| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Geology - Earthquakes Forum » Peru 7.9
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| Skywise |
 Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 12:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Damon Hill |
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 12:57 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Skywise <into@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote in
news:13c7mjhapqu0if6@corp.supernews.com:
Quote: What? No mention of the Peru quake yet? Guess it's time to
bring this group back to life.
We were waiting for Weatherleawyer's post-diction. Someone
always claims to have predicted these things after the fact.
--Damon, who never felt a thing |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| David Oberman |
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Skywise <into@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:
Was this a section of the subduction zone that unzipped in 1960?
____
When Herr Composer wants to bang his gong,
he will bang his gong, & God help if we balk.
-- Carl Maria von Weber, 1825 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Tom Kerr |
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <13c7mjhapqu0if6@corp.supernews.com>, Skywise <into@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:
I don't know about other places, but no warnings or watches were posted
for Hawaii; there was an advisory though. Despite that, it appears some
panic occured. This is hearsay but I think some radio stations actually
implied there was a watch or warning and of course the rumours spread.
The county of Hawaii civil defense message that went out at around 15:30
HST actually said there was no tsunami but that unfounded rumours were
going around and that people should only rely on official information. I
think this stemmed from
www.prh.noaa.gov/ptwc/messages/hawaii/2007/hawaii.2007.08.16.002055.txt
which got people excited. I wonder if the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center
will reconsider these messages after today. I'm not sure what the best
option is, but I also think people were on edge - while waiting for
Hurricane Flossie we had a 5.4 EQ which felt rather large, especially
where I am - bigger than the 6.7 last year. I think everyone here was
somewhat stressed! It's certainly been in interesting 2 or 3 days here.
Just as a by-thought, the civil defense agency were quoting the Richter
scale for the EQ. I don't know if that was because that was what they were
told or if they assumed that was the scale being used.
It looks bad for those affected in Peru, the death toll is rising and my
thoughts are with them. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Belba Grubb |
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Aug 16, 1:42 am, David Oberman <doberman@etc.> wrote:
Quote: Was this a section of the subduction zone that unzipped in 1960?
I don't know, but Rafael Peralta (about whom I know nothing other than
that he is a Chilean who blogs about Nazca Plate seismicity, appears
to be strongly interested in prediction, and introduced himself in one
of the Aysen threads a few months ago) says there were two notable
quakes, 6.7 and 6.0 magnitude, at roughly the same point last October
20th and 26th, 2006: http://sismofuturo.blogspot.com/2007/08/sismo-mayor-magnitud-75-mw-en-la-costa.html
(in Spanish).
Also, yesterday's event has been upgraded to an 8.0.
Barb
----------
Nature is the most thrifty thing in the world; she never wastes
anything; she undergoes change, but there's no annihilation - the
essence remains.
- T. Binney |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer |
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:28 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Aug 16, 6:57 am, Damon Hill <damon16...@comcast.not> wrote:
Quote: Skywise <i...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote innews:13c7mjhapqu0if6@corp.supernews.com:
What? No mention of the Peru quake yet? Guess it's time to
bring this group back to life.
We were waiting for Weatherleawyer's post-diction. Someone
always claims to have predicted these things after the fact.
So kind. I always get a suitable glitch in my computer to help me out
on these occasions.
Right then.
The fat lady is on stage so get ready for the finale. You will know
when this disastrous spate of spells is over when the forest fires get
rained on and when the flooded fields get a warm, sunny and windy
spell.
But you didn't really need me to point that out to you, did you, you
moron. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Skywise |
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:46 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
thk_797@yahoo.com (Tom Kerr) wrote in
news:46c401dd$0$26716$ed962e05@news.felx.com:
Quote: In article <13c7mjhapqu0if6@corp.supernews.com>, Skywise
into@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote:
What? No mention of the Peru quake yet? Guess it's time to bring
this group back to life.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/us2007gbcv.php
For a while there were tsunami warnigns and watches, but they have
all been cancelled.
http://www.prh.noaa.gov/pr/ptwc/
I don't know about other places, but no warnings or watches were posted
for Hawaii; there was an advisory though. Despite that, it appears some
panic occured. This is hearsay but I think some radio stations actually
implied there was a watch or warning and of course the rumours spread.
