'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock

Posted by: Susan

'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/13/10 03:11 AM

Maybe an iffy source, but...

"Earthquake Warning for Northern California and Oregon"

'Following the recent significant earthquake off Eureka, California last week, there is a moderately higher probability of a much stronger quake along the San Andreas fault between San Francisco and Oregon in the next two weeks. According to Jack Coles, an earthquake forecaster, the recent series of quakes, including the 6.5 shaker off the Coast are possibly fore-shocks of something bigger yet to come.' Before it's news

I've never heard of Jack Coles

Sue
Posted by: Tarzan

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/13/10 05:11 AM

I've heard of the guy and supposedly he is right sometimes. But even a broken clock is right twice a day... We will see in the next two weeks, I guess.
Posted by: JohnE

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/13/10 06:37 AM

Did he predict what happened in Haiti today?

Didn't think so...

Predicting that an earthquake might be followed by another earthquake is sort like predicting the ground is gonna get wet after it rains.
Posted by: Blast

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/13/10 12:47 PM

I was wondering if the sea lions left because they sensed an earthquake coming. That would be fascinating.

-Blast
Posted by: James_Van_Artsdalen

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/13/10 03:06 PM

He didn't get a false negative, i.e., predicted no earthquake for Haiti. That's very different from no prediction at all. Moreover, if he really does do prediction you'd expect to actually focus on specific areas, and Haiti isn't likely to have be an area of investigation.

No cites of published work. No reference to methodology or research. No error bars given for incredibly precise predictions (54% this, 64% that). The bogo meter is going off loudly here.
Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/13/10 10:24 PM

On one hand, looking at this guys previous predictions, specifically his forecast page, I'm underwhelmed. Lots of the faults in the US southwest and west are statistically overdue. So make a prediction, pretty much any vaguely worded prediction, and there is some chance it will be 'true' if you squint your eyes enough.

On the other hand, just because someone makes a prediction based on smoke doesn't mean an earthquake isn't going to happen some time soon. IMO a certain level of watchful alertness and well rounded preparedness will prove helpful either way. No matter what does or doesn't happen.
Posted by: benjammin

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/13/10 10:54 PM

I'm no geologist or seismologist or anything like that, but here's my go at it. Let's see if I even get close:

I predict that before the end of the month, there will be an earthquake along the California Coast of at least magnitude 8.

Well, one can at least hope...LOL
Posted by: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/14/10 04:31 AM


I'll go for a Magnitude 8.1 on Saturday Feb 13th 2010 05:05 centred at 34.82N 119.00W Lake of the Woods. whistle

Posted by: JohnE

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/14/10 06:38 AM

Unbelievable...



Posted by: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/14/10 05:39 PM

Quote:
Unbelievable...


I don't think its unbelievable, just that the prediction has a very very small probability of occurring with such a precise prediction. Widen the bounds of the prediction and the prediction becomes more probable, but with less actual usefulness in making it worthwhile to publish a warning to the public.

Saying a large earthquake will occur in the next 20 years somewhere in California is just as pointless even though the probability of making that prediction is very probable.

There has been a case made for something called 'Earthquake storms' though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_storm

But whether this can be applied to global scale is highly debatable.

But it might still be worthwhile looking out for domestic and wild disappearing/nervous animals i.e. The local newspaper lost pet columns have increased dramatically and poor SW reception due to increased noise, poor or strange GPS wandering/accuracy specifically due to ionospheric errors and strange cloud formations which have unusual colours.

Watching the reaction of the tourists on the beach during the boxing day tsunami is a case in point. It took a long time for the penny to drop for many of the tourists to react to the sea draining away/disappearing in front of their eyes.

Posted by: JohnE

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/14/10 05:55 PM

I was referring to making jokes and hoping for 8.0 magnitude earthquakes to occur.


Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/14/10 11:42 PM

I'm not making any prediction, beyond the obvious one:(somewhere, sometime, something will happen) but the Caribbean plate does jut into the fault that gives the west coast so much excitement.

http://www.countrywatch.com/imgs/global_thematic/Tectonic_Plates.gif

It isn't so much that the plate tectonics isn't a interactive system where movement of one part can't trigger changes in another. My doubt is centered on people's ability to understand this chaotic and noisy system and make reliable predictions.

Posted by: benjammin

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/15/10 12:35 AM

No jokes, and certainly not hoping for any such thing. Rather, it is make the point that such things happen; it is inevitable that they will, and it shouldn't matter the when or the where. We should be prepared regardless of the time and place. In adding my prediction, I am pointing out that the specifics are meaningless once you are aware of the perpetual risk and take steps to mitigate it proactively.
Posted by: wildman800

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/15/10 03:14 AM

Jim Berklund of Orange County, Los Angeles, Ca is now a retired Geologist, who worked for Orange County. He is a very accurate earthquake predictor.

His system is simple, he counts the number of Lost Pets ads in the paper everyday. When he notes a dramatic increase in "Lost" ads, he looks at where the various animals were lost at, area wise. That tells him where an earthquake is about to occur and how strong the earthquake will be.

Item to note: all those critters (sea lions???) that took over Pier 39 in San Francisco, have suddenly got up and left to parts unknown. I'm glad I don't live in San Francisco or anywhere thereabouts, right now.....
Posted by: Mtnmom5

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/15/10 03:48 AM

Oh boy, I have a son living in San Jose...
Posted by: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/19/10 11:12 PM


From the Great Californian Earthquake of 1857. Perhaps Californians should keep a watchfull eye out for an unusual or new dusty white fog as well.

