too

reply to post by Spypants


I called him a liar because he lied. Simple as that. He was being rude and called me a chick and then, It's aback couple pages. Then he brushed it off and tried to say it wasn't an insult. All of statements were meant to antagonize me. He lied to me. I have no idea about what else he's lying about. But he doesn't even his facts straight and can't answer questions. Like the one I've been asking from the begining, why no harmonic tremors at YMR.

You can't come in her and be making grand claims and when your first claim isn't even true, you are forced to question motives. I'm finding it comical how he persists in the facade when most of us here aren't buying it.

Can someone invited Samm and Cav over for a visit so we can compare notes?
He's only in the forum cause no one else will have him.
Say it's going to happen in 2012 and go find the Niubu crowd.

reply to post by Trip3


So you think that 'clever' answer is funny perhaps? I would suggest that maligning Mr Lowenstern is not going to endear you to anyone on this thread. How dare you belittle another professional in that manner?

That is not the sort of behaviour that I would expect from someone who is supposedly a scientist in the field, or from a gentleman. In addition you say you were at Hawaii University in 1983 therefore I would have thought that not being exactly wet behind the ears you would have learnt some manners.

As usual I note, you failed to answer the question.

To the person that gave that post a star you should be ashamed of yourself.

reply to post by Robin Marks


Notice I said that I am convinced that he is convinced that he is telling the truth.

Originally posted by Robin Marks
You're a liar.

You don't have any cause to declare me a liar.

However, your repeated insistence on doing so has done nothing but cast your own integrity into serious doubt, not to mention provide ample evidence of a very unsavory pettiness.

reply to post by Trip3

I guess I should notify my contact there are no harmonic tremors at YS, and he should stand down.

Sounds like a scheme to me. By the way, you have stated these are harmonic tremors but so far you have presented no real evidence except your opinion.

Perhaps you could present your spectrum analysis and Fourier transforms so that we can analyse your results? I am sure you would like to present them so that we can agree with you no? We are after all here to learn.

Referring to another of your replies:

Microseisms, from a storm? We already did that "elsewhere". That's not even CLOSE to the same signal.

Whom did you contact for this explanation from USGS? And what storm were you relying on for this microseisms.

As I said to you I never mentioned storms nor did my post yet you say we "already did that elsewhere". Having trouble remembering which thread you are on at times. Difficult isn't it.

Having seen your 'response' along similar lines I will say to you as was said on the other forum. I am NOT going to divulge my sources for you to denigrate and belittle, not that you could. Since you have now brought up the subject of 'storms'....

1) Is the background on this webicorder image from microseisms?

Response: Yes, the ~6 s period signal appears to be microseism, probably related to strong Pacific storms (a similar signal is also strong at stations in Long Valley, CA)

2) If the latter is true, how come we can see them on a short-period station (YSB).

Response: Some short period stations record at these periods - just not as well as they record at shorter periods. If you look at a broadband station (e.g. YHB), you can see that this ~6 second signal appears much stronger.

My observation on that is that there is evidence of this signal from around 01:00 UTC on the 25th January by about 10:15 UTC on 26th January it has pretty much died down again.

3) Why do we see the wiggly signal on some stations and not others? Is this simply a matter of gain, filtering, etc. in the webicorder generation?

Response: It could be related to any number of factors, including software (gain, filtering, etc), hardware (i.e. the actual seismometer model - not all "short period" stations are the same), amount of high-frequency cultural noise, or even the type and quality of the seismometer installation and rock/soil type at the site.

These are the responses from USGS however if you know this is wrong please enlighten us. I am not making comment on them other than that they were provided to me by someone I have had dealings with in the past on technical matters to do with seismograph readings and I have no reason to doubt the explanation. Explain to me if this is incorrect. Not your opinion, a proper explanation.

Looking at the Pacific coast would it be fair to say that today the signal here is the same as that at YSB/YHB? Looks pretty like it to me. What do you think?

