Quake Watch 2010

Hmm has anyone noticed all the sinkholes opening up lately China, So Cal , Florida etc?

Does anyone know if these sinkholes and even crevices, would have anything to do with Earthquakes? Frequencies?

Originally posted by JJBB22
Hmm has anyone noticed all the sinkholes opening up lately China, So Cal , Florida etc?

Does anyone know if these sinkholes and even crevices, would have anything to do with Earthquakes? Frequencies?

My uneducated guess would be that some of these places have been getting more than usual rainfall. this could loosen the soil which had previously bridged the gap or rain was washing out from underneath.
Like crevasse in snow peaks, it may look like it has always been there but it is hollow underneath.

reply to post by Lil Drummerboy


Thanks for replying!

2nd Line

reply to post by MoorfNZ


I too am wondering if these are aftershocks from Baja. No way to find out? I have a bad feeling about Calif. now.

reply to post by crazydaisy


No, they are not aftershocks from Baja. The odd one or two at the very top of the Gulf probably are, but this little batch (which appears to be quiet now) is away from that and there has been little or no connecting activity.

Is there any evidence from the past of light/medium quakes in the Gulf of California or even Baja preceeding a large quake in California itself? I can't recall it.

The Gulf of Cal has had these swarms in the past before without it leading to anything else.
Depends what time span you look at I guess.

reply to post by PuterMan


Thank for clarifying that for me.

Originally posted by muzzy
reply to post by kiwitina948

 

Felt that one here on the Kapiti Coast

Almost the same feeling as the Darfield 7.1. It was just a very weak rocking (under the couch this time). Like the 7.1 I looked around to see if it was the cat playing around with the furniture but she was sleeping on another chair.
We are 510km away

Reference Number 3380101/G
Universal Time September 29 2010 at 4:14
NZ Daylight Time Wednesday, September 29 2010 at 5:14 pm
Latitude, Longitude 36.68°S, 177.29°E
Focal Depth 280 km
Richter magnitude 6.4 ML
Region Raukumara Plain
Location

* 90 km north of White Island
* 120 km north of Te Kaha
* 150 km north of Whakatane
* 230 km east of Auckland

USGS have it at 5.3mb. Geofon 5.2mb on the main list but 5.3mb on the event page
The Geofon NZ station phase magnitude readings are interesting compared to the USGS (same place different machine) the further away the higher the reading
Stat Net Geomb, GeoML ~ USGS Mag (Unk.type)
URZ NZ 0.0, 5.4 ~ 4.5
HIZ NZ 0.0, 5.2 ~ 4.5
BKZ NZ 0.0, 6.2 ~ 4.6
WPVZ NZ 0.0, 5.8 ~
OUZ NZ 0.0, 6.1 ~ 4.6
BFZ NZ 0.0, 6.5 ~ 5.9
SNZO IU 0.0, 6.6 ~ 5.7
QRZ NZ 6.6, 6.7 ~ 5.8
KHZ NZ 7.0, 7.0 ~ 5.8
RPZ NZ 6.0, 6.9 ~ 5.7
ODZ NZ 5.8, 0.0 ~


Whats really weird is the distances at which it was felt www.geonet.org.nz...

some of the Christchurch ones might be mistaken local aftershocks from Sept 4, but look at those others
MM4 Wellington 235, Palmerston North 22


5.3 my arse

Dragged this one up to advise that it has been revised up to 6.532ML by Geonet.

Just doing some revision of the last few months

reply to post by crazydaisy


No problem. By the way I have been researching the Cali quakes (this sort of answers muzzy as well)

I have taken an area Min Longitude -123, Max Longitude -114, Min Latitude 27, Max Latitude 40. This covers most of California, North Mid and Baja.

Using the ANSS catalog I got 217,777 quakes between 1 Jan 1900 (you could really say 1932 - see below) and today.

Of those only 148 were above 5.5+
0f those only 54 were 6.0+
Of those only 21 were 6.5+
Of those just 8 were 7.0+
and of those just 1 was 7.5 (21st July 1952)

There were no quakes in that time span above 7.5

Basically California rumbles, but does not do anything very serious very often.

BUT

The 1906 quake is NOT in the list. However that was reckoned to be a 7.7Ms or maybe a 7.9 Mw

Let's face it by some standards that is not a large earthquake, and with excellent building codes one wonders what the effect of 'the big one' would be? There would certainly seem to be no historical evidence for the oft touted 9.0+ quake of many spurious prediction threads. That does not mean it won't happen but the evidence would seem to be against it.

Once I get this list sorted out I will publish some graphs from 1932 onwards as that seems to be when the main data starts.

Edit: By the way the 217,777 were 2.0 and above only.


More input: By applying the same criteria to the much vaunted Centennial catalog from which all the USGS lies figures are taken for earthquake totals we get the following (using the M1 column only):

59 were above 5.5+
0f those only 34 were 6.0+
Of those only 23 were 6.5+
Of those just 11 were 7.0+
and of those just 1 was 7.5 (18th Apr 1906 - The San Francisco 'big one')

I leave you draw your own conclusions!


