-
115 pts115 pts6 ptsJECMay 29, 2018 at 1:26 pm #4706
Lester, watching carefully as you know. I am looking at the eq patterns..from Great Crack to East Rift Zone, and it concerning. From Hawaii yesterday PM: This is a Civil Defense message for Monday, May 28 at 5:42 p.m.
The Pacific Tsunami Warning Center reports the earthquake that occurred at approximately 5:42 p.m. was NOT large enough to cause a tsunami for the Island of Hawaii. There is NO tsunami threat for the island of Hawaii.
Preliminary data indicates that the earthquake measuring a magnitude of 4.4 was centered in the Hilina region of Kilauea.
I think activity is ramping up..and a 7 should hit, maybe explosively. JEC
Score: 06 ptsJECMay 29, 2018 at 1:41 pm #4707And then this article points out a depth of 3.5 km which is the layer for slump.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222301959_Rock_mass_strength_and_slope_stability_of_the_Hilina_slump_Kilauea_volcano_Hawai%27i18 quakes at that level over 3 in the past three days. Now, if NOT a tectonic earthquake, say a volcanic one…does it count for the successful prediction?
Score: 0115 ptslesterMay 29, 2018 at 3:48 pm #4708Hi JEC
I noted some significant data on 23rd – 24th May related to Hawaii,the data was relevant to my particular detection method. The 2+ event count for 23rd – 24th May was 73 – 46 respectively… this increased dramatically to 135 on the 25th, and prompted me to post my current forecast. The rate has exceeded the 25th May count over the last 3 days, and seems to suggest a buildup to a potential “explosive” event. Weather the earthquake is tectonic or volcanic, it is “still” a naturally occurring event, and therefore if the magnitude is within the range you posted, it becomes a valid prediction. If on the other hand, you predicted a 5.0 in North Korea, and it coincided with a nuclear test, it would be invalid because the event was man made… and you would probably have a couple of guys in suits and shades knocking on your door 🙂
From your current forecast details, determining a “successful prediction” on this site would have to be negotiated with Ben (SO). I recently completed a 20 day forecast period for Nikol’Skoye Island, Russia. I added a further 7 days on the expiry time because I was following the data, and the data is the science aspect of what we do here. I did this knowing it would not be a valid claim should an event occur here, because I had exceeded the maximum 20 day period allowed for predicting on this site !. Different detection methods produce different results, sometimes you can see a potential seismic event coming many days ahead. Other times you see something major in the data, and catch the actual event within 24 hours. My friend Chris and I have on many occasions missed out on success because our combined efforts favour the former method… and consequently we have missed several 6+ opportunities because of the time period restriction. From a scientific point of view, if your data suggests a potential seismic location, and you have a successful hit within 30 days using a minimal margin of error, it goes against what would be considered as “Chance”… and from my point of view, should count !
Score: 06 ptsJECMay 30, 2018 at 12:28 pm #4714Lester, USGS looks to be managing the earthquake data, several sites have no recent reports, and I know there is a high level of smaller quakes. Looking on the web, I now see a lot of rather official reports that the US government has found USGS actually manipulating data. I sure hope earthquakes such as could be caused by a geothermal (green) energy source is not one of them! Just my two cents when I find chunks of EQ suddenely showing up in blocks on the USGS reporting site, and NOTHING on some sites. Surely the recent 4 somethings should have shown up outside of USGS! Or it could be just overloading all sites with too much data..thats possible I guess. But I see lots of small reports on EQ for Alaska, etc..just not in areas where we know there is activity, S. California or Hawaii.
Score: 0115 ptslesterMay 30, 2018 at 5:45 pm #4716Question is… how would the USGS benefit from manipulating the data ?. I noted yesterday a significant contact in the ACE satellite data linked to Volcano, Hawaii “big” time !. Chris has posted data in the chat forum, which also reflects our belief that another major event is probable at this location. With regards USGS, it could be a case of too many chiefs and not enough Indian’s… different people covering different aspects of the event, and not working together.
Apologies for droning on a little yesterday… droning is a symptom of old age 🙂
Score: 0115 pts -
|
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.