Snipola
You are correct that Hawaii only had advisories.
As for the panic, that will happen no matter what. It the amount
of panic that would be of concern. If it wasn't much, that is,
simply attributable to idiot syndrome, I don't see a need to
change anything. There's always going to be some idiots.
Quote: Just as a by-thought, the civil defense agency were quoting the Richter
scale for the EQ. I don't know if that was because that was what they
were told or if they assumed that was the scale being used.
Although many would rail against the use of the term, and I
used to, Susan Hough made an interesting observation about
the use of the term. Even though the actual scales used today
are not the Richter Scale, they are calibrated to be parallel
to Richter's scale. So in that sense, it could be considered
correct to say the quake was _equivilant_ to an 8.0 on the
Richter Scale.
Quote: It looks bad for those affected in Peru, the death toll is rising and my
thoughts are with them.
That's the problem with an interest like this. We get all excited
about the massive amount of energies the Earth can unleash and the
information it provides, yet at the same time we have the sorrow
of death and destruction.
Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Belba Grubb |
| Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:09 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Aug 16, 5:28 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: Right then.
The fat lady is on stage so get ready for the finale. You will know
when this disastrous spate of spells is over when the forest fires get
rained on and when the flooded fields get a warm, sunny and windy
spell.
I guess we're in the clear then - the burning rain forest at Kilauea
got soaked by Flossie, and here I sit on warm, sunny Mississippi Delta
earth, amid corn and cotton fields, that 80 years ago were all covered
by 10 feet of water (reference: http://www.rms.com/Publications/1927_MississippiFlood.pdf
). (The wind happens every afternoon due to convection brought about
by the daily 100-plus degree weather lately.)
Cue Miz Smith, and hit it!:
http://www.god-bless-america-lyrics.com/katesmith1.wav
Barb
----------
"In a cavern, in a canyon, Excavating for a mine Dwelt a miner, Forty-
niner, And his daughter, Clementine..."
-- Percy Montrose |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Aidan Karley |
| Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 4:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <j9s7c3d1bkq7vb5k231ogk3f5k7s49fjef@4ax.com>, David Oberman
wrote:
Quote: Was this a section of the subduction zone that unzipped in 1960?
Without looking at the detailed locations ... the 1960 quake is
usually described as being a "Chile" quake, which would put it's
epicentre well south of the Peru quake.
This present quake series is on a line of coast trending NW-SE ;
the Chile coastal segment runs about 10 degrees east of north, so
a-priori one would expect there to be a zone of complication between
these two segments.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Message written at Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:59 +0100, now I'm back on
shore. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer |
| Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 7:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Aug 17, 9:09 am, Belba Grubb <trungsister...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote: On Aug 16, 5:28 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Right then.
The fat lady is on stage so get ready for the finale. You will know
when this disastrous spate of spells is over when the forest fires get
rained on and when the flooded fields get a warm, sunny and windy
spell.
I guess we're in the clear then - the burning rain forest at Kilauea
got soaked by Flossie, and here I sit on warm, sunny Mississippi Delta
earth, amid corn and cotton fields, that 80 years ago were all covered
by 10 feet of water (reference:http://www.rms.com/Publications/1927_MississippiFlood.pdf
). (The wind happens every afternoon due to convection brought about
by the daily 100-plus degree weather lately.)
You did notice that there were several places on the planet that were
suffering discoodination then?
One wonders how people like Damon can post to the Internet with their
heads so deeply inserted up the posterior portions of their digestive
tract that they have to open their mouths to see.
