-
11 ptsCounselorJuly 7, 2019 at 6:58 am #6202
With USGS reporting an M3 near Loma Linda, CA, and EMSC reporting a M3.5 nearer to Lancaster today, my already shot nerves are concerned for a coastal eddy appearing over the Channel Islands/ off the coast of Los Angeles. A small low also appearing to the south near San Felipe, Baja California has me concerned too for the already stressed San Andreas.
With respect to Ridgecrest, I am also concerned for an M6+ in So Cal on the San Andreas fault line itself to 100 KM off the coastline from Lompoc to San Diego. This initial watch for 4 days from time of this post. This posting is in support of any forecaster who has one currently for this region.
This post has received 1 vote up.-
This topic was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by
Counselor.
11 pts6 ptsJECJuly 7, 2019 at 8:06 pm #6207Concur with your projections. And Cascadia is also under threat..as the pressures build. What I fear (my kids live in Seattle and north to Bellingham..) is a ‘zipper’ effect,with the southern faults releasing pressure..triggering the north earthquakes. We went thru St. Helens..house and window shook..thought it was an atomic bomb the ground jumped so. A big earthquake..with tsumani..would be a lot worse for the coastal areaa.
Score: 0115 ptslesterJuly 7, 2019 at 8:59 pm #6209JEC… I have been compiling data towards a possible forecast for an eruptive event of Mount St Helens. As I believe you are more informed on volcanic matters than I, would you say that the possibility exists that a 1980 type event could occur here in the near future ?
Current status is listed as “normal or dormant”, but the data shows that there has been an increase in seismic activity related to this volcano since mid June.
Appreciate any thoughts you have…
This post has received 1 vote up.Score: 16 ptsJECJuly 7, 2019 at 10:00 pm #6211The slow increase in EQ and unrest is what happens with St Helens: at least this time they have monitors and such and actually know a bit about the volcano itself. If its swelling..that is the most definitive sign, that and increasing EQs along with more off gassing. Its had dome building events for years. BUT if Cascadia has any sort of major burp, the volcanoes along its eastern subsidence area(not sure if that is what the diving down crustal stuff is called there) ..can have issues. Like eruptions. We just do NOT have enough info since its only been recently (since 1960s or so) when they were trying to build nuclear plants in Olympia and Skagit that the dangers of the earthquakes/tsumanis were suddenly realized. All we have are oral native histories, and most have been ignored because of the sources…go figure. Funny, I just read a book warning about the big 9.0 forecast for the NW..and how the space needle might survive it because of overbuilding in those days (1960s). The NW is overdue, and certainly Mt Helens is a sentinal warning system.
Tsunmani dangers too. Mt Hood, Mt Helen, Mt Rainer ..to Mt Shasta. Those ‘flats’ of Skagit..and up and down the Pacific coastlines those ‘sloughs” or ‘slews’ or muddy waterways with many stumps of dead forests/trees are all warning signs from the past.
This post has received 1 vote up.Score: 16 ptsJECJuly 7, 2019 at 10:17 pm #6212Mt St Helens dome is growing at 5 meters!! a day. Thats a lot of growth and rock for sure. So if EQ pick up..and if the growth increases even a little..signs for an event. GPS position… tilting or changes and EQ increases..
This post has received 1 vote up.Score: 1115 ptslesterJuly 7, 2019 at 10:22 pm #6213I have had several near misses on the West coast these past few weeks (out of time mostly), and believe you are right about Cascadia. I spent 40 days on Ferndale alone on 124’W with my forecasts, my numbers still suggest 124’W as a prime target, but you can only hang around so long !. I really appreciate your detailed analysis, and more than I expected. I shall wait and observe the Cascadia region before moving on Mount St Helens… thank you my friend.
Sorry Counselor… is this “your” forecast page ? 🙂
Score: 011 pts115 ptslesterJuly 8, 2019 at 9:58 pm #6221Counselor… my toys have recorded something “serious” at 19:56 UTC. I would like to think it relates to Bougainville, but under current circumstances, it is likely to be Ridgecrest / Searles Valley again in the next 24 hours… you know my toys are credible, so check your map !
Score: 0115 pts11 ptsCounselorJuly 9, 2019 at 1:08 am #6224Hey, JEC! Just wanted to say thanks for your open discussion too. I trust your insight into volcanoes as well. The info you also shared on Hawaii was great!
