Earthwatchers

[ Earthwatchers ] [ Main Menu ]


  


98400


Date: August 13, 2024 at 23:40:51
From: jordan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: 4.4 Nevada

URL: https://scedc.caltech.edu/recent/Maps/115-37.html


4.4 - local magnitude (Ml)
Time Tuesday, August 13, 2024 at 8:06:35 PM (PDT)
Wednesday, August 14, 2024 at 3:06:35 (UTC)
Distance from Pahrump, NV - 54 km (33 miles) NNE (28
degrees)
Las Vegas, NV - 67 km (41 miles) NW (318 degrees)
Summerlin South, NV - 67 km (42 miles) NNW (332 degrees)
North Las Vegas, NV - 69 km (43 miles) NW (311 degrees)
Spring Valley, NV - 72 km (45 miles) NW (324 degrees)


Responses:
[98401] [98404] [98402] [98405] [98406] [98413] [98403]


98401


Date: August 14, 2024 at 07:14:24
From: Dee, [DNS_Address]
Subject: 3.2M Salton Sea...& Swarm at Borrego Springs...Re: 4.4 Nevada

URL: https://scedc.caltech.edu/recent/Maps/116-33.html


3.2M Salton Sea

And

A swarm at Borrego Springs.


That 4.4M at Indian Springs, NV kind of makes a triangle of activity between it and the two 5M's in CA, north Los Angeles area.

What's up???

USGS will never warn us.

We are on our own.


Responses:
[98404] [98402] [98405] [98406] [98413] [98403]


98404


Date: August 14, 2024 at 09:25:56
From: Eve, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: 3.2M Salton Sea...& Swarm at Borrego Springs...Re: 4.4 Nevada

URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVkA4KdxkCg



Follow your own instinct as each of us must (regardless of outside sources imo even if USGS did warn would you trust them? it does not come across as if you would..so theres that).


Responses:
None


98402


Date: August 14, 2024 at 09:06:01
From: eaamon, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: 3.2M Salton Sea...& Swarm at Borrego Springs...Re: 4.4 Nevada


that's for sure. like they/USGS got sued by the real estate brokers when they warned
of a imminent volcanic eruption at Long Valley after the valley floor rose
3 meters just after Mt. St Helens blewup....


is it possible that the 4.4 is a distant end of the Garfield fault?


Responses:
[98405] [98406] [98413] [98403]


98405


Date: August 14, 2024 at 09:52:26
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: 3.2M Salton Sea...& Swarm at Borrego Springs...Re: 4.4 Nevada


That was in 1980, if I remember correctly. Geophysics
has come a long way since then.

USGS was going to warn, but because mammoth was a
tourist/ski town, it upset the chamber (see Dante's
peak). But, it's good to note that it did not erupt, in
the long run. It may one day.

It did convince the town to build a new road. At the
time, there was only one road in and out of town and
the magma intrusion was rising right beneath it.
(again, they used a lot of this material in Dante's
peak movie..where the volcano DID erupt).

I also remember in 1989, the USGS put out a rare
warning in August of that year. It was to last for 2
weeks and was after a 5 mag quake very near the San
Andreas.

When the quake did not happen in 2 weeks, the USGS was
mocked.

Then the quake hit in October..October 17th, to be
exact (Loma Prieta quake).

Another good example is Parkfield, which seemed to have
a 6pt quake every 22 yrs like clockwork...until the
USGS set up all kinds of labs and experiments there to
catch the next one.....and it didn't happen. Again,
they had to go back to the drawing board.

There is no secret society of those who "know" when the
next big quake is going to happen. There are
probabilities, but if someone can land a date and time
and which fault is the next, please advise. Do it three
times (criteria for a working, tested theory) and
you'll probably get a medal lol.

The fact is, the science has advanced a great deal.
That being said, they are still a long way from
reliably predicting large, damaging earthquakes.

There are consequences to issuing those kinds of
warnings, especially if the warned against earth quake
doesn't happen. The USGS can lose credibility. The
warning can affect business and property values. Crying
wolf too many times can cause the public to poopoo the
next warning.

They have to be careful. Causing panic is not good, and
causing the public not to take you serious...or doing
harm, is also not good.

If they were really sure, and suddenly had a working,
tested model and could do that, I have no doubt it
would be put into action. These are scientists who deal
with facts and data.
 
I look forward to the day when making those kind of
accurate predictions are happen. We're not there yet,
and no one's hiding anything that I have seen.

