Earthquake in BRC

[RingO'Fire]

BTW Ring-o-Fire, Elizabeth Miller the co-author of the paper you cited is a friend and past teacher of mine here at SU. She's probably one of the more well versed geologists in the world on B&R geology as she did her PhD paper on the Lake Lahontan basin. She's also a long time BM attendee who can ALWAYS be found at Martini Camp (~ 4:30 and middle ring.) The camp's a good group of people and she's usually ready to talk rock. You might look their camp up next year.

Wow, thanks for the tip! I'll definately look her up.

Conversations containing the word "orogenic" are always cool.

Mmmm... Are you touching your mountains right now?

[ygmir]

p.

Conversations containing the word "orogenic" are always cool.

Mmmm... Are you touching your mountains right now?

[chiefdanfox]

What sort of pictures, eh? Wink wink, nudge, nudge. Vacation pictures? Say no more, say no more.

[wedeliver]

I used to think that Los Angeles had "Earthquake Weather" when it was hot in Los Angeles and cold to the east. I also thought air pressure could have something to do with it. If this applies then the conditions are ripe. Here in Northern Cal, modoc plateau, below freezing here, but 50 degrees 1,000 feet up from me, 1 mile away. That is an amazing differance in air temp, don't ja think!

[Sail Man]

Wedeliver, I see Cal. had a big earthquake exercise recently, did your part of the state participate?

[ygmir]

I used to think that Los Angeles had "Earthquake Weather" when it was hot in Los Angeles and cold to the east. I also thought air pressure could have something to do with it. If this applies then the conditions are ripe. Here in Northern Cal, modoc plateau, below freezing here, but 50 degrees 1,000 feet up from me, 1 mile away. That is an amazing differance in air temp, don't ja think!

I've encountered that fairly often out in desert areas.......no wind, the coldest air can settle in low areas......I've come into low valleys that are white and frozen, while, it's nice on the ridges above...


I'm at 2800 ft. and look down on Sac.
At times, in winter, it's warmer here than down there, for a while anyway........

if this is what you refer to.

[wedeliver]

Wedeliver, I see Cal. had a big earthquake exercise recently, did your part of the state participate?

No Sail Man, I hear millions of people in southern cal were involved but we are kinda far away from everything.

wedeliver wrote:
I used to think that Los Angeles had "Earthquake Weather" when it was hot in Los Angeles and cold to the east. I also thought air pressure could have something to do with it. If this applies then the conditions are ripe. Here in Northern Cal, modoc plateau, below freezing here, but 50 degrees 1,000 feet up from me, 1 mile away. That is an amazing differance in air temp, don't ja think!


I've encountered that fairly often out in desert areas.......no wind, the coldest air can settle in low areas......I've come into low valleys that are white and frozen, while, it's nice on the ridges above...


I'm at 2800 ft. and look down on Sac.
At times, in winter, it's warmer here than down there, for a while anyway........

if this is what you refer to.

Funny, just last night I was getting gasoline in Klamath Falls, Oregon and in Oregon they pump gas for you. The young guy and I were talking about how the weather had recently turned colder and I mentioned how sometimes air higher up can be warmer then on the ground. He replied "yeah, hot air rises" He was very correct.

I love how the morning inversion layer can keep the playa dust on the ground. You can kick the ground and the dust will not float but will fall back to the ground quickly.

We moved up here 3 years ago from Sacramento and the news Helecopter's would report temps in the '70 and 3000' while it was 55 on the ground

[ygmir]

wedeliver:
how far are you from 395?

I may be coming back to CA from WA that way, in a couple of weeks......

[wedeliver]

wedeliver:
how far are you from 395?

I may be coming back to CA from WA that way, in a couple of weeks......

We are off Cal Hwy 139 between Tulelake, Ca and Canby, Ca. south of Klamath Falls, or. We are one major route west of 395 and if you are heading south from Klamath, even if you are going through Cedarville to Gerlach, it is about the same in miles.

Check the webcam for the weather, and we do have a trailer avalable for guests.

Please do stop by!

