Quake Watch 2013

reply to post by PuterMan


Thanks to all who responded . . . including you, PuterMan.

Sorry you consider me a scaremonger.

I take my duty as a "watchman on the wall" maybe too seriously . . . but to do otherwise is unthinkable, to me.

I'd rather folks be nudged yet again to prepare a little better, or more, than not.

I'd rather alert a 1,000 and be wrong 999 than fail to warn and miss a big one.

Certainly you are much more knowledgeable about quakes than I'll ever be in 10 lifetimes.

However, I've studied Biblical and other prophecies for more than 45 years.

Yes, the Christian prophetic is a MESS and other stuff much WORSE.

NEVERTHELESS,

Of the following, I'm 100% certain.

This era WILL BE THE WORST THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN AND WORSE THAN IT WILL EVER KNOW AGAIN. That's just a fact. Time will prove that out in many dozens of ways. God was not whistling "Dixie" when He declared that.

I do not KNOW that these predictions about 3 Oct 2013 are greatly MORE VALID than many earlier missed ones.

I DO KNOW that I've NEVER SEEN such agreement across so many earnest folks in my 45 years of watching such things.

You assert that such is still nonsense.

I'm not at all sure you are right. I wouldn't be THAT surprised to see that you are horribly wrong. I don't have a wonderfully comfortable feeling about it all. I don't quite know what to think but I don't feel comfortably confident that nothing will happen.

I pray you are right. I pray such things will be delayed. I KNOW there is no use praying they will never happen.

It IS CERTAIN that there WILL BE quakes of that size--and likely WORSE--in this era. I assume along the Left Coast as well as other areas.

God was not whistling Dixie when HE DECLARED that at some point in the END TIMES ERA, every mountain and every island would be moved out of their places. When He declares "every," He means "every."

There are scoffers aplenty just as there was in Noah's day until the day GOD SHUT the door of the Ark. They quit scoffing as the waters rose.

There are scoffers aplenty now. They will continue to scoff for a time.

Nevertheless, the satanic global government is rising in comprehensive and devastating tyrannical power more and more overtly EXACTLY AS GOD PREDICTED IN SCRIPTURE 2,000 YEARS AND LONGER AGO--for the era in which Israel became a nation again "in a day" as it did in 1948.

It is MOST LOGICAL to believe that ALL the other Biblical END TIMES prophecies will literally come to pass exactly as written.

I do not know if this case will prove horribly true, or not.

I DO KNOW such WILL COME TO PASS. Some such predictions WILL BECOME HORRIBLY TRUE in worse detail than we can currently imagine in our armchairs.

I have to live with myself. I have to sleep nights. God declares that HE WILL HOLD TO ACCOUNT any watchman that fails to warn. Do do NOT want to be on that side of His ire.

I'll take your ire a million times gladly compared to His ire.

Nevertheless, I'm grieved that you think of me as a fear-monger. I've become much more critical and sifting of such warnings . . . partly as a function of your exhortations. I share a much smaller percentage of such than I used to.

Nevertheless, I have a duty, when I feel compelled, to speak up.

pheonix358
reply to post by BO XIAN

 

Interesting enough. At least we only have a week to wait. If it happens it may strengthen many peoples belief. the opposite is true as well. Time will tell.

I do not see these warnings as a waste of time, rather they can inform us if a source is true or otherwise.

ABSOLUTELY INDEED.

And, they can nudge procrastinators to prepare yet again . . . and others to prepare more, as well they should.

Sooner or later, such events WILL OCCUR.

reply to post by PuterMan


With all much due respect, Puterman,

I don't think the most expert quake geologist knows more than a pile of educated guesses about

all

the dynamics involved in quakes.

I just don't.

I edited the professional quake journal articles of one of the Pacific rim's top quake geologists for years.

We've studied such things with the best "science" available for many decades now . . . and mostly, as far as the unclassified "science" involved, we still don't have a reliable clue about much related to the factors involved.

There are complexities aplenty.

The best quake scientists are NOT all

that much better than reading tea leaves about pending quakes.

Soooooooooo, when the scientists get their act together in terms of predictions, THEN wail at me about the flawed and failed predictions of those with dreams and prophetic impressions.

A good natured Harumph.
.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Hopefully once the 3rd of Oct passes without any such incredible massive quake(s), you'll hopefully be able to relax some, and readjust your views of these sort of over the top type of predictions.

reply to post by PuterMan

I picked 1700km as a size that would encompass the whole of Peru, which in hindsight was a bit much, the country is 2300km end to end. However at the back of my mind were my own observations that the big quakes behind the Andes ie on the East side did not usually have aftershocks, and the list (and my map) confirms this.
The area is like the Back Arc Basin west of of Fiji/Tonga/Kermadecs where the same scenario happens, deep quakes with no or few aftershocks.
What is different about this one was it was relatively shallow and on the edge of the sub-duction zone.