Obviously possible, just incomprehensible. The description "mouth
breather" falls somewhat short. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer |
| Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 10:05 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Aug 17, 9:09 am, Belba Grubb <trungsister...@yahoo.com> wrote:
The more things change the more they stay the same:
"Herbert Hoover, the commerce secretary under President Coolidge, was
appointed by the president to lead the rescue and relief efforts. He
coordinated the federal response with those of the local governments,
as well as the Red Cross.
It was estimated that 330,000 people were rescued from rooftops and
other high ground as the water levels rose. However large numbers of
African Americans were left stranded on top of the intact sections of
the levees because the white planters in the area were concerned that
if they left "there will be no labor to work the crops" |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jo Schaper |
| Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 10:28 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Skywise wrote:
Quote:
Just as a by-thought, the civil defense agency were quoting the Richter
scale for the EQ. I don't know if that was because that was what they
were told or if they assumed that was the scale being used.
Although many would rail against the use of the term, and I
used to, Susan Hough made an interesting observation about
the use of the term. Even though the actual scales used today
are not the Richter Scale, they are calibrated to be parallel
to Richter's scale. So in that sense, it could be considered
correct to say the quake was _equivilant_ to an 8.0 on the
Richter Scale.
That's not entirely true. Only the moment magnitude is roughly close to
Richter. There are many other scales, including the Mercalli, which are
are numerically nowhere near Richter. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| David Oberman |
| Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 11:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Jo Schaper <jospamnotschaper34@5socket78dot9net> wrote:
Quote: That's not entirely true. Only the moment magnitude is roughly close to
Richter. There are many other scales, including the Mercalli, which are
are numerically nowhere near Richter.
Here's what the USGS says:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/aboutus/docs/020204mag_policy.php
--In 1935, Charles Richter developed the local magnitude, ML scale for
moderate-size (3 < ML < 7) earthquakes in southern California. The ML
scale is often called the “Richter scale” by the press and the public.
All of the currently used methods for measuring earthquake magnitude
(ML, duration magnitude mD, surface-wave magnitude MS, teleseismic
body-wave magnitude mb, moment magnitude M, etc.) yield results that
are consistent with ML. In fact, most modern methods for measuring
magnitude were designed to be consistent with the Richter scale.--
Mercalli? Isn't that just a system for rating the human-felt intensity
of shaking in any given spot? It's not really a "scale" in the sense
of measuring quake magnitude.
____
When Herr Composer wants to bang his gong,
he will bang his gong, & God help if we balk.
-- Carl Maria von Weber, 1825 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Erik Newman |
| Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Jo Schaper wrote:
Quote:
That's not entirely true. Only the moment magnitude is roughly close to
Richter. There are many other scales, including the Mercalli, which are
are numerically nowhere near Richter.
The Mercalli scale measures intensity (i.e. how severe the shaking
/feels/ to someone at a given location) not the size of an earthquake.
An intensity scale gives you contours on a map for a given earthquake
while the magnitude should be a single number describing the size of
that earthquake.
The main difference between the different magnitude scales is at what
magnitude they saturate; it is impossible to measure magnitudes larger
than 7.0 on some scales. The moment magnitude has the advantage of not
being based on an instrument reading that can saturate.
http://pneumatictu.be/magnitudescales02.png |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Skywise |
| Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 7:25 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Erik Newman <ejnewman@uiuc.edu> wrote in news:fa7f78$pr6$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
Quote: Jo Schaper wrote:
That's not entirely true. Only the moment magnitude is roughly close to
Richter. There are many other scales, including the Mercalli, which are
are numerically nowhere near Richter.
The Mercalli scale measures intensity (i.e. how severe the shaking
/feels/ to someone at a given location) not the size of an earthquake.
An intensity scale gives you contours on a map for a given earthquake
while the magnitude should be a single number describing the size of
that earthquake.
It is also derived from the amount of damage done, not unlike the
Fujita scale for tornados. You can have a massive mile wide monster
tornado, but if it does no damage, it's still an F0. SImilarly, on
the Mercalli scale, a modern quake resistant bulding vs a mud brick
hut is going to rate the same shaking much differently.
Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:22 pm
|
|