Just remembered that the Centennial catalog only goes to 2002 so the adjusted figures allowing for 2003 - 2010 are:

66 were above 5.5+
0f those only 36 were 6.0+
Of those only 25 were 6.5+
Of those just 12 were 7.0+
and of those just 1 was 7.5 (18th Apr 1906 - The San Francisco 'big one')



Edumacation Section:
Largest earthquakes in the US
10 largest earthquakes since 1900 (Note that SF 1906 did not make that list.)

reply to post by PuterMan

Nice bit of research there
What a coincidence that the biggest quake you found was in 1952, I just revised that year on my blog yesterday using the Centennial list

FWIW, here the details I put on. I wonder what the damage would be if this happened these days? $60mil is peanuts compared to what even a low 7 mag quake seems to cause today (est. $4 billion for Christchurch's 7.1 in Sept 2010)

Date/Time: 1952/7/21 11:52:14
Lat: 35 Long: -119.017
Region: Kern County, California USA
Mw: 7.3 [p&s] Ms: 7.8 [abe] Mb: 7.3 [abe] ML: 7.2 [noaa] Me: n/a Unk: 7.7 [g&r]
Depth: 16 km Deaths: 12 , Injuries: n/a Tsunami: n/a Source: noaa
This earthquake was the largest in the conterminous United States since the San Francisco shock of 1906. It claimed 12 lives and caused property damage estimated at $60 million. MM intensity XI was assigned to a small area on the Southern Pacific Railroad southeast of Bealville. There, the earthquake cracked reinforced-concrete tunnels having walls 46 centimeters thick; it shortened the distance between portals of two tunnels about 2.5 meters and bent the rails into S-shaped curves. At Owens Lake (about 160 kilometers from the epicenter), salt beds shifted, and brine lines were bent into S-shapes. Many surface ruptures were observed along the lower slopes of Bear Mountain, in the White Wolf fault zone. The somewhat flat, poorly consolidated alluvium in the valley was erratically cracked and recontoured. The cracking along Bear Mountain indicated that the mountain itself moved upward and to the north. The main shock was felt over most of California and in parts of western Arizona and western Nevada. It was observed at such distant points as Stirling City, California, Phoenix, Arizona, and Gerlach, Nevada. The California Institute of Technology at Pasadena recorded 188 aftershocks of magnitude 4.0 and higher through September 26, 1952; six aftershocks on July 21 were of magnitude 5.0 and higher


In the weeks prior to this event was there any activity in the Gulf or Baja? Mag 5's? or even 4's?
Its just that it seems to me every time there is more than 2 quakes above 4.5 anywhere within 500 miles of California internet forum posters go into a semi panic of speculation that the "big one" is imminent. (its not just ATS'ers)
I'd look myself but have to go to work now.

Plus the previous 6.9 mag in the gulf of CA, as reported by OP in the other thread.....






Magnitude 4.0 - CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
2010 October 21 17:56:58 UTC
DetailsMapsScientific & TechnicalEarthquake Details
This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
Magnitude 4.0
Date-Time Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 17:56:58 UTC
Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 10:56:58 AM at epicenter

Location 38.451°N, 119.250°W
Depth 4.9 km (3.0 miles) (poorly constrained)
Region CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
Distances 22 km (13 miles) N (355°) from Bridgeport, CA
27 km (17 miles) WSW (242°) from Wichman, NV
34 km (21 miles) NW (322°) from Bodie, CA
55 km (34 miles) W (262°) from Hawthorne, NV
193 km (120 miles) E (93°) from Sacramento, CA

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 5.9 km (3.7 miles); depth +/- 31.8 km (19.8 miles)
Parameters Nph= 5, Dmin=15 km, Rmss=0.39 sec, Gp=155°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=2
Source California Integrated Seismic Net:
USGS Caltech CGS UCB UCSD UNR

Event ID nc71477151


Magnitude 6.9 - GULF OF CALIFORNIA
2010 October 21 17:53:14 UTC
Versión en Español
DetailsSummaryMapsScientific & TechnicalTsunami Earthquake Details
This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
Magnitude 6.9
Date-Time Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 17:53:14 UTC
Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 11:53:14 AM at epicenter

Location 24.843°N, 109.171°W
Depth 10 km (6.2 miles) set by location program
Region GULF OF CALIFORNIA
Distances 105 km (65 miles) S of Los Mochis, Sinaloa, Mexico
125 km (75 miles) SW of Guamuchil, Sinaloa, Mexico
140 km (85 miles) NE of La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico
1200 km (740 miles) WNW of MEXICO CITY, D.F., Mexico

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 6.1 km (3.8 miles); depth fixed by location program
Parameters NST=187, Nph=187, Dmin=843.1 km, Rmss=1.17 sec, Gp=133°,
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=6
Source USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)

reply to post by muzzy


Very strange this one and somewhat foreboding.

This is the graph of quakes in the area I described above for July 1952



There are 21 quakes in the area in the period 29 Jun 1952 to 21 Jul 1952. There were no more than 4 quakes on any one day in the run up (over 2.0) - a total of 21 quakes over the 23 days including up to 09:00 hrs approx on the 21st July. Total energy in mega units (is it dynes?) 1.484 units

Out of the blue with pretty much no warning comes the 7.5. During the rest of that day alone there were 64 quakes releasing 178,878.4 units of energy - 122,552 times the amount of energy in one day.

