9.5 QUAKE hits Siberia!?! WTH? Did I miss Something? 6.7 Upgraded to 9.5!

Hum...Can you all read my post please?This is the real explanation for this number of 9.5.....Thank you...

reply to post by AllUrChips


In Soviet Russia...earthquake rates you!

No way it was 9.5!

They just have a case of "Earthquake Envy"
Propaganda, plain and simple.

Originally posted by Bennogob
Hum...Can you all read my post please?This is the real explanation for this number of 9.5.....Thank you...

Went back and read it...you got a Star Bubba! TY for letting us know they use a different scale for measuring...

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Thanks for that site, I will bookmark it.

Originally posted by Bennogob
Hum...Can you all read my post please?This is the real explanation for this number of 9.5.....Thank you...

Thanks for the clarification, someone should urge RT to clarify which scale is being used in the news report, because they only say 9.5

reply to post by Destinyone


At least!!!!Thank you for the star ^^ See you all

reply to post by Bennogob


Thank you for clarifying that!!!! Star for you my friend. Still, would like RT to clarify the scale they use. Many ups

Ok so it may only be a 6.6 or there abouts. But I just came across this. Interesting. Maybe our super sluths can dig up some more.
mitchbattros.wordpress.com...

I do have a question though: With this differnet scale in play, does that mean the original quake that was called a 6.7, was only a 3.4 before the upgrade?

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
You know, kind of like FoxNews for Russia.

RT and Fox are not alike. RT is a State run news organisation. RT is an instrument of self promotion and Russian foreign policy. Fox is a private company and panders to an audience. Whether you like it or not, they are not the same.

To OP.

A 9.5 quake would make it the biggest - or one of the biggest - recorded earthquakes. Methinks a typo / shoddy reporting / faulty instruments. If it was true it would be more widely reported.

Edit - Just to say I have just read Bennybob's explanation which has thrown light into this darkened room.

Regards

reply to post by paraphi


Thats why I was proposing the nuke correlation or as the post above said, maybe it was where the satellite fell?
I dont know not sure how that typo could happen, but I agree, it would be WIDELY reported news. Thats why I want to get to the bottom of this

This is the part of the site the OP was referring to: rt.com...

The magnitude of the quake that struck south-eastern Siberia late on Tuesday has been raised to 9.5, according to Russia’s emergencies minister Sergey Shoigu. The quake is the strongest ever to be detected in the region he said. There have been no reports of damage or casualties since the tremor - initially reported as 6.7 on the Richter scale - struck a sparsely populated area in the Republic of Tyva near the Russian-Mongolian border. However Shoigu expressed doubts that there has been no damage at all and has ordered the authorities to stay on the alert for any aftershocks that may follow.

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
You know, kind of like FoxNews for Russia.

RT and Fox are not alike. RT is a State run news organisation. RT is an instrument of self promotion and Russian foreign policy. Fox is a private company and panders to an audience. Whether you like it or not, they are not the same.

You are right and also wrong.

Fox News is also an instrument of self promotion and US foreign policy.

To a lesser degree all major news networks and cable news broadcasters are, in the USA.

Fox is just way better at it, and at convincing the masses that they are not.

reply to post by paraphi

TextEdit - Just to say I have just read Bennybob's explanation which has thrown light into this darkened room.

So then what about my question to that? Does that mean the originally reported quake was only a 3.4 then?

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by AllUrChips

Yes, I provided a link, it was RT.

Yes I see you edited in a link, but there is nothing on the main page (your link) about this.

Have a link to the actual article? I can't seem to find it.

edit on 27-12-2011 by Fractured.Facade because: (no reason given)

rt.com...

reply to post by Bennogob


Good point. So it is reporting the equivalent of MMS, the trouble is that it does not specify that.

However it is very obvious that it was not a MAGNITUDE 9.5.

By the way USGS reported 6.6 Mw NOT Mercalli - very different as you have pointed out.

Thanks for the explanation however. Not a scale I have come across.

By the way USGS are showing Mercalli VII

earthquake.usgs.gov...