By the way you say this signal has never been seen before in the park? Since you are a geologist you should have no problem in getting hold of these:

TA.H17A for ordinal day 2010.110
WY.YSB for ordinal day 2004.15
WY.YSB for ordinal day 2004.17

That is just 3

As you are a geologist perhaps you could also get the SEED files for those as they are not online now. Oh and the SEED file for the 25th Jan 2011 would be good as well.

It does look as if this instrument may show them up rather better than others, but then as the USGS said these short period stations are not supposed to show them at all. Additionally volcanic quakes and HT show best on long period stations, something you are not aware of perhaps otherwise why would you press the point that they were not visible on other short period stations?

You could also perhaps take a look at WY.YHB for ordinal day 2010.07. My that was a HUGE amount of charges they set off that day.

Oh and you have not addressed the matter of the storage space nor indeed commented as to why LKWY did not go off-line, yet sometimes does when the other stations do not. Surely that is not classified information? Your 'contact' could provide you with that could he not?

SO, just to recap:

In order that we better understand your expertise in this matter and are cognisant of your concerns perhaps you could provide

• evidence that what you are seeing is HT by producing spectrograms and Fourier transforms.
  
• demonstrate that these cannot be microseisms
  
• explain why the samples I pointed out are not the same thing as the signal at YSB
  
• respond with regard to how 6TB of storage could possibly be taken up
  

I guess if we can clear those up we can get on with the thread.

Originally posted by Trip3

Originally posted by Robin Marks
You're a liar.

You don't have any cause to declare me a liar.

However, your repeated insistence on doing so has done nothing but cast your own integrity into serious doubt, not to mention provide ample evidence of a very unsavory pettiness.

I speak the truth every day all the time. I find lying repugnant. You clearly insulted me and then denied.
At one time, I would slap a glove across your face and challenge you to a duel.

I understand the meaning of truth. I admit to everyone here that I'm crazy. I admit fully about my problems and illness. I don't shy away from the truth and I will stand and challenge anyone ever lies to me. You lied.

I ain't your chick. And there ain't no shiat in my bath tub. And if I was a girl I would slap you for callling me a chick.

A fact is a fact. You insulted me. Then lied about it.

reply to post by Robin Marks


Robin, the more I watch your video, the more I think you have more knowledge and insight that anyone I have come across. Your idea's are Brilliant and right on the "Mark" - You have more knowledge and insight than most of the "Scientist" and in my book are right up there with Bob Smith. I think you 2 would make an outstanding team.

Don't let this guy get your goat - for that is what he is trying to do - learn the game - let it go - he know how to get you, so don't even entertain it!!!

Also, Robin, last year, you mentioned you thought we would not see another major swarm until 2014 I think you said - have you done anymore thinking on that?

reply to post by Anmarie96


I want to go to bed. My brain is powering down. I know most of you would rather see me handle things differently. But that ain't gonna happen. I tell the truth. That's all I got left. It save me. And I won't let any deciet stand. I once drove my car down a major highway with STOP BUSH on the side. All the Americans were giving me dirty looks as a speed past them. I didn't care. The whole thing was based on lies. Lies make me crazy. A lie made Hal crazy. I had to fight too much as a kid and I ain't letting anyone bully me. That's right when Trip3 started. He told me since I had no training and no knowledge outside this forum, that meant nothing. So right off the bat he calls me a nobody. I tried to stick to the facts. The non-existent harmonic tremors. The he insulted me and then lied about it. I ain't taking that lying down. Sorry.


My damned experiment is genius. Because I was ahead of the researchers, and my demostration is exactly what they are describing. But mine is more dynamic. They just explain that gas is escaping the volcanic plugg it causes small quakes. They described it as a wobbly cork in a champagne bottle. Well, that's what I demonstrated. In my experiment you can actually tell where there are periods of swarms. Right near the end you see the big quake. Once that big quake allows in more water, then the chain reaction begins. I laughed because I didn't know how big it would get. I did it in my bath tub because I didn't want to get hot oil all over my home. So did it in the tub because it would be easire to clean.

