possible Volcanic "event" in southern CA?

Originally posted by BobAthome
LAVA FLOW harmonics.
Do you see the word EARTHQUAKE there?

Well lets see your data to back that up...

Thanks in advance

Nothing showing up here
www.volcano.si.edu...

Oh my God, oh my God, surely everyone living in THAT area is already dead, why is the USGS hiding it from us, why is the mainstream media not talking about it at ALL??

Science, guys. If you're not going to learn it, don't pretend to know it.

reply to post by BobAthome


Now you pay attention please,

1st: I wasn't replying to your comment on Harmonic tremors I was refering to the question in regards to seismic activity which an Earthquake comes under no ?

2nd: To clarify as simply as possibly for you, there are no earthquakes, there are also no harmonic tremors or lava flow tremors or anything to do with the geology of that area.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2d81fc97d998.gif[/atsimg]

During the first week of April a different type of seismic signature was showing up on seismograms from Mount St. Helens. On April 1 the first weak harmonic tremor was detected. Stronger bursts of harmonic tremor were recorded on the 2nd. The seismogram above is an example of harmonic tremor recorded at seismic station RAN on April 2. (Image courtesy of the Volcano Hazards Program website)

Taken from earthquake.usgs.gov...

This is what a harmonic tremor should look like, it's pretty easy to spot from the difference in the waveform on the chart! There is nothing that remotely resembles this on the seismogram that sunnydee posted.

I implore you in future to read up on what you're talking about so you don't make future mistakes.

But of course it's all a conspiracy, there's a volcano erupting northeast of LA and everyone but Dutch & his cronies are in on the conspiracy to cover it up

reply to post by Discotech



Got a minute to pull up the data for the Alaska area?

jhaines6.wordpress.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.google.com...:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a

google is our friend.

maybe something is building up? maybe california is going to have a volcanic eruption mega quake.

and the state is going to slide off into the ocean.

wonder why no news about this.

reply to post by zorgon


The seismographs ?

There's 53 stations there, here's one for yesterday from Sand Point

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Quakes can clearly be seen on it though at the 11 UTC and 16 UTC lines

reply to post by Discotech


Thanks... wasn't sure where to find the right ones and figured you would be quicker...

reply to post by zorgon


No worries

Here's the link for all the areas in the USA earthquake.usgs.gov...

Clicking on the red waveform will bring up all the stations for each area (there's ALOT lol) Then you can search upto the last 15 days of activity

Originally posted by shaneslaughta
maybe something is building up? maybe california is going to have a volcanic eruption mega quake.
and the state is going to slide off into the ocean.
wonder why no news about this.

Ummm maybe because....

IT ISN'T HAPPENING?

Just a thought



oh wait... maybe.... maybe OMG!@!!! we just lost Mt Hood Meadows, OR: Past 15 Days

I can't be bothered learning about how to post screenshots. But, if you look at the video to the point he says, "Whoa, look a that!" That signature is thunder. When a thunderstorm rolls through an area, this is what it looks like. Whenever I've seen it on the Yellowstone webicorders, or on the ones for Akansas, I've then checked my radar and sure enough, there's some thunderstorms right ontop of the siesmogram.

It was a thunderstorm.

Originally posted by Discotech
Here's the link for all the areas in the USA earthquake.usgs.gov...

Thanks... never spent much time on that one... I wanted to go back and check the Hawthorn Nevada are that had a heavy series of shocks awhile back in an area where there wasn't a recorded fault. Several days of noise there and that was near a lava flow

This event
More Than 150 Quakes Hammer Hawthorne
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Seems nothing came of that one

Originally posted by Robin Marks
there's some thunderstorms right ontop of the siesmogram.

Makes sense... My house shakes when the thunder is close

reply to post by BobAthome


Well....that was interesting! Way better that that Dutch clown I wonder what that actually is?

It very well could have been activity at the Marine Corp Air Ground Combat Center at Twentynine Palms. Maybe training or Explosive Ordnance Disposal. it fits with the area, the "+NXP" on the radar is "Twentynine Palms EAF Airport "

Not sure why a few people feel that need to be rude when discussing things. I don't think there is anywhere in any of my posts that I have said I know anything for sure, or at all. I have thrown out a few links, ideas, and observations that I wonder about, I do not presume to interpret them, and I welcome someone smarter than me in this subject to tell me more.

Someone said the graph I posted was very quiet and I had no business talking about things I know nothing about.
Well, here are all the area graphs, and I see some that are much quieter than the one I posted.

pasadena.wr.usgs.gov...

Now actually this one is not too far from the area we've been discussing, it is just a bit southwest of that area. It shows something that went on, but I do not presume to know what.
pasadena.wr.usgs.gov...


And here is one just a little farther away to the northwest, it seems less busy than that first Newberry Springs graph I posted. So to me, It does seem like there was something creating some sort of noise on that Newberry Springs graph. And when I say noise, I will clarify that that is my wording and not meant to be any type of official jargon for what I am looking at on that graph.
pasadena.wr.usgs.gov...

Originally posted by StealthyKat
Well....that was interesting! Way better that that Dutch clown

I wonder what that actually is?