Lester, thanks for the heads-up! I will hope for Bougainville too, especially with all that could still happen here. I am not to far from the intersection of the Garlock fault zone and San Andreas. The quake swarm I watched (20+ quakes in an hour near Grapevine) is the sight of a 7.5 back in 1952 when California snow totals were measured at over 60 feet. I think I have read that we came close to 50 ft? That puts us in range of the snow levels California had in the winters just before the Spring/ Summer melt periods when other devastating quakes occurred. 1890 had a 6.8 in So Cal and there was over 60ft of snow that year, the Owens Valley quake in March of 1872, M7.4 – 7.8, was a winter that people noted in this article: https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=DAC18720220.2.7&e=——-en–20–1–txt-txIN——–1
Snowed for weeks in February so bad that it created snow blockades (worst people had seen in three years prior with prevailing winds that were different than usual too and a winter that was noted as “violent”)
San Francisco quakes of 1906, and 1911, saw high snow totals. I will let a nice chart do some talking for me too: http://www.thestormking.com/Weather/Sierra_Snowfall/sierra_snowfall.html
It just seems that things are lining up for California and the western US to definitely cycle into a higher quake period. Other factors used to forecast will also be important to note.
Score: 0115 ptslesterJuly 9, 2019 at 5:32 pm #6225Hey, sorry about the panicky heads up my friend, I walked into my observatory last night, saw what was on the spectral graph, and had one of those OMG, red alert, call the president moments 🙂 . After the exiting result I got from Mayotte today (4.1 🙁 ), I too hope my anomaly relates to Bougainville !.
This was a “very” interesting piece you posted, and I can see how this could relate to “some” significant events in this region. However, I am not totally sold on the idea, because my own calculations suggest recent events in SoCal were “pre selected” through natural occurrence !!.
Hope you are not too rusty at following my method with maps :)…
On 26th May between times 12:38:34 UTC – 14:14:21 UTC, the moon was at apogee at a distance of 397,759 km’s during this period. At 12:38:34 UTC on this day, it was sunrise on coordinates 117’30’W – 35’42’N, pre-seismic location of the M 6.4 (M 7.1) Southern California epicentre. Also at 12:38 UTC, it was sunrise on coordinates 130’30’W – 51’13’N, pre-seismic location of the M 6.2 Queen Charlotte Islands epicentre… which as you know occurred on the same day as the M 6.4 SoCal event (4th July).
The 26th May was also the day that this years (so far) biggest seismic event occurred in Northern Peru (M 8.0).
Between times 22:25:01 UTC 7th June – 00:06:58 UTC 8th June, the moon was at perigee at a distance of 362,127 km’s during this period. At 00:06:58 UTC on this day, the moon was located on longitude 117’27’W !. It is also interesting to note that it was moonrise at this time on coordinates 154’43’E – 6’15’S Bougainville P.N.G. ( M 5.5 6th July).
On 2 July, New Moon occurred at 19:24 UTC. At 19:54:05 UTC, the sun was located on longitude 117’30’W. Also at this time, it was moonrise on coordinates 144’24’E – 19’52’N, location of the post seismic M 6.4 Northern Mariana Islands epicentre of 28th June. At 19:56 UTC, the moon was located on longitude 117’39’W… and again it was moonrise on the Bougainville P.N.G. coordinates posted above. I’m not sure if this has any bearing, but these events were occurring during the peak period of the southern hemisphere solar eclipse !!.
As suggested earlier, it is my opinion that these SoCal events were pre selected through naturally occurring events !. Here is a final calculation that I made today (9th).
Between times 12:16 UTC – 12:41 UTC today, the sun and moon were geocentric on their opposing sunset / moonrise thresholds relative to Earth during this period… commonly known as “First Quarter” moon phase. At 12:41:29 UTC today, it was sunrise on coordinates 117’30’W – 35’42’N ( 117.506’W – 35.705’N USGS ), epicentre of the 4th July M 6.4 SoCal event.
There is good reason to believe melt water may have contributed towards events in California, but the mainstream scientific community is not going to entertain this theory without credible back cast data and testable numbers. My numbers can be verified using the following websites…
http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Earth
http://www.sunrisesunsetmap.com
I am concerned that my recorded anomaly and first quarter both relate to SoCal within a 12 hour period… should I call the president ? 🙂
Score: 0115 ptslesterJuly 9, 2019 at 7:14 pm #6227Oh! I almost forgot… try this. On 7th July, sunset on the M 6.4 SoCal epicentre occurred at 03:09 UTC. Input the time of occurrence for the M 6.9 Molucca Sea event on this day, in the sun map… and then deduct “12 hours” !. This event time also coincides with moonrise on coordinates 64’15’W – 27’47’S Santiago del Estro, Argentina !!.
Score: 011 pts -
This topic was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by
-
|
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.