4th Significant Earthquake Shakes Calif

[HeeBGBz]

4th Significant Earthquake Shakes Calif

snip

A 6.6-magnitude temblor hit about 125 miles off the coast of Eureka around 11:30 p.m., rattling the ocean floor. In the afternoon, a 4.9-magnitude quake struck east of Los Angeles, startling people and knocking items off shelves and desks.

snip

Four significant quakes have hit California this week: A magnitude-5.2 quake shook Riverside County on Sunday, and a magnitude-7.2 quake trembled Tuesday under the ocean 90 miles off Northern California.

[jus_the_facts]

1. Dammit....sure hope it settles down out there.....

.....everybody be CAREFUL and SAFE! :grouphug:

[Spinzonner]

2. We're just getting ready to secede

[ElectroPrincess]

4. That may be a good idea

because The Washington Post thought a Photo (original photo not available but equally disgusting) of "Seersucker Thursday" was a better Photo-Op synopsis of yesterday's major events.

[Dover]

5. LMAO!

That was funny!

[Eloriel]

42. Mother Nature may do that for you. n/t

[GeorgeGist]

3. I leave for a week to Ca tomorrow...

hope I survive. LOL.

[still_one]

6. the eartquakes are probably aftershocks triggered by the original

earthquake

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. Unlikely.

Maybe a couple of the ones near LA are somehow related, but the rest are too far apart to be related in any way.

[Terran]

16. Are you sure?

All four quakes occurred in and around the Pacific Plate, the so-called Ring of Fire. That makes them related, does it not? It's all one big system.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

22. Not necessarily, no.

These earthquakes weren't that big. In some cases they were on entirely different fault systems. This level of activity is not abnormal for California.

[Terran]

34. Mmmm, well...

I from California, and I went through the 1971 Sylmar quake and the 1989 Loma Prieta quake as well. And I don't think earthquakes in the 5, 6, & 7 range are normal in one week. I realize that small quakes happen almost continually, but this seems a little unusual. Just my non-professional opinion.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

38. What you'd expect to see...

So, this isn't true of all earthquakes. Many have no leading indicators, and even in hindsight it's been difficult to pick out patterns that might be related to an upcoming quake. That said, frequent small quake activity in a zone near the future epicenter of a large earthquake might be an indicator. There were four earthquakes in the 4-5 range during one week when I was living in SF about two years ago, so it's not completely unheard of. I wouldn't worry too much - at least no more than you'd normally worry. It's still always good to be prepared, though.

[Terran]

44. Yep, being prepared.

I live within the New Madrid fault area (about 200 miles from it) now, and unfortunately I can't say I'm at all prepared for what might happen here when that fault lets loose. When I lived in SF I had a whole emergency kit prepared. Nobody here even thinks about earthquakes as a threat.

[Eloriel]

43. That's funny. The seismologist interviewed in MSNBC I saw said

that whenever you have a "big earthquake" like the 7.x the other day, "the planet rings like a bell" and you can definitely get these other quakes along with it.

It frankly doesn't make sense to me for people to claim that closely occurring quakes in the same relative area aren't related. The whole PLANET is related, but even if it's not the same fault lines, ALL the plates connect. They're not islands, for heaven's sake. Everyone knows from everyday life that "the kneebone connected to the thigh bone," and you move ONE thing, certainly others are affected, especially where there's tension to start with.

Edited: another one I JUST saw, this one on Fox (cause I got tired of the celebrity gossip posing as news, not that i really expect Fox to be better), said at the tail end of her bit, "...based on what we're beginning to learn about how these things are connected." She went on to say that she doesn't see a pattern that would lead to some doomsday scenario. But she DID say that they're learning that there is a connection between some quakes.

[XemaSab]

25. Not so much...

the quakes in northern california and the quakes in southern california may well have been related, but the two sets of quakes are probably unrelated.

The nothern california quakes are occurring in the middle of the Juan De Fuca plate, which is a small plate that's being shoved under the north american plate. This plate extends from northern california to BC.

The southern california quakes occurred on the network of faults winding their way under the LA basin.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/recenteqsUS/Maps/US2/33.35.-118.-116.html

[Ediacara]

49. Uh....

The two in LA were probably related, and the two off the coast are almost certainly related.

[QuettaKid]

8. maybe they are...or maybe

they are precursors to something else.....I'm just saying.

[HeeBGBz]

10. This 4th one is supposed to be an aftershock of the 7.2

It is in the same vicinity.

[HawkerHurricane]

9. Better a bunch of little ones

than one big one.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

11. I think what they're concerned about is the idea that large earthquakes..

...are usually preceded by a cluster, or several clusters, of smaller quakes. In this case, and following the line of thought described in my first sentence, some of the "smaller" quakes are fairly substantial.

[slackmaster]

15. One integer on the magnitude scale is a factor of 100 in energy

It would take 10,000 5.2 earthquakes to release the same amount of energy as a 7.2.

People get a false sense of security about moderate quakes.

[HawkerHurricane]

48. Alas and alack

http://www.volcanolive.com/magnitude2.html

Each integer is 10 times, not 100.