[ygmir]

well,
thanks for the generous offer, I'd love to meet you.
I'll be coming from Yakima to Reno, on 395. Do you know how far from 395 to you?

thanks

[wedeliver]

well,
thanks for the generous offer, I'd love to meet you.
I'll be coming from Yakima to Reno, on 395. Do you know how far from 395 to you?

thanks

395 runs parallel to the hwy we are on. As the crow flies it might be 100 miles from Cal Hwy 139 to 395. Google tionesta, ca and you will see where we are. You can go all the way to Susanville on 139 and get back on 395 there.

[ygmir]

ok, thanks.
I'll try to work out a stop and meet......

[wedeliver]

I have found that I can predict when there will NOT be an earthquake and so far I have had 100% success with many predictions.

but....

An Area near Death Valley, CA has experienced a small swarm of 3.x and better quakes in the last few days. Here is the link

http://quake.usgs.gov/recenteqs/Maps/117-36_full.html

[wedeliver]

Looks like right under BRC..

http://quake.usgs.gov/recenteqs/Maps/119-41.html

Magnitude 2.5 - local magnitude (ML)
Time Wednesday, December 3, 2008 at 11:29:47 AM (PST)
Wednesday, December 3, 2008 at 19:29:47 (UTC)
Distance from Gerlach-Empire, NV - 9 km (6 miles) N (6 degrees)
Phil, NV - 13 km (8 miles) ENE (60 degrees)
Trego, NV - 17 km (11 miles) WSW (246 degrees)
Lovelock, NV - 93 km (58 miles) NW (309 degrees)
Sacramento, CA - 301 km (187 miles) NE (37 degrees)

Coordinates 40 deg. 42.2 min. N (40.703N), 119 deg. 19.8 min. W (119.330W)
Depth 7.6 km (4.7 miles)
Location Quality unknown
Location Quality Parameters Nst= 7, Nph= 7, Dmin=0 km, Rmss=0 sec, Erho=0 km, Erzz=0 km, Gp=0 degrees
Event ID# nn00266802
Additional Information 2-degree map
Google Earth KML (Requires Google Earth.)

[wedeliver]

There is some regularity to these events of over 3.x and 4. the series started on November 30, then a few more over 3 on 12-2-08, then one more over 3 on 12-07, one more 3.x on 12-8 then a 4.4 on 12-9 (half hour ago)