You are correct about the Fault length, and I selected 1 degree of distance from the epi-centre as the area of aftershock activity. My observations again show that most aftershock sequences fizzle out after 2 months, so I have used that time span for each major event. Some quakes might have longer aftershock time spans and the 8's may extend more than 1 degree distance, but the only way to find out is to break the list down, which I will have a crack at.
Watch this space. But as usual with such things, something else will happen while I'm doing that and I'll probably never finish it ( it took me nearly 2 years to get around to doing L'Aquilla, and the Christchurch one nearly 3 years as it just kept going on and on, still haven't redone Dusky Sound 2009 revised data yet, and the Van, Turkey quake is long overdue for a page)

reply to post by SpaceJockey1


I pray so.

However, I don't know what "over the top" means in this era any more.

The Constitution is increasingly shredded week by week if not day by day. . . . and that's just one issue among a lot of issues.

The New Madrid IS a real issue regardless of how one rates it. It could have implications all the way up into New England.

Cascadia IS a real issue regardless of the timing. Ditto San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, . . . and a list of volcanoes.

Taiwan and Japan could be in for some more very interesting rides. The same for Kunming and other areas of China.

The same for the Middle East--particularly Istanbul . . . the horn of Africa . . .

New Zealand is far from home safe.

I don't think PEACE AND REST in this era have anything to do with events like quakes. There are too many awesome [I rarely use that word] potentialities on too many fronts. imho, the ONLY Peace and Rest in this era are in a RELATIONSHIP with God and a growing confidence in His care regardless of what happens to one's mortal body...

Bo, lets hope its a mistake in magnitude passed down through many translators over time, even a 7 there is bad enough.
There is a big catamaran going cheap down at the Americas Cup Centre in SF right now for only $120million, only 2 months on the clock, can do 0-45 knots in 30 seconds!, one way to get out of Dodge in a hurry!

reply to post by muzzy


Thanks for your kind reply.

I have no hope in mistranslations. The text is shockingly solid as extensive research has documented over and over.

I do have hope in prayer and in God's mercy.

However . . . at some point, it is clear that no amount of prayer will avail and that delays will no longer offer hope.

Wishful thinking about living in another era will not work. LOL.

Dealing with reality is crucial for all of us.

What reality is . . . . is a whole 'nother issue. LOL.

Have often wondered how well a very high tech, very large [ferro cement?] self-righting, oblate spheroid might fair on the high seas in coming traumas. imho, the monster waves will also be a problem. I realize Tsunami's are not a problem except on the shores. I do believe there will be an abundance of other kinds of unprecedented high waves, however. LOL.

I wish the size of the coming quakes had a delimiter on them . . . I don't know of one. I ASSUME that a magnitude 20 is impossible. At some point physics has limits, imho. But I don't know what they are in terms of POSSIBILITY. Do you have confidence that you really do?

Many have speculated that the predicted "mountain cast into the sea" [large meteor evidently] will set off massive unprecedented quakes around the world.

IIRC, the Sumatra quake rang around the world in several reverberations, right?

I'm skeptical that a purported pole shift would do it. What do you think about that?

I'm skeptical that a quake/volcanic fostered landslide in the Canary Islands would do it. I don't know how high a Tsunami it would generate but I don't see it generating big quakes.

I don't know what to make of Stan Deyo's expanding earth hypothesis. He's a smart man. Certainly the smartest can still be wrong.

We all "see through the glass darkly."

Blessings,

A thought to add to the musings.

If any quake fault goes off with a 9+ and zones close by are at high to extreme pressures, ie, ready (geologically speaking) to pop, then one quake could flow and cause the others. It would be a cascade of quakes.

To a certain extent I agree with BoXian, we really know diddly squat! Hell man, we can not even use science to predict a quake +/- a month, year or decade. Our knowledge is like that of a two year old.

That we have not seen this happen is irreverent. Our life times and our collective records and musings are just silly short term as far as mother earth is concerned.

P

reply to post by BO XIAN


Dear Bo, please do not be offended if I say that whilst I respect your or any person's religion and the tenets of their beliefs, that link you provided is simply poppycock.

Whilst it is possible a Mag 9.0 to 9.2 could hit Cascadia at a time in the geologically relatively imminent future the possibility of a Mag 9.7 in or off California in the next week is not only preposterous it is impossible. That would require a rupture length of thousands (plural) of kilometres.