And in addition to the 5.2's, there have been dozens of 3.0's and smaller in the same area. A lot of energy is being released. And better a 7.2 than a 8.2, eh?

[HeeBGBz]

12. Is this the 5th or an aftershock?

2005/06/17 06:40 M 4.6 OFF COAST OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA Z= 10km 40.96N 126.24W

A magnitude 4.6 earthquake OFF THE COAST OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA has occurred at:
40.96N 126.24W Depth 10km Fri Jun 17 06:40:16 2005 UTC

Time: Universal Time (UTC) Fri Jun 17 06:40:16 2005
Time Near Epicenter Thu Jun 16 22:40:16 2005
Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) Fri Jun 17 02:40:16 2005
Central Daylight Time (CDT) Fri Jun 17 01:40:16 2005
Mountain Daylight Time (MDT) Fri Jun 17 00:40:16 2005
Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) Thu Jun 16 23:40:16 2005
Alaska Daylight Time (ADT) Thu Jun 16 22:40:16 2005
Hawaii Standard Time (HST) Thu Jun 16 20:40:16 2005

Location with respect to nearby cities:
175 km (110 miles) W of Eureka, California
180 km (110 miles) WNW of Fortuna, California
190 km (120 miles) WSW of Crescent City, California
485 km (300 miles) NW of SACRAMENTO, California

[CountAllVotes]

21. I didn't feel the 4.6 one this a.m.

but I sure felt that big aftershock (6.6) last night! :scared:

I'm not far from Eureka, California ...

:kick:

[cliss]

45. Got your water bottles, Count?

I'm in Portland, and this whole thing has got me nervous. I'm going to spend some time this weekend checking over my supplies in the garage. They say a few water bottles are more important than food; batteries, a working radio and so on.

We went down to Crescent City a few years ago. Some people showed us the damage from the tsunami in 1987 (?). Wow. We couldn't believe how HIGH the water went up.

Stay dry.

[CountAllVotes]

47. yes I do!

I have about 6 cases of bottled water in my garage. I'll tell ya, this is NO JOKE!

There are markers alongside the roads in southern Humboldt showing how high up the water was in 1964 when the last big flood hit this region. I'm telling you, it WILL happen again. The only question is WHEN! :scared:

:kick:

[woodsprite]

13. CA is just trying to shake Ahhhnuld off it's land. n/t

[slackmaster]

14. Zen question

Is an earthquake really "significant" if there are no deaths or injuries or property damage?

[BrotherBuzz]

30. The New Madrid Earthquakes of 1811-1812 were significant

Does a tree falling in the forest make any noise if no one is there to hear it?

[meganmonkey]

17. They'll stop when Ahhhhnold turns in his resignation letter.

That's what the earthquake fairies told me

O8)

[Benhurst]

18. Throwing a virgin down a volcano is the only way to stop this.

If a virgin can't be found, which is likely in California, the most powerful leader of the tribe must take her place.

Just in case, does anybody know where Arnold is?

[thinkingwoman]

19. I would pay to see that. nt

[XemaSab]

26. Which volcano?

Will Shasta or Lassen work? How about the Long Valley Caldera? Konocti? Medicine Lake? The Sutter Buttes?

Or do we need to find a volcano with lava at the summit? 'Cause tickets to Hawaii are spendy, and anyways, that place is a tourist trap.

[readmylips]

20. You guys are funny....most-likely Ahhnold will throw...

Maria. The Gods will reject her since she's skin and bones. Ahhnold..I wand your first born...

[Seabiscuit]

23. Does this mean CA is finally going to "fall into the sea"?

Non-Californians have been saying this for decades.

[Shakespeare]

24. this puts me in mind of a certain Steely Dan song...

I remember the thirty-five sweet goodbyes
When you put me on the wolverine
Up to annandale
It was still september
When your daddy was quite surprised
To find you with the working girls
In the county jail
I was smoking with the boys upstairs
When I heard about the whole affair
I said oh no
William and mary won’t do
Chorus:
Well I did not think the girl
Could be so cruel
And I’m never going back
To my old school

Oleanders growing outside her door
Soon they’re gonna be in bloom
Up in annandale
I can’t stand her
Doing what she did before
Living like a gypsy queen
In a fairy tale
Well I hear the whistle but I can’t go
I’m gonna take her down to mexico
She said oh no
Guadalajara won’t do

Chorus

California tumbles into the sea
That’ll be the day I go
Back to annandale
Tried to warn you
About chino and daddy gee
But I can’t seem to get to you
Through the u.s. mail
Well I hear the whistle but I can’t go
I’m gonna take her down to mexico
She said oh no
Guadalajara won’t do

[Barkley]

41. Actually So. Cal is drifting towards Alaska

and we'll arrive there in a billion or so years...

According to the display at the L.A. Griffith Park Observatory.

[Dcitizen]

27. USGS information: 6.4 followed by 2 more 4+

This information is provided by the USGS
National Earthquake Information Center.

These parameters are preliminary and subject to revision.