Hell, Trick could have made a joke about it. If you look on the You Tube Video, the last person who bothered to comment made a joke. At least it was a funny joke. I laughed, left it on my channel and even wrote back. Trick 3 insulted me, not even to be funny, in crude disprespectful manner. And then lied. I have no desire to debate this person.

Damn that experiment is cool. It was tricky to get set up. But when I got it right, it behave just as I suspected.

It's water. Water is a key ingredient in really big eruptions. But what do I know? I ante no rock doctor.

reply to post by Robin Marks


Yes, we have discussed water as a main factor, one I think is spot on. If we look at Yellowstone, our latest biggest swarms have been in the beginning of the year. This would be when the snow begins hitting the heated land - which equals melt - differant than rain because rain is a warmer temperature. Hmmm -- Robin, wonder what an experiment with hot/freezing cold would show.

Robin, See it for what it is - he's trying to get you! - you let out the info on how to do that -- we are hitting things that They don't want let out - - at all!!! --- They are going to hit back however They can ---- let it go my friend and understand what is playing out here..... Look at what happened on our other thread - an attack on PM as the focus - here now a day later ---- Robin - use your brilliant mind and see what this guy is trying to do to you!!! --- Yes tired brain - time for rest.

And - don't forget to get me an update as to 2014 - march i think you said. That is if we are still here

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by Trip3

 

So you think that 'clever' answer is funny perhaps? I would suggest that maligning Mr Lowenstern is not going to endear you to anyone on this thread. How dare you belittle another professional in that manner?

That is not the sort of behaviour that I would expect from someone who is supposedly a scientist in the field, or from a gentleman. In addition you say you were at Hawaii University in 1983 therefore I would have thought that not being exactly wet behind the ears you would have learnt some manners.

As usual I note, you failed to answer the question.

To the person that gave that post a star you should be ashamed of yourself.

It was both amusing and an accurate characterization of the individual's position at Yellowstone.

I answered the question, as far as I saw one. Save your 'tude for someone else who doesn't know the difference.

reply to post by PuterMan


I'd like to see him name his source too. Because apparently whoever it is must be either keeping some field work secret, or is the laughing stock of every other scientist at the USGS. That community is its own self testing bed, and there is great competiveness/pride among themselves to deliver solid information that stands up to scrutiny by the rest. If there were HT's happening at YS, that info would be qualified very carefully, scrutinized by all concerned, and a consensus reached.

If that consenus had been reached on HT, it would no doubt have appeared here in the Feb 1 update:

volcanoes.usgs.gov...

YELLOWSTONE VOLCANO (CAVW #1205-01-)
44°25'48" N 110°40'12" W, Summit Elevation 9203 ft (2805 m)
Current Volcano Alert Level: NORMAL
Current Aviation Color Code: GREEN

During the month of January 2011, 57 earthquakes were located in the Yellowstone National Park region. The largest was a magnitude 2.4 event on January 25 at 9:51 PM MST, located about 6 miles north northwest of West Yellowstone, MT. No earthquake swarms were noted in January 2011.

Earthquake activity during the report period occurred at relatively low background rates.

So the only thing worthy of note was a quake in Montana, and they print that instead of confirmed HT's at YSB?



Ahhh no. Not just no but hell no. Now seriously folks. :shk: Get a grip. Anyone in their right minds should not trust this BS being put forth. Fanciful for a conspiracy site, but the exact reason why the pros have no time for this, and why I prefer my tax dollars be spent with them watching for REAL harmonic tremor and other signs at Yellowstone- not dispelling baseless rumors on internet forums. GOOD. Stay away from here and keep doing the excellent work you have been.

Because it doesn't take a degreed seismologist to see through this BS. PuterMan is plenty enough, and is already overkill, wasting his time arguing with some washed up geologist who's seen Supervolcano one too many times and is maliciously exploiting the scare factor. Fricken sad. Really.

reply to post by PuterMan



I may be mistaken, but earlier weren't you claiming the offered "harmonic tremors" were telemetry noise?