Also there was a 5.1 less then 100 miles away on 12-5-08

http://quake.usgs.gov/recenteqs/Maps/117-36.html

4.4 2008/12/09 16:28:25 35.977N 117.312W 3.1 24 km (15 mi) NNE of Trona, CA
1.4 2008/12/09 13:30:29 36.006N 117.265W 9.6 24 km (15 mi) SW of Telescope Peak, CA
1.4 2008/12/09 13:28:18 35.954N 117.317W 7.1 21 km (13 mi) NNE of Trona, CA
1.5 2008/12/09 10:24:55 35.981N 117.287W 7.7 25 km (16 mi) NNE of Trona, CA
0.5 2008/12/09 07:04:28 36.948N 116.708W 0.0 6 km ( 4 mi) NE of Beatty, NV
1.2 2008/12/09 06:54:28 36.948N 116.708W 0.0 6 km ( 4 mi) NE of Beatty, NV
1.7 2008/12/09 04:26:01 35.947N 117.676W 3.9 27 km (17 mi) ESE of Coso Junction, CA
2.2 2008/12/09 03:49:57 36.206N 117.924W 3.6 9 km ( 6 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
1.5 2008/12/09 03:02:34 36.208N 117.917W 6.0 10 km ( 6 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
1.8 2008/12/09 02:13:56 36.968N 116.658W 4.0 11 km ( 7 mi) NE of Beatty, NV
1.7 2008/12/09 00:12:48 35.975N 117.323W 3.5 24 km (15 mi) N of Trona, CA
2.3 2008/12/08 21:14:13 36.215N 117.909W 3.4 10 km ( 6 mi) ESE of Olancha, CA
3.1 2008/12/08 19:41:07 36.212N 117.914W 2.6 9 km ( 6 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
1.4 2008/12/08 14:53:03 35.961N 117.311W 6.6 22 km (14 mi) NNE of Trona, CA
1.3 2008/12/08 12:16:16 35.964N 117.322W 8.6 22 km (14 mi) N of Trona, CA
0.9 2008/12/08 09:10:44 36.702N 116.312W 12.0 45 km (28 mi) N of Death Valley Junction, CA
0.8 2008/12/08 07:49:23 36.216N 117.927W 6.9 8 km ( 5 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
1.8 2008/12/08 06:00:57 35.988N 117.314W 3.3 25 km (16 mi) N of Trona, CA
1.7 2008/12/08 05:54:10 35.789N 116.634W 3.8 38 km (24 mi) WSW of Shoshone, CA
0.9 2008/12/08 05:32:16 36.063N 117.609W 1.0 23 km (14 mi) S of Darwin, CA
1.0 2008/12/08 05:04:47 36.206N 117.913W 5.5 10 km ( 6 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
0.9 2008/12/08 03:59:06 36.205N 117.913W 7.0 10 km ( 6 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
1.3 2008/12/08 02:13:57 36.208N 117.917W 2.7 9 km ( 6 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
1.8 2008/12/08 01:47:00 35.972N 117.317W 2.1 23 km (15 mi) NNE of Trona, CA
2.4 2008/12/08 01:38:44 35.969N 117.317W 1.2 23 km (14 mi) NNE of Trona, CA
1.7 2008/12/08 01:13:25 36.209N 117.915W 5.7 10 km ( 6 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
1.5 2008/12/08 00:43:04 35.978N 117.306W 1.5 24 km (15 mi) NNE of Trona, CA
1.1 2008/12/08 00:37:08 36.209N 117.910W 5.6 10 km ( 6 mi) SE of Olancha, CA
0.5 2008/12/08 00:31:13 36.018N 117.816W 1.3 12 km ( 8 mi) ESE of Coso Junction, CA
1.1 2008/12/08 00:30:14 36.015N 117.811W 1.9 13 km ( 8 mi) ESE of Coso Junction, CA
3.3 2008/12/07 12:13:20 35.977N 117.309W 1.2 24 km (15 mi) NNE of Trona, CA

[Sail Man]

Well, if all that seismic activity keeps up and/or gets worse, the burn may come full circle and one day be back on a beach

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Nevada is just a bunch of fault zones but being in the middle of a playa during a big one is not good thing since it would turn to jello and quick sand with a few sand geysers here and there

But a 1.8 mag at O km that might have been a landslide

[wedeliver]

15 years ago this week an earthquake happened in Reseda California. They called it the Northridge Earthquake because Reseda is not as classy as Northridge (the Norhtridge Hospital is in Reseda).

At that time the weather condtions were very warm in LA and cold as shit everywhere else and I had said to my wife this is "earthquake weather" naturally there can't be anything called earthquake weather but today it will be in the 80's in Los Angeles, right now where i am in Northern Cal it is 8 degrees and 56 in Northridge, fucking great day to go surfing!

I am not saying there will be an earthquake, but lets say there is one.........

[littleflower]

shudder .......... let's not!

[chiefdanfox]

15 years ago this week an earthquake happened in Reseda California. They called it the Northridge Earthquake because Reseda is not as classy as Northridge (the Norhtridge Hospital is in Reseda).

The 1994 Northridge Earthquake occured on the Northridge Thrust Fault or Pico Fault (same fault two names). They could have called it the Pico Earthquake, but it seemed bigger than that

[wedeliver]

15 years ago this week an earthquake happened in Reseda California. They called it the Northridge Earthquake because Reseda is not as classy as Northridge (the Norhtridge Hospital is in Reseda).

The 1994 Northridge Earthquake occured on the Northridge Thrust Fault or Pico Fault (same fault two names). They could have called it the Pico Earthquake, but it seemed bigger than that

Humm, interesting. At the moment I can't recall any earthquake that was named after the fault, I thought normally they are named after the epicenter city or where the most damage was. The issue might be that in an area like LA quite often more damage in a city next to the epicenter rather then right above the fault break. There was more "reportable" damage in Northridge then Reseda, although the apartments that collapsed were on Reseda Blvd, in Northridge. (now I am probably confusing someone, sorry)

So, If they had called it the Pico fault that would have implied it was over the hill near westwood. my way of thinking.