From the USGS:

Magnitude 6.6
Date-Time Tuesday, December 27, 2011 at 15:21:56 UTC
Tuesday, December 27, 2011 at 10:21:56 PM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 51.858°N, 95.825°E
Depth 6.9 km (4.3 miles)
Region SOUTHWESTERN SIBERIA, RUSSIA
Distances 96 km (59 miles) E of Kyzyl, Russia
336 km (208 miles) NE of Ulaangom, Mongolia
361 km (224 miles) ESE of Abakan, Russia
3744 km (2326 miles) ENE of MOSCOW, Russia

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 14.9 km (9.3 miles); depth +/- 6.8 km (4.2 miles)
Parameters NST=227, Nph=227, Dmin=541 km, Rmss=0.82 sec, Gp= 36°,
M-type=teleseismic moment magnitude (Mw), Version=7
Source Magnitude: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Location: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)

Event ID usc0007dax

source


I have found this to normally be the most reliable site. I believe this began as a 6.4-6.6 and has stayed in that range.

This is a large quake, especially at that depth. However, compared to a 9.5 is nothing. The explanation of the russian scale is a good one but certainly doesn't excuse the very misleading story linked in your OP. That kind of misrepresntation of this quake is just terrible. (ETA: I am referring to the news site, not your OP! )

I hope that no one was affected as originally reported....much smaller quakes have caused deaths.

If this were anywhere near a 9.5, the earth would be ringing. The 6.6 showed up on the seismos in Yellowstone (just as an example) so that gives you an idea of the power involved. No, it wasn't 'felt', the waves traveled through the earth much like ripples on a lake. If you want an idea at the massive power at play, go look over the threads on the recent 9.1 Japan quake. There are many examples there of how it looked around the world!

reply to post by Bennogob


So this was the update on your link, but they just say "they dont believe it"

TextUpdate 28/12 – 00:13 UTC : RT (English broadcasting) is reporting that Mr. Shoigu has said that the magnitude was raised to 9.5. We do not believe this report. The Minister mentioned the number as MSK (almost equivalent to MMI and on a scale from 0-12). A 9.5 magnitude at this shallow depth would have been totally destructive and damaging far beyond the epicenter. Kyzul suffered light to moderate shaking. As a result there might be some cracks in houses, but Kyzil (said to be at ca 100 km from the epicenter) had no severe damage or devastation.

From what I understand of the area in which it hit, that is a major junction between the North American plate and the Eurasian plate. Alaska has been seeing a lot of increased activity between 3.5-5.0 recently, all the way out the Aleutian chain, but there hasn't been a lot of corresponding activity where the two plates converge in inland Siberia. That area was due for a big one.

That being said, I do not believe that Russia has a network of seismographs anywhere near as robust as the network we have here in the US. Any accurate readings would have to be the result of inference based on seismographic data from other distant locations.

With a 10 km depth, that's a pretty shallow quake. There would be major damage close to it, but it wouldn't necessarily carry all that far... unless it popped in the middle of semi-contiguous bedrock region (like the Virginia quake, earlier this year, which travelled up the appalacians). Strength isn't the determination for distance of travel. Deeper quakes are, in general, felt less but travel farther. Shallower quakes are, in general, felt more but travel less.

All of this being shared, I should note that big quakes in that area are, to the best of anyone's knowledge, fairly rare. I would suggest that it is a harbinger for a series of larger quakes along the Juan de Fuca plate, the Aleutian chain, and across the western coast.

Originally posted by AllUrChips
reply to post by paraphi

 

Thats why I was proposing the nuke correlation or as the post above said, maybe it was where the satellite fell?
I dont know not sure how that typo could happen, but I agree, it would be WIDELY reported news. Thats why I want to get to the bottom of this

I would doubt that this was a nuke test or a satellite impact. While such events could be registered on seismographs, their signatures are drasticly different. Instead of a steady pulse of movement, you would get a single spike and then nothing. Seismologists note this and delete all but bona-fide EQ's.