-
15 ptsCanyonratJune 25, 2020 at 6:15 am #9093
Observed: Mount Ebeko Volcano which is erupting.
Observed: M 7.4 – south of the Kermadec Islands 2020-06-18 12:49:53 (UTC) 33.294°S 177.838°W 10.0 km depth
Observed: M 7.4 – 12 km SSW of Santa María Zapotitlán, Mexico 2020-06-23 15:29:05 (UTC) 16.029°N 95.901°W 26.3 km depth
Now go to google earth and follow this, and it is eye opening. Draw a circle from the New Zealand quake out to 40,000km/24,850mls and save it. Then do the same for the Mexican quake, same distance. Where the intersect up north, measure over to Mount Ebeko Volcano which is erupting. Ebeko is only 170km/106mls from the intersection point. Mnt Ebeko is only .00425% off from a perfect triangle. I must give credit to Dutch for pointing this out. But I will add my thoughts that this triangular pattern is what Dr. Hoagland spoke of planetary geometry involving tetrahedrals. The crossing these circles in the south we arrive at 53°19’49.58″S 32°21’9.88″W. My watch center point is located 775km/480mls from this circle cross point.
Watch: M 5.0 to M 7.0 south west of the South Sandwich Islands 2020-06-24 to 2020-06-30, center point 58°55’21.02″S 24°19’23.53″W, 300km/160mls radius.
The center point is located at one of DutchSince’s “X” or “END” points for Earthquakes. Most quakes strike near this point of his.
My first mention of this watch was at 2020-06-24 3:07 UTC.
Since then the following quakes have occurred in the area, MUCH sooner then I expected.
M 4.9 – South Sandwich Islands region 2020-06-24 23:12:08 (UTC) 56.896°S 25.280°W 10.0 km depth – USGS
This is just my circles hypothesis. It is showing some promise.
Score: 015 ptsCanyonratJune 26, 2020 at 7:02 pm #9108Correctly watched for these two quakes and likely one more to come and be in the M6+ range.
Observed quakes:
M 4.9 – South Sandwich Islands region 2020-06-26 08:21:27 (UTC) 59.889°S 25.391°W 10.0 km depth. This was really a 5.0 but the USGS weighted all the readings above M5.0 at 0 and gave one a .75 weight and gave all the upper M4’s weightings of 1.
M 5.3 – South Sandwich Islands region 2020-06-26 02:10:24 (UTC) 56.750°S 25.387°W 10.0 km depth.
Score: 0115 ptslesterJune 27, 2020 at 10:06 pm #9118Mark,
I have been trying your “circle hypothesis”, so unlike me, you have feedback from your instructions. Unfortunately, I am having trouble understanding how the circle intersections “directly” relate to your watch region. so as you can appreciate I have questions…
I followed the instructions exactly as you stated, and calculated the Ebeko intersection as being on coordinates 156’14’E – 51’19’N. This location places Mt Ebeko volcano at 71 km’s (44 miles) SSE of the intersection. The M 7.4 South of the Kermadec Islands event occurred on 18th June… the Oaxaca, Mexico event occurred on 23rd June. Your opening line reads “Observed: Mount Ebeko volcano is erupting”. Mt Ebeko started erupting on 21st June after 10 days of inactivity. If the intersection was not directly in contact with Mt Ebeko, and the second circle event occurred 2 days after it first erupted… how does it relate to this equation ? On two counts, you mention “Mount Ebeko volcano which is erupting” Your words do not imply that this equation is related to triggering eruption of Mt Ebeko, merely that it is within the percentage point of a perfect triangle. If trigger theory is not the objective of this statement… why include Mt Ebeko at all ?
The South Sandwich Islands intersection, I calculated as being on coordinates 32’42’W – 54’03’S. There have now been 3 events in the South Sandwich region since you posted this watch. I measured distance from intersection to epicentre, and these calculate as…
26th June – M 4.9 – 25’23’W – 59’52’S ….. 792 km’s – 492 mls
26th June – M 5.3 – 25’22’W – 56’45’S ….. 535 km’s – 343 mls
27th June – M 5.1 – 26’46’W – 56’09’S ….. 445 km’s – 276 mlsAs you can see, the distances vary by “several degrees” from the intersection. The location of the intersection never experiences seismic activity, yet these events are presumably related to this point… how ?
You have posted an exercise for fellow forecasters to attempt, which as mentioned I have done so accordingly. But this exercise does not explain why your watch location is situated 727 km’s – 452 miles, or 6.53 degrees Southeast of the intersection, on coordinates 24’11’W – 58’33’S !. You state that your chosen location is at one of DutchSince “X” or end points… and MOST QUAKES strike near this point. Over 90% of earthquakes in the South Sandwich Islands, occur between 24’W – 26’W longitude. If you gave us an exercise to follow, and your actual watch point is over 6 degrees away from the stated intersection… what are we supposed to learn from this ?. If I wanted a quick fix from New Britain P.N.G. I simply predict 151’W, 90% of earthquakes in this region occur within a short margin of this longitude. It is a way of avoiding using “skill factor”, and you are only cheating yourself !