But and it's a bigg butt... You said Pico who remembers Pico and Sepulveda

[youtube][/youtube]

I miss Dr Deminto

[Isotopia]

Humm, interesting. At the moment I can't recall any earthquake that was named after the fault, I thought normally they are named after the epicenter city or where the most damage was.

Yep. You'd be correct. Usually earthquakes are name after some geographically significant landmark such as a town, area, region and on rare occasions the day it falls on ('Good Friday.')

A good example is the Landers earth quake which happened very near the town of Landers, California but actually involved (5) different faults (Johnson Valley, Landers, Homestead Valley, Emerson, and Camp Rock faults.)

[AntiM]

But and it's a bigg butt... You said Pico who remembers Pico and Sepulveda

[youtube][/youtube]

I miss Dr Deminto

I do ... I'm a Dementoid. I named one of my cats Pico because when I played the song, he perked up. I have 16 years worth of Dr. Demento fan club CDs.

As for that video ...hah! That's from an 80s movie called The Forbidden Zone. About the strangest thing I've ever seen, and I should know, I collect weird movies. Those guys are simply lip-synching.

Thread Drift!

[wedeliver]

I think I remember hearing this song on sunday morning from that radio station in Pasadena.

If you have never heard "i want a hippopotamus for christmas" here it is.

[youtube][/youtube]

'bout quakes

Study finds troubling pattern of Southern California quakes
The southern stretch of the San Andreas fault has had a major temblor about every 137 years, according to new research. The latest looks to be overdue.
By Jia-Rui Chong
January 24, 2009
Large earthquakes have rumbled along a southern section of the San Andreas fault more frequently than previously believed, suggesting that Southern California could be overdue for a strong temblor on the notorious fault line, a new study has found.

The Carrizo Plain section of the San Andreas has not seen a massive quake since the much-researched Fort Tejon temblor of 1857, which at an estimated magnitude of 7.9 is considered the most powerful earthquake to hit Southern California in modern times.

But the new research by UC Irvine scientists, to be published next week, found that major quakes occurred there roughly every 137 years over the last 700 years. Until now, scientists believed big quakes occurred along the fault roughly every 200 years.

The findings are significant because seismologists have long believed this portion of the fault is capable of sparking the so-called Big One that officials have for decades warned will eventually occur in Southern California.

"It's been long enough since 1857 that we should be concerned about another great earthquake that ruptures through this part of the fault," said Ken Hudnut, a geophysicist at the U.S. Geological Survey in Pasadena who was not involved in the study.


Many scientists thought the Carrizo area produced relatively infrequent but large-scale earthquakes such as the Fort Tejon temblor. The new work suggests the area produces more quakes but also ones of a smaller magnitude than Fort Tejon, said Ray Weldon, a University of Oregon geologist who was not involved in the research but reviewed the paper for the Journal of Geophysical Research.

Such temblors, experts warned, would likely be at least as big as the 1994 Northridge quake, which had a magnitude of 6.7.

"Even moderate earthquakes on the San Andreas can cause considerable damage, so the overall hazard and risk has gone up," Weldon said.

The section of the San Andreas fault threading through the dry Carrizo Plain is one of the most famous and photographed parts of the fault because creek beds and other features on one side of the fault have clearly shifted away from matching features on the other side. About 100 miles northwest of Los Angeles, the Carrizo area was one of the main sections that ruptured in the 1857 quake. That rupture, roaring southwest into the Los Angeles Basin, rocked parts of the region so hard that men were thrown to the ground.

Lisa Grant Ludwig, a principal investigator on the study, first visited the Carrizo Plain about 20 years ago, digging trenches in an area west of the Panorama Hills known as the Bidart Fan.

By looking at the pattern of soils and using radiocarbon dating on charcoal deposits, she found evidence of five large earthquakes dating back to the early 1200s. She found a gap of some 400 years between the 1857 earthquake and the one before, but only about 100 years separating the three preceding quakes.

Back then, the earthquake age estimates were very rough and the samples had to be fairly large, about the size of a jelly bean. Ludwig saved field notes and hundreds of soil samples in glass vials in her garage for more than 15 years, hoping that radiocarbon dating techniques would improve.