No, I'm not having any sort of trouble remembering what thread I'm in. I assumed that you would be able to intuit my deference to this forum in not referencing another forum, given that you were obviously not "elsewhere". My mistake ... or is this nothing but a cheap tactic and posturing, attempting to get some sort of twisted oneupmanship without any substance, as the rest of your post?

I'll clarify: when I said we "already did that elsewhere", it was on another forum and other persons. You and I obviously not have that discussion, but I've heard it before. And I don't blame you: I wouldn't want to offer my supposed source for such a claim either.

Microseisisms from storms, pressure drops, and other things, look nothing like harmonic tremors.

Furthermore the only instruments able to register such microseisisms, would be broad-band stations .. such as YMR, which is both broadband and strong-motion.

YJC and YMP, YSB, and YPK, all offered as demosrating harmonic tremors on the 25th, are all short-period seismographs, and they would not register microseisisms.

Here's a decent paper referencing the subject, and it even references Yellowstone:
Origin of deep ocean microseisms by using teleseismic body waves

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by PuterMan

 

I'd like to see him name his source too. Because apparently whoever it is must be either keeping some field work secret, or is the laughing stock of every other scientist at the USGS. That community is its own self testing bed, and there is great competiveness/pride among themselves to deliver solid information that stands up to scrutiny by the rest. If there were HT's happening at YS, that info would be qualified very carefully, scrutinized by all concerned, and a consensus reached.

If that consenus had been reached on HT, it would no doubt have appeared here in the Feb 1 update:

volcanoes.usgs.gov...

YELLOWSTONE VOLCANO (CAVW #1205-01-)
44°25'48" N 110°40'12" W, Summit Elevation 9203 ft (2805 m)
Current Volcano Alert Level: NORMAL
Current Aviation Color Code: GREEN

During the month of January 2011, 57 earthquakes were located in the Yellowstone National Park region. The largest was a magnitude 2.4 event on January 25 at 9:51 PM MST, located about 6 miles north northwest of West Yellowstone, MT. No earthquake swarms were noted in January 2011.

Earthquake activity during the report period occurred at relatively low background rates.

So the only thing worthy of note was a quake in Montana, and they print that instead of confirmed HT's at YSB?

RIGHT!

Because we all know that non-localized harmonic tremors, which have no epicenter nor focus, and which don't fall into either "quakes" or "quake swarms" would be something that brain-dead public referencing the "Volcano Alert Level", would actually consider.



.

reply to post by Trip3


I've had a really, really, long 36 hours. My patients as now gone. Mods, you need to step in before my cork blows and it's champagne for everyone - I love memosa's. And, if they Frack near Yellowstone without hitting the magma Chamber - I am sure it will act the same as the cork that is about to let loose.

Originally posted by Trip3
Furthermore the only instruments able to register such microseisisms, would be broad-band stations .. such as YMR, which is both broadband and strong-motion.

YJC and YMP, YSB, and YPK, all offered as demosrating harmonic tremors on the 25th, are all short-period seismographs, and they would not register microseisisms.

PuterMan, after that statement there is no need to go on given what we already know. Some short period instruments can indeed register them. And due to even more specific particulars, that right there proves this guy isn't in the real loop. Talks a good rap though, I'll give him that. He just picked the wrong forum. Wouldn't be the first, and won't be the last. Dismissed.

Originally posted by Robin Marks
reply to post by Anmarie96

 

I want to go to bed. My brain is powering down. I know most of you would rather see me handle things differently. But that ain't gonna happen. I tell the truth. That's all I got left. It save me. And I won't let any deciet stand. I once drove my car down a major highway with STOP BUSH on the side. All the Americans were giving me dirty looks as a speed past them. I didn't care. The whole thing was based on lies. Lies make me crazy. A lie made Hal crazy. I had to fight too much as a kid and I ain't letting anyone bully me. That's right when Trip3 started. He told me since I had no training and no knowledge outside this forum, that meant nothing. So right off the bat he calls me a nobody. I tried to stick to the facts. The non-existent harmonic tremors. The he insulted me and then lied about it. I ain't taking that lying down. Sorry.