I know you are still learning as you have mentioned on frequent occasions… So don’t take my questions to heart. I know from experience that any hypothesis, no matter how long it has been in use, is constantly being developed. For a hypothesis to work, it has to withstand scrutiny and scepticism. If you can answer the questions put before you without hesitation, then it becomes classed as a “working” hypothesis… and this is were others engage with you, to further develop its potential.
Lastly, as another learning curve. Consider your wording in respect of fellow predictors before you post. “Correctly watched for” could be conceived as a credit worthy achievement. Your “time period” for your watch makes it a credible achievement, which is what I presume is meant by your opening words of your second post. If other forecasters have been predicting this region prior to you, and their forecast is still active, then credit for correct determination of location rightly belongs to them. We have on many occasions doubled up on predicted locations, but we usually add in our forecasts “First Credit To ######”. Its just a polite gesture, and shows respect… and besides, you wouldn’t want to crossing circles with someone that may be able to analyse you under the table… 🙂
Sincerely trying to understand !
Score: 015 ptsCanyonratJune 27, 2020 at 10:50 pm #9119Lester,
Yes I am very aware you could likely analyze me under the table. I have read some old posts where you have been referred to as “Professor”. You have my full attention and respect, truly. Being on Quakewatch has made me rapidly examine new ideas, question my methods, and made me consider that no single forecasting method will stand on it’s own, it might be a blend or combo of methods. Also I will step up my on the description of my process, my apologies on that. As you can see from much of what I write, I try to be consistent and methodical. On my “watches” I can provide best hunches/guesses on varying points. With a dash of humor. 🙂
Thank you for your comments. When I place a watch it means no credit for correct results. In the case of the Sandwich Islands, I am off of my crossing circles by hundreds of miles and I have a very wide magnitude range. Both of which are way too sloppy for a formal forecast.
What I did in this situation was I looked at the cross, and saw NOTHING there. No prior quakes, etc. So I looked around and noticed this is where Dutch has his “X” which indicates an ending point for quakes. So I made that my watch area because of that, and there are volcanoes there and many old earthquakes there.
So what is my thinking of finding a cross and then not using it. It is from my thinking about plate boundaries. If I observe two quakes along a plate boundary and then I search for the middle point between them, it is a bit of a guess BECAUSE the plate boundary is not a strait even line, it often meanders like a creek does. SO I have to (at this time) kind of follow the boundary guesstimate the middle point, and then look for a reason a quake would strike on one side or the other or closer to one of the observed quakes or not. So I look for history of past quakes and volcanoes etc.
My other consideration has been about what is going on deep down. A few weeks ago Counselor mentioned adding depth to my forecast…hmmm… I had not thought of that, but now I am. I used his suggestion to push my thinking into more 3D thinking rather then a flat 2D map thinking. So now I am using this to observe and then further fine tune my center points.
And the last two weeks have been very unexpected and busy for me and I have so much I want to study/research, including re-reading all that you have provided me and then try it for my self, and read Ben’s new text book that I received a few weeks ago.
Score: 0115 ptslesterJune 27, 2020 at 11:44 pm #9121This has to be the best counter explanation I have seen in many years my friend 🙂 . It was not my intention to put you on the spot so to speak. I have had to endure being eaten alive by genuine USGS and BGS assessors in the past… and they tore me to pieces. I have since had many years to refine my hypothesis, but age is now against me and I have no enthusiasm to take up the mantle again. A bit like the gladiator who once had a foot in the Colosseum in Rome… but is now reduced to fighting in the shanty towns lol.
There is nothing wrong with the principle of your hypothesis, and I think it is merely a case of testing it against other examples. I also think it would be more beneficial to you, if you committed to actual predictive forecasting… rather than keep posting watches. It is better to miss trying, rather than speculate an active location, event occurs… and you end up being buried in the forum with no credit to your name. South Sandwich Islands, a good call… this would have been a more credible attempt than my own, had it been an official forecast. And this is because you were bang on with the timing. This is a solitary business we are involved in, but each hit, even by a fellow forecaster makes us all feel we have achieved something. Becca got a triple hit recently, after a long absence due to a loss in the family. After what she had been through, I could think of no one more deserving to achieve this success… but it was also a pick me up for all of us.
At the end of the day, we are all trying to find an answer to the same problem. I’m sure every one has a little advice to offer you, if it helps towards an end goal… even Counselor lol. Right now, you are in the shanty towns with me, if you start building up credit as I advised… you may one day get your foot in the Colosseum 🙂
Score: 0115 ptslesterJune 28, 2020 at 12:34 am #9123I would also like to add, your humour is really appreciated. I’m a Yorkshire man myself, and it is in our blood to dabble in a little dry humour on occasion. I have been on several forums, but my best material on this site has always made me feel like the court jester relegated to a monestary lol. Earthquakes are a serious subject, and I already learned a hard lesson about humour and earthquakes, with my Guatemala / Mt Fuego incident that I mentioned several weeks ago.
Unfortunately, Counselor keeps being included in my punch lines. But he knows me, he knows I am a “serious” player, and he knows that I would never intentionally offend him… or anyone else for that matter. Humour is good for the predictive spirit, and if you post something that you imagine makes someone else smile thousands of miles away, its worth including with the serious stuff !