The 1906 earthquake ruptured the northernmost 296 miles (477 km) of the San Andreas Fault between San Juan Bautista and Cape Mendocino. By comparison, the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake had a rupture length of only 25 miles. The San Andreas fault today has locked and creeping segments along its approximately 800 mile (1300 km) length in California. The 1906 earthquake ruptured all locked segments of the fault in northern California.

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Since not all the segments are locked the chances of a full 1300 km rupture are so small as to be infinitessimal and let us not forget that the magnitude of moment of an earthquake depends on the surface area of the ruture thus a deep rupture will have less surface displacement than a very shallow rupture.

To get a mag 9.7 the approximate fault rupture area would be 500,000 sq km. Even with the height/depth dimension of the rupture at 200 km(!) would require a rupture length 0f 2500 km - nearly twice the available length. The time taken to rupture would be 13.8 minutes and the displacement of the rupture approximately 125 metres.

To achive a rupture that fitted into the 1300 km of the San Andreas, the rupture vertical (or oblique) dimension would have to be 400 km. I do not believe it is possible to achieve that.

For a Mag 9 to rupture the full length of the San Andreas would require a vertical rupture area of 75 km, and again in a non Wadati zone I doubt that is possible.

Having said that I am not a geologist/seismologist so I could be wrong.

reply to post by BO XIAN

Soooooooooo, when the scientists get their act together in terms of predictions, THEN wail at me about the flawed and failed predictions of those with dreams and prophetic impressions.

See my post above which in relation to a 9.7 answers this point BUT I agree with you - the scientists know so very little about Mother Earth.

reply to post by BO XIAN


I realise I am answering questions you posed to Muzzy but......

I wish the size of the coming quakes had a delimiter on them . . . I don't know of one. I ASSUME that a magnitude 20 is impossible. At some point physics has limits, imho. But I don't know what they are in terms of POSSIBILITY. Do you have confidence that you really do?

In practical terms a Magnitude 10.7 with a rupture height of 125 km would encircle the earth (circumference 40,000 km). Frankly not only is that the maximum limit but is pretty much impossible anyway.

I think it would be reasonable to assume that the absolute maximum earthquake possible on this planet is a Mag 10 which is about 4 times stronger than the biggest we have documented.

IIRC, the Sumatra quake rang around the world in several reverberations, right?

All great earthquakes ring the world several times before dissipating.

I'm skeptical that a purported pole shift would do it. What do you think about that?

The pole is always shifting. The nonsensical idea that the whole crust could slip round by 30 degress is so absurd as the be completely unbelievable.

I'm skeptical that a quake/volcanic fostered landslide in the Canary Islands would do it. I don't know how high a Tsunami it would generate but I don't see it generating big quakes.

About 1 to 3 metres on the Eastern seaboard of the US.

I don't know what to make of Stan Deyo's expanding earth hypothesis.

Along with EMST it makes far more sense that plate tectonics.

reply to post by pheonix358

That we have not seen this happen is irreverent. Our life times and our collective records and musings are just silly short term as far as mother earth is concerned.

And possibly irrelevant as well? (Highlighting above by me)

Yup we know diddly squat and have been around for about a second of so in the Earth's day.

reply to post by PuterMan


Thanks for the 10.7 maximum in your view. I hope you are right.

Interesting about Stan Deyo's expanding earth hypothesis.

Yeah, I think the Canary Islands thing is . . . interesting but . . . probably more full of "know-it-alls" than real facts . . . beforehand. LOL.

I do think it will likely be more devastating than folks believe. And, most of me believes we will live to see it lit off.

I understand there have been larger landslides off the Hawaiian islands??? Sounds like that could be troublesome . . . particularly with the contention by some that the islands are eroding or losing volume from within somehow . . . vulnerable to collapsing massively. Is that solid science?.


Thanks for your kind words. However, I have a ton of affection for you and you have no capacity to lessen that. So there. LOL.

reply to post by pheonix358


Thanks for your kind words.

I had not thought of the obvious about a cascade of quakes as the stresses were transferred to nearby fault systems.

I think that's an excellent and sobering point.

reply to post by PuterMan


An interesting analysis:

california-earthquake.net...

Major Earthquake Prediction for 2013-2014-2015-2016


Global Weather Oscillations Inc. (GWO), was formed in 1992 with the specific understanding that Earth has natural rhythms and strong cyclical natural forces that control much of the global cooling and global warming cycles of climate change, carbon dioxide cycles, annual variations in hurricane activity and seasonal hurricane paths, cyclical occurrences of the El Nino and La Nina, cyclical historical floods such as the 2011 Mississippi River flood, and earthquakes.