My damned experiment is genius. Because I was ahead of the researchers, and my demostration is exactly what they are describing. But mine is more dynamic. They just explain that gas is escaping the volcanic plugg it causes small quakes. They described it as a wobbly cork in a champagne bottle. Well, that's what I demonstrated. In my experiment you can actually tell where there are periods of swarms. Right near the end you see the big quake. Once that big quake allows in more water, then the chain reaction begins. I laughed because I didn't know how big it would get. I did it in my bath tub because I didn't want to get hot oil all over my home. So did it in the tub because it would be easire to clean.

Hell, Trick could have made a joke about it. If you look on the You Tube Video, the last person who bothered to comment made a joke. At least it was a funny joke. I laughed, left it on my channel and even wrote back. Trick 3 insulted me, not even to be funny, in crude disprespectful manner. And then lied. I have no desire to debate this person.

Damn that experiment is cool. It was tricky to get set up. But when I got it right, it behave just as I suspected.

It's water. Water is a key ingredient in really big eruptions. But what do I know? I ante no rock doctor.

I NEVER told you that you if you had no training nor knowledge outside this forum, "that it meant nothing", nor ever implied anything of the sort!

I never said anything to INSULT you, and didn't know who made the video and the terms of it were unclear on the site. I was actually trying to find out more from you about how you created the experiment and what you believed it meant. I MISTAKENLY chose the word "chick", in a attempt to be flattering and not sound diminishing or stodgy or antiseptic, as with "girl" or "woman" or "female".

I also have addressed what I sometimes do as "blow **** up", despite the fact that I've dealt with everything from biological and chemical rounds, to tactical nukes refurbishment concerns involving UXO/MRBA. areas of military bases. However I never would engage that subject so flippantly while actually on a project. Then again, I would be disinclined to detonate things perched on a towel on the side of a bathtub.

And for future reference, water is not the key in big eruptions. The key to big eruptions is silica, which changes the viscosity of the magma body, making the melt more andesitic in nature. This changed viscosity in results in the explosive degassing of magma when it is abruptly depressurized.

This is why I was able to sleep a quarter mile from the Kilauea eruption for months, without concern. Oceanic hotspots don't have access to sialic crust in their melt.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by Trip3
Furthermore the only instruments able to register such microseisisms, would be broad-band stations .. such as YMR, which is both broadband and strong-motion.

YJC and YMP, YSB, and YPK, all offered as demosrating harmonic tremors on the 25th, are all short-period seismographs, and they would not register microseisisms.

PuterMan, after that statement there is no need to go on given what we already know. Some short period instruments can indeed register them. And due to even more specific particulars, that right there proves this guy isn't in the real loop. Talks a good rap though, I'll give him that.

He just picked the wrong forum. Wouldn't be the first, and won't be the last. Dismissed.

Yeah, g'luck with that.

The different between "Puterman" and myself, beyond my being a geologist and not finding any sort of self-importance in misplaced references to "spectrograms" and "Fourier transforms" in a long, drawn-out post involving nothing but a terminal case of posturing ...

.... is that I actually consulted an on-site doctoral professional, a known expert in his field.

Beyond that, microseisisms have signatures nothing at all like the harmonic tremors, and nothing like what's evident in the seismograms. Puterman was doing much better with the "telemetry noise",

ETA I'm oh-so-tempted to question you about what constitutes a "TrueAmerican", and why, but I suspect there's a high probability that would lead to a heated discussion.

reply to post by Trip3


Make one more comment about gender and I will declare war. You think your avitar gives you some kind better than all - I see you for what you are - I will battle you if you so choose.

And then go out to finish your post with regards to water and ice - the debated subject - so you know the game - are you working for the government or are you working for the frackign industry? There are a few of you here in the last few days - -

Check

reply to post by Trip3

The different between "Puterman" and myself, beyond my being a geologist

Proof please?? if you can not prove this you are a fraud. that is the way it is.