I’ll finish now before I make a “DAM” fool of myself… Doh! too late 🙁
Score: 015 pts115 ptslesterJune 28, 2020 at 7:31 pm #9133Mark,
I was checking out your google circles, and came up with something unusual. It may or may not be anything to do with your hypothesis, but if you follow these instructions, you can make up your own mind if it means something !. Coordinates have to be as accurately pined as possible…
On google earth, locate the M 7.4 South of Kermadec Islands epicentre on coordinates 177.838’W – 33.294’S… place and save a pin at this location. Locate the M 7.4 Oaxaca, Mexico epicentre on coordinates 95.901’W – 16.029’N… place and save a pin at this location. Using the circle option, locate coordinates 160.060’E – 50.685’N… this can be found just East of Mt Ebeko. Extend the circle South from this point, and place / save it on to the M 7.4 Kermadec epicentre. If you rotate the earth back to the M 7.4 Oaxaca epicentre, the circle should be in contact with the pin. Of less relevance… the circle continues and crosses the North flanks of Mt Etna volcano.
I found the exact start point for the circle East of Mt Ebeko, and then spent a further 2 hours trying different locations in this general area. It only works if start point of circle is exactly on latitude 50.685’N… this is the exact same latitude as Mt Ebeko volcano !
According to http://www.volcanodiscovery.com Mt Ebeko volcano is currently the most eruptive volcano on the planet… with a total of 10 eruptions since 21st June. With this amount of activity, I would speculate that further seismic activity could ensue in this region. I checked the archives and found the following…
2013-03-24 04:18:33 UTC – M 5.9 ESE of Ozernovskiy, Russia … 160.159’E – 50.731’N (listed as M 6.0 EMSC)
2019-03-28 22:06:49 UTC – M 6.2 ESE of Ozernovskiy, Russia … 159.943’E – 50.495’N (listed as M 6.1 EMSC)
This shows that earthquakes do occur at this start point, and combined with current activity from Mt Ebeko volcano… it does hold potential. I will check this out further with my method when I get time, but it would be interesting to see if seismic wave influence could be correlated to this location too !
I have been working my own analysis of the 23rd June Oaxaca event… and just refining a few details. But I have a small exercise for you to try, so you can see how I look at these scenarios. My calculations are accurate to the second, but you will get the general idea with the times provided.
Load http://www.timeanddate.com and select “Moon Light World Map”… input 11th June 23:52 UTC. At this time, it was Solar Noon (high noon) on the M 7.4 Kermadec epicentre… The SLT (Setting Lunar Threshold) was located on the M 7.4 Kermadec epicentre… and the SLT was also located on Mt Ebeko volcano.
Click “+12 hours” at base of map… On 12 June at 11:52 UTC, it was Sunrise on the M 7.4 Oaxaca epicentre… and the sun was on the opposite longitude to the M 7.4 Kermadec epicentre.
Click “+1 day” at base of map… On 13th June at 11:52 UTC, it was Sunrise on the M 7.4 Oaxaca epicentre… the RLT was located on the M 7.4 Kermadec epicentre… and the sun was on the opposite longitude to the M 7.4 Kermadec epicentre.
Click “+12 hours” at base of map… On 13th June at 23:52 UTC, it was Solar noon on the M 7.4 kermadec epicentre… and the RLT was located on Mt Etna volcano.
Real eye opener… 🙂
Score: 0115 ptslesterJune 30, 2020 at 12:26 pm #9150I checked out location off East coast of Kamchatka … 160’03’E – 50’41’N
On 19th June at 17:06:21 UTC, it was sunrise on the stated coordinates… and the moon was located on longitude 95’54’W, pre seismic longitude of the M 7.4 Oaxaca, Mexico epicentre of 23rd June.
On 21st June at 09:37 UTC, it was both sunset and moonset on the stated coordinates. Earlier at 07:54 UTC, I noted the penumbral border of the Northern hemisphere solar eclipse, was momentarily in contact with this location, the sun was located on longitude 177’58’W Lone Pine at this time… just thinking outside the box !
On 28th June between times 09:35 UTC – 09:59 UTC, the moon was geocentric on the sunset threshold for “First Quarter” moon phase… and remained at this position for the duration of this period. At 09:36 UTC, it was sunset on the stated coordinates, and the moon was located on longitude 128’21’E… ref; Oaxaca analysis in “chat room”.
On 29th June at 17:10 UTC, it was sunrise on the stated coordinates… and the moon was geocentric on the ATE threshold over Tanzania on coordinates 30’40’E – 5’54’S. At “12 hours” earlier 05:10 UTC, it was moonset in Puerto Rico, and the moon was located on longitude 155’23’W Hawaii… two very influential locations !
On 30th June at 14:22 UTC, it was moonset on the stated coordinates… and the SLT was located on the post seismic M 7.4 Kermadec epicentre of 18th June.
I don’t know if any of this is relevant… just fulfilling what I said I would do !
Score: 0 -
|
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.