Another graph shortly........

Edit: OK, another graph. I could not plot the energy release by quake so for the time being I have used magnitude. There is a Poly 4 trend, and a moving average of 30 quakes. You can see from the MA that this could not have been predicted on the basis of preceding quakes. 1952 was completely 'normal' until July 21 and then WHACK!!

Of note here, this one has been scrubbed by USGS as of now, good thing I caught it quick, they are no longer showing this one?????





Magnitude 4.0 - CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
2010 October 21 17:56:58 UTC
DetailsMapsScientific & TechnicalEarthquake Details
This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.
Magnitude 4.0
Date-Time Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 17:56:58 UTC
Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 10:56:58 AM at epicenter

Location 38.451°N, 119.250°W
Depth 4.9 km (3.0 miles) (poorly constrained)
Region CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
Distances 22 km (13 miles) N (355°) from Bridgeport, CA
27 km (17 miles) WSW (242°) from Wichman, NV
34 km (21 miles) NW (322°) from Bodie, CA
55 km (34 miles) W (262°) from Hawthorne, NV
193 km (120 miles) E (93°) from Sacramento, CA

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 5.9 km (3.7 miles); depth +/- 31.8 km (19.8 miles)
Parameters Nph= 5, Dmin=15 km, Rmss=0.39 sec, Gp=155°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=2
Source California Integrated Seismic Net:
USGS Caltech CGS UCB UCSD UNR

6.9 Gulf of California

Magnitude 6.9
Date-Time

* Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 17:53:14 UTC
* Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 11:53:14 AM at epicenter
* Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 24.843°N, 109.171°W
Depth 10 km (6.2 miles) set by location program
Region GULF OF CALIFORNIA
Distances 105 km (65 miles) S of Los Mochis, Sinaloa, Mexico
125 km (75 miles) SW of Guamuchil, Sinaloa, Mexico
140 km (85 miles) NE of La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico
1200 km (740 miles) WNW of MEXICO CITY, D.F., Mexico
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 6.1 km (3.8 miles); depth fixed by location program
Parameters NST=187, Nph=187, Dmin=843.1 km, Rmss=1.17 sec, Gp=133°,
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=6
Source

* USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)

Event ID us2010crbl

EMSC
Magnitude Mw 6.9
Region GULF OF CALIFORNIA
Date time 2010-10-21 17:53:15.4 UTC
Location 24.89 N ; 109.19 W
Depth 10 km
Distances 102 km S Los mochis (pop 214,601 ; local time 11:53 2010-10-21)
102 km S Juan josé ríos (pop 26,380 ; local time 11:53 2010-10-21)
80 km S Topolobampo (pop 7,580 ; local time 11:53 2010-10-21)


Tsunami Information
Message Time: 21 Oct 2010 08:03 am HST
Message Num: 1
Message Text: click to read
Message Type: Tsunami Information
Warning: none
Watch: none
ETAs / Obs: none

Magnitude
6.9
Date-Time
Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 17:53:14 UTC
Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 11:53:14 AM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
24.843°N, 109.171°W
Depth
10 km (6.2 miles) set by location program
Region
GULF OF CALIFORNIA
Distances
105 km (65 miles) S of Los Mochis, Sinaloa, Mexico
125 km (75 miles) SW of Guamuchil, Sinaloa, Mexico
140 km (85 miles) NE of La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico
1200 km (740 miles) WNW of MEXICO CITY, D.F., Mexico
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 6.1 km (3.8 miles); depth fixed by location program
Parameters
NST=187, Nph=187, Dmin=843.1 km, Rmss=1.17 sec, Gp=133°,
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=6
Source
USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Event ID
us2010crbl

A little late, but yeah you got it, check my previous post, and heres the Panama Seismo....

aslwww.cr.usgs.gov...

Originally posted by freetree64
A little late, but yeah you got it, check my previous post, and heres the Panama Seismo....

aslwww.cr.usgs.gov...

Are you saying that your 4.0 was actually the 6.9?

I did not see another post with the 6.9 or did I miss it?

Yup I missed it

Plus the previous 6.9 mag in the gulf of CA, as reported by OP in the other thread.....

What other thread? I hate this new ATS I can't find anything easily.

Good morning

Talking about this now on CNN

Is this it? Is a bigger one on the way?

I didn't go to work yet, its raining again

Well thats an eye opener at Gulf of Cal
Geofon have that at 6.4 Manually Revised, so I bet USGS downgrade it too.
geofon.gfz-potsdam.de...

Mexicans at 6.5, not 100% sure but I think they are ML
www.ssn.unam.mx...

reply to post by PuterMan

Cheers for that

Pretty much confirms what I have seen before looking at large 7+ events, there generally is no build up into them, they just come out of the blue, even if you look at a time scale of months before.

I'm sticking to the forecasting formula I have had for years, its when there is nothing happening at all that you should get nervous.

(present Gulf of California excepted)