Interesting Read on the Cascadian Subduction Zone

This disaster is one of the least publicized possible catastrophic events. Perhaps it is the relative distance the Juan De Fuca Fault has to the coast. Or maybe it is perhaps the mythical and scarce accounts of its last rupture. The last major earthquake was on January 26th 1700. What people don't realize that this is a geological time bomb that would be worse than both a San Andrea earthquake or New Madrid. It would have global ramfications creating a tsunami of up to 100 feet smashing into the west coast. Building in Seattle and Vancouver would crumble and the west coast would become vulnerable to possibly exploitments by the Chinese. en.wikipedia.org...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.oregonlive.com...
A quake along this fault could very well spark a series of quakes along the San Andreas or vise verse. Also volcanoes such as Mt St Helen and especially Mt Rainer could possibly have major eruptions triggered by such a disturbance.

I have also found a very interesting read regarding 2012 and the cascadian subduction zone that could be left up to the skeptics to quarrel over but is definitelty a mind grasper. As we all know there will be a Venus Transit in 2012 these events are rare and occur in a pattern that repeats itself every 243 years. One occured in 2004 and in that year the Asian Tsunami occured. Also Kraktao erupted in 1882 another year where a venus transit happened. Could 2012 venus transit possibly be the cause for a rupture of the Cascadian Subduction Zone.
pakalahau.wordpress.com...

[edit on 25-4-2010 by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010]

Thanks for posting that, S&F.

Very interesting and informative- highly recommended watching!

You can betcha that station US.NWLA, on the northern coast of Washington State, is one I always monitor in GEE, along with a couple of others south of there along the Oregon coast.

While no one knows exactly when it will hit, interestingly the last three big events, as noted in the video, have occurred in 300 year intervals, down from initial larger intervals of 1000 years or so.

That makes watching the Cascadia subduction zone particularly important. If the current interval continues, and the last one was in the year 1700, then we are already 10 years overdue.

That sucker could literally go any day now. Scary, scary.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Thanks for posting that, S&F.

Very interesting and informative- highly recommended watching!

You can betcha that station US.NWLA, on the northern coast of Washington State, is one I always monitor in GEE, along with a couple of others south of there along the Oregon coast.

While no one knows exactly when it will hit, interestingly the last three big events, as noted in the video, have occurred in 300 year intervals, down from initial larger intervals of 1000 years or so.

That makes watching the Cascadia subduction zone particularly important. If the current interval continues, and the last one was in the year 1700, then we are already 10 years overdue.

That sucker could literally go any day now. Scary, scary.

Yeah it is scary. Even scarier is the connection is has with the San Andreas and how an earthquake on either fault could release a ton of energy on the other

Originally posted by EarthquakeNewMadrid2010
Yeah it is scary. Even scarier is the connection is has with the San Andreas and how an earthquake on either fault could release a ton of energy on the other

Now that part I am not so sure about. I'd say if one could affect the other more, it would be a quake on the cascadia subduction zone affecting the San Andreas, if at all. A large quake on the San Andreas I couldn't see affecting the rupture of continental plate stress anywhere near as much- but that's just my opinion.

Overall though, I am less sold these days on quakes triggering quakes. After watching some awfully big shocks travel through Yellowstone, for example, and not setting off anything major there, it is pretty evident that most fault lines are pretty tolerant to teleseismic waves from other, more distant quakes.

But that may not be the case from closer faults, for example, like what we are seeing with the Baja quake and all the subsequent aftershocks spread out a pretty good ways over the area. I believe that one did trigger some quakes on adjacent faults.

In the case of the Chile quake, and its subsequent aftershocks all up and down the South American coast, again, that is a subduction zone. It seems that when a quake occurs on a subduction zone, it is more prone to produce a wider area of aftershocks, due to the usual much larger rupture area than what happens when a quake occurs on an interplate fault line.

And that's one more reason why being statistically overdue for a subduction zone quake on the Cascadia is not good. Not good at all...