What is interresting, are the major earthquake predictions they made for the next years 2013,2014,2015 and 2016!



We read on their site: “In July of 2012, California will enter a three year window for PFM induced increased earthquake activity. The window is centered on the period December 2013 to March 2014.

There is an overall 90% risk for a major to strong earthquake (6.4 to 8 magnitude) during this period, a 75% risk for a major (7 to 8 magnitude) earthquake, and a 40% risk for a severe 7.5 to 8 magnitude earthquake.

Hmmmm

Not sure what to make of this one but it seems to go at it by a different sort of tangible analysis:

32664734-earthquake-prediction-for-september-2013

.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Bryant and Young 1992 "Catastrophic wave erosion on the southeastern coast of Australia: Impact of the Lanai tsunamis ca. 105 ka?" seeks to suggest:

Because this wave train swept up to an elevation of about 375 m on the island of Lanai (Moore and Moore, 1984; Moore et al., 1989), it must have had a widespread impact on Pacific shorelines. However, no evidence for its long-distance effects has been reported.

My first observation is that if indeed there was such a widespread area of impact, yet no reporting of it, then possibly the impact did not occur. There is no good justification for stating that it MUST have had a widespread impact without a considerable amount of information other than just the height on Lanai.

Since the starting point on the journey is Hawaii it makes sense to look at the Lanai tsunami first. I came across a publication by Felton,E.A.; Crook,K.A.W.; and Keating,B.H.

The Hulopoe Gravel, Lanai, Hawaii: New Sedimentological Data and their Bearing on the ``Giant Wave'' (Mega-Tsunami) Emplacement Hypothesis

Recognition that many oceanic islands are shaped by giant landslides has highlighted claims that the Hulopoe Gravel on south Lanai, Hawaii, was deposited by giant waves (mega-tsunami) generated by such a landslide. This interpretation is controversial. Resolution of the controversy has global implications because mass wasting of oceanic islands has been a common process for as long as hot spot volcanism has affected the ocean basins. Thus, if mega-tsunami are attendant upon the mass wasting process, their effect on earth surface processes should be discernible for much of geological time and may be comparable to that resulting from bolide impacts that form astroblemes.Detailed facies analysis of the pebble, cobble and boulder gravels that form the Hulopoe Gravel type section shows that the gravels are composed predominantly of basalt clasts with appreciable amounts of limestone clasts in 8 of the 14 beds present. Deposition was not continuous: eight disconformities are recognized in the 9.2 m type section, three of which are associated with truncated paleosols. The Hulopoe Gravel was not deposited by a single tsunami at 105 ka, as has been proposed. One bed is clearly an alluvial deposit. The origins of others are unclear but the facies data do not exclude tsunami as one of the processes that deposited individual beds within the Hulopoe Gravel, either above or below sea level.

This would seem to present a problem for the Bryant and Young paper which is dependent basically on there being a single deposition from a large tsunami.

An alternative version of the above by the same authors penned for the 1999 Tsunami Symposium in Hawaii gives a better understanding:

DID A ``GIANT WAVE'' STRIKE LANAI?
Barbara H. Keating and E. A. Felton
HIGP - University of Hawaii
Honolulu, Hawaii USA

Enigmatic geological features described from south Lanai, including assemblages of marine faunas, apparently in situ, at elevations of up to 329 meters, and the occurrence of gravel deposits containing coral clasts dated at 101-115 Ka have been attributed to a ``Giant Wave'' generated by a large submarine landslide off Hawaii approximately 105,000 years ago (Moore and Moore, 1984, 1988). It has also been suggested that this wave traveled across the Pacific Ocean and impacted the coast of southeastern Australia. the ``Lanai tsunami'' runup is an order of magnitude greater than tsunami runups in historic times. It is critical to assessments of tsunami risk to verify that such a wave did indeed occur.
Our review of evidence cited in support of the giant wave hypothesis, including ongoing field studies, leads us to question the validity of the hypothesis.
An examination of gravel stratigraphy at the type section has identified and characterized a complex sequence consisting of 15 beds, rather than 6 beds of alternating coral-rich and coral-poor basalt illustrated by Moore and Moore (1988), and interpreted by them to reflect the run-up and seaward return flow of each of three waves in a tsunami wave train. Our studies also show that deposition of the gravel sequence was punctuated by at least three periods of subaerial exposure of sufficient duration to allow soil formation, and several other erosional breaks. This is inconsistent with a wholly tsunamigenic origion for the deposit.
Other observational evidence cited in support of the giant wave hypothesis includes soil stripping from the land surface up to 375 meters, deposition of a continuous blanket of gravel (the Hulopoe Gravel) up the slopes of Lanai to 329 meters, and thinning and fining of this gravel landwards, could not be verified in the field.
A single giant wave event was suggested by Moore and Moore (1984, 1988) based on radiometric dating of a limited number of coral clasts from two locations, which yielded a narrow range of dates. Larger numbers of recently reported dates tend to cluster around 220 and 120 thousand years, periods of former high sea level stands. While these dates record ages of material in the deposits, they do not represent depositional age(s). Without stratigraphic control of sampling, there can be no assessment of whether dated material is eroded and re-deposited.