A magnitude 6.4 earthquake OFF THE COAST OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA has
occurred at:
40.72N 126.54W Depth 10km Fri Jun 17 06:21:42 2005 UTC

Time: Universal Time (UTC) Fri Jun 17 06:21:42 2005
Time Near Epicenter Thu Jun 16 22:21:42 2005
Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) Fri Jun 17 02:21:42 2005
Central Daylight Time (CDT) Fri Jun 17 01:21:42 2005
Mountain Daylight Time (MDT) Fri Jun 17 00:21:42 2005
Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) Thu Jun 16 23:21:42 2005
Alaska Daylight Time (ADT) Thu Jun 16 22:21:42 2005
Hawaii Standard Time (HST) Thu Jun 16 20:21:42 2005

Location with respect to nearby cities:
200 km (125 miles) W of Eureka, California
200 km (125 miles) W of Fortuna, California
225 km (140 miles) WSW of Crescent City, California
495 km (305 miles) WNW of SACRAMENTO, California

For maps, additional information, and subsequent updates,
please consult:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/recenteqsww/Quakes/uszkal.htm .

Events of magnitude 6.5 or greater are generally reviewed and posted to Bigquake within 2 hours of their occurrence and events of magnitude 5.5 to 6.5 are generally posted to Bigquake within 24 hours.

My Comment: Unsure these shallow quakes are activities at Cascadia subduction zone.

[theHandpuppet]

28. Here are other links to a good site

http://www.iris.edu/seismon/last30days.phtml
and
http://www.iris.edu/seismon/

[Dcitizen]

29. Tsunami Bulletin, 6.9 quake reported

WEPA43 PAAQ 170626
TIBWCA

TO - TSUNAMI WARNING SYSTEM PARTICIPANTS IN
ALASKA/BRITISH COLUMBIA/WASHINGTON/OREGON/CALIFORNIA
FROM - WEST COAST AND ALASKA TSUNAMI WARNING CENTER/NOAA/NWS
SUBJECT - TSUNAMI INFORMATION BULLETIN
BULLETIN NUMBER 1
ISSUED 06/17/2005 AT 0626 UTC

...THIS TSUNAMI INFORMATION BULLETIN IS FOR ALASKA - BRITISH
COLUMBIA - WASHINGTON - OREGON AND CALIFORNIA ONLY...

NO - REPEAT NO - WATCH OR WARNING IS IN EFFECT.

EARTHQUAKE DATA
PRELIMINARY MAGNITUDE - 6.9
LOCATION - 40.6N 126.3W - 110 MILES W OF EUREKA-CA.
285 MILES NW OF SAN FRANCISCO-CA.
TIME - 2222 ADT 06/16/2005
2322 PDT 06/16/2005
0622 UTC 06/17/2005

EVALUATION
BASED ON LOCATION AND MAGNITUDE THE EARTHQUAKE WAS NOT
SUFFICIENT TO GENERATE A TSUNAMI DAMAGING TO CALIFORNIA -
OREGON - WASHINGTON - BRITISH COLUMBIA OR ALASKA. SOME AREAS MAY
EXPERIENCE SMALL SEA LEVEL CHANGES. IN AREAS OF INTENSE
SHAKING LOCALLY GENERATED TSUNAMIS CAN BE TRIGGERED BY SLUMPING.

THE PACIFIC TSUNAMI WARNING CENTER WILL ISSUE TSUNAMI BULLETINS
FOR HAWAII AND OTHER AREAS OF THE PACIFIC.

THIS WILL BE THE ONLY BULLETIN ISSUED FOR THIS EVENT BY THE
WEST COAST AND ALASKA TSUNAMI WARNING CENTER UNLESS CONDITIONS
WARRANT. REFER TO THE INTERNET SITE WCATWC.ARH.NOAA.GOV
FOR MORE INFORMATION.
$$

[smirkymonkey]

31. Is there any way to tell if these quakes are precursors to larger

quakes or if they are just isolated incidents? It seems like the Pacific Rim has been increasingly active lately.

[Ediacara]

50. The two sets may be related

The first quake in LA about a week ago is probably related to the one that occured in LA more recently. A fault rupture (an earthquake in English) can stress adjacent regions of the fault zone creating earthquakes, and that appears to be what happened in LA. The two earthquakes out on the coast appear to be on faults within the Gorda Plate, and the one today is probably an aftershock of the one a few days ago.

[dbonds]

32. It's thier own damn fault.

:P

[Roland99]

33. God is pissed at somebody in Cali.

;)

[Seabiscuit]

35. Yup. Ahnulled and Cunningham.

[Roland99]

36. Surely it must be an evil, pagan Dem!

[Seabiscuit]

37. So it's moi???

[Roland99]

40. May you burn in Hades!

Don't forget the Coppertone!


:P

[Seabiscuit]

46. All because I became a renegade Catholic?

[Dcitizen]

39. Probability tool

Link: http://www.syzygyjob.net/prediction/messages/20091.shtml
by Berkeley University.

Any method use ex-post data for ex-ant event is not the exact prediction. It's likely a hobie to see how many percent an event can occur. It's good to know. :D