And, are you talking about the Garlock fault? It's a
little far north, and the wrong type of movement. This
is the Basin ranges where the earth is stretching. I
took a look at that focal mechanism after it happened.
It was a "normal" quake, with a slight sideways offset.
A normal quake is where a block of earth drops "down"
in relation to another block of earth. This is a
classic basin range fault type.

The Garlock is a strike-slip (one block of earth
sliding past another), and the type of movement you see
along it is different. So, it would be very unlikely at
this point with what we know.

I majored in Geology in college, but left before
actually achieving my degree (due to a family health
emergency..gpa was 3.85 when I left) . I've studied on
my own all my life as geology has always fascinated me.
My life took other turns, but it's always been a side-
hobby. I have all kinds of strange geology and
seismology books and maps in corners of my house (and a
fairly good size rock collection). I've even dealt a
bit with the USGS in my travels and studies. Full
disclosure: I'm not a professional seismologist or
geologist, but I probably know more than the basic
layman on this topic..enough to be real annoying on the
internet lol. I will, of course, always defer to
professional opinions and look forward to their
feedback. But just to clarify my background and
bonafides (and limits of those bonafides).


Responses:
[98406] [98413]


98406


Date: August 14, 2024 at 10:26:40
From: sher, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: 3.2M Salton Sea...& Swarm at Borrego Springs...Re: 4.4 Nevada


Great information! Thanks Redhart. I hope that helps Dee!


Responses:
[98413]


98413


Date: August 14, 2024 at 14:53:04
From: Dee, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: 3.2M Salton Sea...& Swarm at Borrego Springs...Re: 4.4 Nevada

URL: http://earthboppin.net/talkshop/geology/messages/98411.html


Yes, thanks Redhart.

I found this article informative (see link)......if it is accurate. He/she says lots of micro's and even 4M's, etc, do not mean a big one is coming, nor do they mitigate a big one if a big one is coming. (Paraphrasing)

So I guess there is no such thing as a fore-shock, or the ONLY way to know we had a fore-shock is AFTER we have had a big one. "Hindsight is like concrete", USGS can safely say, "Yes, that must have been a fore-shock before the big one, after everything is over with."

Kind of like really lousy weatherman, who never predict anything, they only go one air AFTERWARDS, to say: "Yes, that was a really big hurricane, after the fact sorry we didn't predict it." USGS: "Yes, we had an earthquake.....and there is a 1 in 20 chance of another quake afterward." Of course, this is after everyone already knows we had an earthquake.

Yes, the San Andreas is over due to erupt, it could erupt anytime in the next 200 years.

So nobody knows anything, so we might as well stop monitoring quake activity and just enjoy life.

Although I think Jim Berkland was ahead of the curve on this stuff, accurately predicting the Loma Prieta quake......but he deceased now. So we are back to being the last to know.


Responses:
None


98403


Date: August 14, 2024 at 09:19:31
From: Eve, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: 3.2M Salton Sea...& Swarm at Borrego Springs...Re: 4.4 Nevada

URL: https://www.usgs.gov/information-policies-and-instructions/liability


Do you have links with that info? I tried to query it online and so far came up with nothing. I may be using the wrong queries but I tried different ones. I did find the
following text on USGS at the link provided:



LIABILITY:

Neither the U.S. Government, the Department of the Interior, nor the USGS, nor any of their employees, contractors, or subcontractors, make any warranty, express or
implied, nor assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, nor
represent that its use would not infringe on privately owned rights.

Links to non-USGS sites - Links and pointers to non-USGS sites are provided for information only and do not constitute endorsement by the USGS, U.S. Department of the
Interior, or U.S. Government, of the referenced organizations, their suitability, content, products, or services, whether they are governmental, educational, or
commercial. Some of the documents on this server may contain live references (or pointers) to information created and maintained by other organizations. Please note that
the USGS does not control and cannot guarantee the relevance, timeliness, or accuracy of these outside materials.

Non-endorsement of non-USGS products and services - Hypertext links and other references to non-USGS products and services are provided for information only and do not
constitute endorsement or warranty by the USGS, U.S. Department of the Interior, or U.S. Government, as to their suitability, content, usefulness, functioning,
completeness, or accuracy.


Public domain software - Links are provided to public-domain software developed by or for the USGS. Although these programs have been used by the USGS, no warranty is made
by the USGS as to the accuracy and functioning of the programs and related program material. Distribution of these materials also does not constitute any warranty, and no
responsibility is assumed by the USGS in connection with any distribution activity.

Contact - If you have general questions about USGS websites, contact the USGS.


Responses:
None


[ Earthwatchers ] [ Main Menu ]

Generated by: TalkRec 1.17
    Last Updated: 30-Aug-2013 14:32:46, 80837 Bytes
    Author: Brian Steele