We suggest that the Hulopoe Gravel is a product of normal events and processes occurring on a rocky, high-energy coast of a tropical oceanic island.
In the other camp we find “Support for the Giant Wave (Mega-Tsunami) Hypothesis: Evidence From Submerged Terraces off Lanai, Hawaii.

Webster, J. M., Clague, D. A. and Braga, J.

I copied this across from an unpublished post on the blog as I have been trying to get round to finishing it since June 2012 !!!

I have looked at all the angle involved in such a wave train striking such a tiny portion of the Australian coast and I personally cannot see any way that this can have occurred, but I need to put my findings into a better presented format than this.

Since this is one of the sources that have been quoted as 'evidence' of the effects of a Canaries mega tsunami, and since other people as well as myself find it to possibly be erroneous, it is kind of a nail in the disaster scenario of a Canaries landslide.

I also have to trot out my standard quotes in response to a Cumbre Veija collapse.

Evaluation Of The Threat Of Mega Tsunami Generation From Postulated Massive Slope Failures Of Island Volcanoes On La Palma, Canary Islands, And On The Island Of Hawaii

The upper limit of his modeling study shows that the east coast of the U.S. and the Caribbean would receive waves less than 3 meters high. The European and African coasts would have waves less than 10 meters high. However, full Navier-Stokes modeling of the same La Palma failure, brings the maximum expected tsunami wave amplitude off the U.S. east coast to about one meter.

10 metres is not insubstantial, but is not a disaster level event.

Sorry, I am just so non-apocalyptic!

Quake swarm at Tjörnes Fracture Zone in Iceland is still ongoing and not showing any signs of calming down. Approx 119 quakes in last 48 hours.



Time&Magnitude graph


en.vedur.is...

reply to post by BO XIAN

Global Weather Oscillations Inc. (GWO), was formed in 1992 with the specific understanding that Earth has natural rhythms and strong cyclical natural forces that control much of the global cooling and global warming cycles of climate change, carbon dioxide cycles, annual variations in hurricane activity and seasonal hurricane paths, cyclical occurrences of the El Nino and La Nina, cyclical historical floods such as the 2011 Mississippi River flood, and earthquakes.

First, the site does not suggest anything larger than Mag 8 and from my point of view this fits in with what I consider to be likely.

Second, with regard to above, yes they are correct but they have missed the point that all of this variability is controlled by the jet stream which in it's turn is controlled by the emanations from the Sun (or lack of them) (Edit to note: They do not ignore then Sun but in my opinion only relate to it's atmospheric warming capabilites and nothing else)

Whilst I can't quite put my finger on it yet there does seem to be a 9 and a 55 (or 56) year cycle of earthquakes that ties in with the Sun. All of last year I stated that we have just crossed the top of one such cycle and whilst there might be a mag 8.5 - which there was (2) - that we would not see another mag 9 until the next cycle top except that the determination of such depends not only on the Solar cycles but on the solar system barycentre and many other astronomical calculations that are way beyond my mathematical capabilities.

Those in the know however suggest that we are indeed headed to a very low cycle - a Maunder type minimum - with very cold winters akin to the period around 1815. Now that being the case, bearing in mind the events of 1811/12 is there another cycle? Yes there is - in fact there are so many that they are beyond my capacity to take in at once.

If we do not get a parting shot from cycle top of a 9+ in Cascadia then my opinion is that we will not see another until around 2060 or so, by the which time the world will be in a warming state again.

What annoys me more than anything else in the whole world is that I probably won't be around to see. That would make me 112 and whilst I have always said I will live to 120 I am not convinced that sheer determination alone can achieve that!

reply to post by BO XIAN

Nevertheless, I'm grieved that you think of me as a fear-monger.

The pace was too fast and I missed this one.

Not you my friend, you were the messenger and I was not directing my comments towards you in any way.