Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Geological rumbling puzzle.
#1
https://relay.nationalgeographic.com/proxy/distribution/public/amp/science/2018/11/strange-earthquake-waves-rippled-around-world-earth-geology?__twitter_impression=true
Reply
#2
The emerging volcano sounds like a really good reason to move.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#3
An armchair guru on a 'sciency' forum suggested it may be a collapsing dome down deep. ...aaaannnd I have no idea if that's a good or bad thing, but I'd definitely be packing if I lived around there.

I've just spent half an hour looking at that island on Google Earth and there's worse places to live, but it's very 'volcanic' looking. Kiwis would be at home there. The little island near Mayotte has an international airport and a crater lake!
Reply
#4
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46403405

So it begins.  Cascadia is next!  Bring it on!!11

I want to see it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1700_Cascadia_earthquake



Go figure-- Japan in 2011, Anchorage in 2018, Pacific Northwest is next and it will be ugly. Then Californicate and then down the coast, across the Pacific and then.... You guys.


Get your shit together!!11Eleventy Smile
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#5
OZ won't be bothered too much, no major fault lines, we're sitting safely in the middle of the plate, like an oyster and caviar cracker in a fancy restaurant.
Kiwis will be nervous though, they haven't finished reconstructing Christchurch yet last I heard.

Hearing about the Anchorage shake on the news, not too bad by their standards?
Reply
#6
Funny how there is no safe place.
At best, we get to choose the threats.

I think I like floods more than fires. Though floods likely do more damage.

The New Madrid fault gave the U.S. perhaps it strongest quake. But there were no sky-scrapers when it happened. Damage was minimal...even though it reversed the flow of the Mississippi River and created a lake in Western KY and TN (Reelfoot Lake) which is a very wild place of swamps and wildlife. Kind-of cool when a natural disaster brings a gift.
Reply
#7
I am so relieved that someone else knows about the New Madrid fault! Thank you Stank!!11 If that fucker breaks loose again, it'll be a thing that Faux News and CNN won't be able to cover because all their infrastructure will be kaput.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Madrid_Seismic_Zone

I think Cascadia is the next big one though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascadia_subduction_zone

We're overdue.

Then there is this fucking thing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowstone_Caldera

That's an extinction level event just waiting to happen.

Then, just for fun, there's this:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059065/
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#8
(11-30-2018, 09:15 PM)sparks Wrote:  Go figure-- Japan in 2011, Anchorage in 2018, Pacific Northwest is next and it will be ugly.  Then Californicate and then down the coast, across the Pacific and then....  You guys.  

Earthquake, schmearthquake.

You need to start embracing your inner seismology and just ignore all that shit. Heck, we built our capital city on land that was largely moved up by an earthquake. What's the worst that could happen - it's all going to sink again? (yes)

Humans have an impeccable history of building major cities in the worst-possible places.

One thing I think about is that it's well-known that changing the weight of water in an area can cause earthquakes, and the additional weight of water released by climate change is changing the shape of the sea floor, then wouldn't it be expected that climate change is actually causing earthquakes?

Given the increase in earthquake frequency this century, it seems fairly logical to me.

(11-30-2018, 11:32 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  OZ won't be bothered too much, no major fault lines, we're sitting safely in the middle of the plate, like an oyster and caviar cracker in a fancy restaurant.  

Until the great central aquifer dries up and the coastal cities fall into the hole.

(11-30-2018, 11:32 PM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  Kiwis will be nervous though, they haven't finished reconstructing Christchurch yet last I heard.

Will never be finished. What the earthquake couldn't accomplish, bureaucracy can.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#9
There's some active volcanoes in Antarctica, too.

A big eruption there could accelerate ice-melt or shake huge chunks loose.

what fun.
Reply
#10
There's always been volcanoes in Antarctica, what's new?
Surely you're not suggesting that volcanoes melting the ice could contribute to rising ocean levels independent of AGW??   You heretic!  Don't you know that only humans are permitted to be blamed for CC disasters?   tch.

(12-01-2018, 12:29 PM)The Atheist Wrote:  One thing I think about is that it's well-known that changing the weight of water in an area can cause earthquakes, and the additional weight of water released by climate change is changing the shape of the sea floor, then wouldn't it be expected that climate change is actually causing earthquakes?

Given the increase in earthquake frequency this century, it seems fairly logical to me.

Doesn't seem all that logical to me, if that's okay?

I'm just guessing here that for e.g. the weight of NYC would trump the weight of a lake that size and dimension.
Bricks and concrete tend to sink in water so taking a stab that a cubic metre of concrete weighs more than a cubic meter of water.
...checked and Google agrees, concrete 2400KG per cubic meter,  .... water 1000kg

So why isn't NYC and London and any town big enough to merit a town hall causing earthquakes?

Funnily enough there was a bit of a joke going around that extra funding was on offer for any 'scientist' who could link CC to earthquakes.  The 'disaster porn' industry are desperate to find some traction in harnessing the public panic about earthquakes to enhance their alarmist campaign.  

That link you posted TA, it's a bit dodgy isn't it?  A 'consensus' of one geologist?  You can do better than that old mate.  Imagine what you'd say to me if I quoted one expert's opinion that dissented with the 'science'.   Kapowie! [Image: yellow-laughing-smiley-emoticon.gif]

We had a consensus of one "climatologist" who convinced the bloody country that it would never rain again and cost us billions building desal plants that have never been used due to the increased frequency of floods on the coast since they were built .. and paid for!.  

The idiot is still wandering in the wilderness pointing at the normal drought and bushfire cycles as 'proof' of his theory.  People pray for his appearance in the inland regions as its an almost sure fire sign that it's going to rain wherever the moron goes.  
Maybe he's just unlucky?  or then again he could be a complete 'scientific' charlatan.

I don't think too many don't believe the climate is changing at all, just that it isn't doing it on a straight upward smooth track..  It's doing what it's always done, gotten eratic and concealed the slow steady overall change beneath the peaks and troughs of short term 'events'.

Personally I think its equally risky to claim a heatwave as proof where all gonna burn as to claim that a blizzard heralds the coming ice-age.

I think we all need to take a deep breath and chill a little.  Is CC 'proof finding' a competition or something?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)