Once the technology improved, Ludwig and her colleagues could date samples with much higher precision and analyze charcoal flakes as small as the tip of a pencil.

They went back to her archive, and the redating effort, led by scholar Sinan Akciz, found that the four big earthquakes before the 1857 temblor probably occurred around 1310, 1393, 1585 and 1640.

"We were better able to constrain the dates and show that actually these five earthquakes were pretty evenly spaced," Ludwig said.

Because they are looking at only a handful of earthquakes, scientists can't be sure that the pattern will hold, Ludwig said.

"But we know it increases the probability of an earthquake," she said. "There's not any way I can look at the data and be comforted by it."

Ludwig's team has dug some new trenches in the area to supplement the redating project, hoping to find new soil samples that show the increased frequency of large earthquakes.

Results won't be finalized for a few months, Ludwig said, but preliminary analysis suggests that the time interval between earthquakes may be even shorter, something on the order of 100 years.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... 4479.story

[ygmir]

that's one thing I love about earthquake predictors.......
every year, they say we'll have a "big one" in the next 10-20 years.........

at some point, we'll have one, and, they'll say
"see, I predicted this _______years ago"............

[chiefdanfox]

Well, the field of seismology is better at reporting than predicting, but it, like the rest of science, is really very new. Astronomy is an old science, and it is very good at prediction, because the math is straight forward, and has had hundreds of years of testing, refinement and revision.

I'll bet that seismology and earthquake prediction gets better, much faster than astronomy. I mean, if you are in your late forties, then you were around before the theory of plate tectonics was developed. I'd say they are doing pretty well, considering the field is really young.

No one really knows how to measure stress in rocks in the ground, other than the use of statistics, but once someone figures out how to pass an energy field or wave form through rocks to measure the stress or elasticity, then it will be a matter of gathering data on rock types, and rock type combinations, plugging it in.

Thirty years ago, no one could predict volcanic eruptions very well, now they are very good at it, and have saved many lives. It isn't perfect, nor do the predictions have an accuracy better than a few weeks, but recent eruptions have been pretty accurately predicted, when the vulcanologists can get in to measure the gas, bulging and temblors.

[gyre]

Plate tectonics goes back much further, but it was considered very fringe science at one time.


Prediction is more of a political thing than a current scientific possibility.

Some things that have known data are very predictable, but there are fault lines not known and some actions that I don't think will ever be predictable, in any sort of long term way.


My father talked about the massive circular patterns on the globe as being evidence of strikes.
I don't know if he thought of this on his own or had a very radical teacher, but he has been proven right about all of those.

[chiefdanfox]

As an accepted geologic process, PT was developed in the 1960s and even then, not really fully accepted until the mid 1970s. When I first started studying geology (late 1970's), there were still text books that referred to it as "just a theory", and the honest text books placed question marks in areas that were not fully understood, like the area near the Yucatan Peninsula. It wasn't until the discovery of the iridium layer at the KT boundary was placed in context with an asteroid strike (1980s) that this area made sense to geologists/geomorphologists. It just didn't fit with the PT mechanics as understood at the time.

The idea of PT may indeed be old, but the evidence has been collected recently, and the theory as a process for rock/mineral transport (the rock cycle) is just barely four decades old. It is under constant refinement even today. For the most part, geology is a real conservative science, and most things ultimately accepted by geologists are first subject to rigorous review and lots of initial skepticism. It is pretty hard to argue with things chiseled into stone, so to speak.

[Laughing Forest]

[quote]that's one thing I love about earthquake predictors.......
every year, they say we'll have a "big one" in the next 10-20 years.........

at some point, we'll have one, and, they'll say
"see, I predicted this _______years ago"............[/quote]

Except that geological prediction is based on a gap of time in which a statistical probability is assigned.

It's not like the science is putting people off with continued delays of what's inevitable. It really is very different from those 'predicting' the second coming and all that horse shit.

[theCryptofishist]

The idea of PT may indeed be old, but the evidence has been collected recently, and the theory as a process for rock/mineral transport (the rock cycle) is just barely four decades old.

I thought that Continental Drift was "old" and that PT was sort of the theory that came out of that observation and the other indications that the earth was a dynamic system, not some sort of stable platform.