How odd that he is showing a thunder storm over the craters

Originally posted by SunnyDee
I do not presume to interpret them, and I welcome someone smarter than me in this subject to tell me more.

We are telling you more though, but it's apparent you do not want to listen.

And the fact you're relying on someone to tell you more is the inherent problem that has run throughout this thread, you're willing to believe stuff based on what someone says, which is wrong and the systematic problem of sheeple syndrome. Personally I like to read what someone has to say on a forum and then go research it if I'm interested in the topic to find out for myself if what they are saying is true or false, whether they're right or wrong doesn't matter to me because I benefit from learning something new that I didn't know beforehand.

Do not fear educating yourself, embrace it, learning new things is a healthy endeavour. Going off blind faith and believing what someone says on the internet is true is not very healthy

With regards to the "activity" you saw on the original seismogram you posted.

Could it possibly be wind ? Caused by a storm ?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/91cca433d154.gif[/atsimg]

earthquake.usgs.gov...

The seismogram above documents a windy night at Geyser Peak station (GGP). From about 22:30 PDT on April 24 to 02:25 on April 25, the wind blew hard in coastal central California as a weather front passed through. Wind can produce low-amplitude seismic waves or "microseisms" in the earth through the action of trees, which transfer wind-generated forces into the ground through their roots. (Ocean waves also generate microseisms by the pounding of the surf.) Here, the wind-generated noise appears as an increase in the amplitude of the smallest background motions detected by this seismometer. Also, two small earthquakes are visible at 22:04 and 22:06, PDT.

The information to educate yourself instead of relying on others to possibly give you false information is out there, you just have to look for it

Originally posted by Discotech

Originally posted by SunnyDee
I do not presume to interpret them, and I welcome someone smarter than me in this subject to tell me more.

We are telling you more though, but it's apparent you do not want to listen.

And the fact you're relying on someone to tell you more is the inherent problem that has run throughout this thread, you're willing to believe stuff based on what someone says, which is wrong and the systematic problem of sheeple syndrome. Personally I like to read what someone has to say on a forum and then go research it if I'm interested in the topic to find out for myself if what they are saying is true or false, whether they're right or wrong doesn't matter to me because I benefit from learning something new that I didn't know beforehand.

Do not fear educating yourself, embrace it, learning new things is a healthy endeavour. Going off blind faith and believing what someone says on the internet is true is not very healthy

With regards to the "activity" you saw on the original seismogram you posted.

Could it possibly be wind ? Caused by a storm ?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/91cca433d154.gif[/atsimg]

earthquake.usgs.gov...

The seismogram above documents a windy night at Geyser Peak station (GGP). From about 22:30 PDT on April 24 to 02:25 on April 25, the wind blew hard in coastal central California as a weather front passed through. Wind can produce low-amplitude seismic waves or "microseisms" in the earth through the action of trees, which transfer wind-generated forces into the ground through their roots. (Ocean waves also generate microseisms by the pounding of the surf.) Here, the wind-generated noise appears as an increase in the amplitude of the smallest background motions detected by this seismometer. Also, two small earthquakes are visible at 22:04 and 22:06, PDT.

The information to educate yourself instead of relying on others to possibly give you false information is out there, you just have to look for it

edit on 24/7/11 by Discotech because: Further information

Wow, can't believe someone gave you a star. That was so condescending and unnecessary. I actually am working at learning all kinds of things here. Like the fact that it could have been a thunderstorm that made those graphs react, among other things. I have not yelled the sky is falling, why are you so reactionary?

reply to post by SunnyDee


The noise at the end of the second graph you posted is wind. I've looked at the others and there's nothing local on them. You can see a big quake coming from Japan that's rolling across the graph at this moment.

If you are new to reading the graphs, much of it will freak you out. But, after you learn to read them, you learn much of the signals that show up are something other than quakes. And for some strange reason, they can lead to some fierce debates. I got into a real nasty argument over snowplows in the middle of the night at Yellowstone.

In the end I was right. There's something wrong with me. I always have to prove my point. I actually email Yellowstone and got the snowplow schedule. Man, I'm a dufuss. Why couldn't I let it go?

With all due respect, there's nothing to see on the siesmos. And unless your willing to go through the frustrating process of trying to understand them, don't bother even looking at them. They'll fool ya, and freak you out all the time. I still find myself over-reacting to phantom stuff. Oh, I forgot another horrible fight. The time somone came on the Yellowstone thread and claimed he was a geologist, and then claimed there were harmonic tremors.

Man, did that get ugly.
And I was responsible for much of the negative crossfire.

I just don't like people claiming things when they haven't done enough study to even have a basic idea. I'm specifically talking about the fellow that started this debate with the video.

I'm sorry, but the siesomgraphs he presented, show nothing but background noise, and the odd real quake. Yet, he offered it as proof.

I'll even go with the explosives dump explaination before I believed a volcano was brewing. The other fellas video may have shown a large dust devil, or a small fire. Hard to say.

It's most likely weather.
It may be an explosion/ and or small fire.
It is highly unlikely that it is a volcanic event.

reply to post by Robin Marks


Thanks for the reply. I know you well from the 2 threads you frequent, so I'd say you tried very hard to not offend me here, thanks.