The 12 days of rain also grabbed my attention as well. wink


Quote:
The first shock started at 8 in the morning and lasted between 80 and 90 seconds.
It began very gently, became strong, and was a little less strong when it ended. The
ground immediately around us seemed to shake violently like a cradle rocking. Only
rarely do earthquakes last so long and have such strange motions. The water standing
in pools was thrown about and splashed over their edges. The water in the ditches
around the village was also thrown about and over the banks, and from being crystal
clear became thick with mud. Dogs howled and the beasts stood like statues while
flocks of startled birds flew shrieking from south to north as if moved by an invisible
force. The people fled into the streets; many could not stand and in terror fell to their
knees and cried out, "Lord have mercy". The houses cracked and if they did not have
light roof's of asphalt would have fallen in, which would have made this earthquake as
destructive as the one in San Salvador in Central America. Many people were nause-
ated. Along the banks of the creek near here the earthquake has produced long open
cracks of varying width. A few minutes after 8 there was another earthquake, which
lasted for a short time. At 11 at night there was a third shock which lasted 4 seconds;
during the night three more were felt, making a total of six that were noticed by most
people. There is also another phenomenon. From the first shock at 10 A.M. until five
P.M. the earth has been moving constantly, though it has required close attention to
notice this. There have certainly been more than a few periods, up to 20 minutes long,
of almost imperceptible earthquakes. It seemed as though the Earth, tired of suffering
our sins, was shaking herself free of us as birds shake off' what disturbs their feathers.

The day before the shock the clouds collided with each other, as if in aerial combat.
One lady, seeing this, predicted that something was about to happen in the earth. Even
the cocks' crows have seemed prophetic. For the last four or six weeks we have seen
a new kind of white and dusty fog that has never appeared before. Some people who
have spent time in it say that it stays in one's hair like flour or ashes. If I am not
mistaken, some silent air currents have been passing over us, which have influenced
even if they have not caused these earthquakes.

We hope these phenomena will be studied by naturalists. They should bear in mind
that last winter (1855-56) there was so little rain that the fields were not covered with
vegetation, and that this winter was very late, the first rains not falling until December
28 instead of October or November as is usual. There is reason to believe that in this
region the Earth's surface is underlain by layers, or perhaps deep streams, or great
pits of asphalt, as is shown by the springs and seeps of this mineral found in this area.
The earthquakes began after 12 days of rain (counting from December 28th to the 8th
of this month), as if they had been produced by an alteration of the elements, the long
drought being ended by the rains.

On the night of the 9th and 10th, three more shocks were felt, though all were brief.
The aspect of things remained threatening.
Posted by: hikermor

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/20/10 12:31 AM

Voodoo science, pure and simple.

And, yes, there will be major earthquakes in the future...
Posted by: bws48

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/20/10 12:52 AM

There does seem to be something that animals can sense; if we could figure out what it is, it might help us in our predictions. The video of Sophie the dog running out of the room about 15 seconds before the earthquake sure impressed me. 15 seconds doesn't sound like much, but she was out of the room by the time it struck.

If you missed the video, try this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MFzcl-kZHo
"Sophie the dog senses earthquake in Eureka at the Times-Standard"
Posted by: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/20/10 02:10 AM

Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MFzcl-kZHo
"Sophie the dog senses earthquake in Eureka at the Times-Standard"


It might be that Sophie could have sensed the P wave arrival before the more destructive S wave.

Quote:
A quick way to determine the distance from a location to the origin of a seismic wave less than 200 km away is to take the difference in arrival time of the P wave and the S wave in seconds and multiply by 8 kilometers per second. Modern seismic arrays use more complicated earthquake location techniques


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seismic_wave

Assumminig the 8km/second and the epicentre of the Eureka Earthquake was 70km away

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_rha1.html

then the time difference would be around 9 seconds between the P wave and S wave arrival times.
Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/21/10 01:34 AM

And then there is the big daddy of them all, Yellowstone and the recent earthquake swarm. Not a prediction but a good read and a discussion of an issue to keep an eye on.

http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/2010/01/more_on_the_january_2010_yello.php

http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/2010/01/wednesday_whatzits_yellowstone_1.php

To keep an eye on with scores of other issues. The second link includes a link to several informative sites. This and other issues point out the need to plan, learn, train, and prepare and help others do the same. But also to stay frosty and to avoid feeding panic and or passing rumors.
Posted by: Russ

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/21/10 01:14 PM

Originally Posted By: Art_in_FL
. . .stay frosty and to avoid feeding panic and or passing rumors.
That last bit deserved repeating. Sometimes I find myself getting caught up in the stuff (being polite here) that passes for information on the web. It's always good to step back and ask whether the info makes sense and to consider the time frames the earth works with. Anyone can make a prediction that sometime in the next millennium there might be a major volcanic eruption that could end all life on Earth -- anything is possible. But what does that mean to us as we prepare? Not much.

Make preparations for likely events: hurricanes on the Gulf Coast, tornadoes in the mid-west, earthquakes along the major faults, rain in California. . . shocked None of these are end of time scenarios, they're real events that anyone can justify making necessary preparations.
Posted by: hikermor

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/21/10 01:32 PM

Originally Posted By: Russ

Make preparations for likely events: hurricanes on the Gulf Coast, tornadoes in the mid-west, earthquakes along the major faults, rain in California. . .:o None of these are end of time scenarios, they're real events that anyone can justify making necessary preparations.


The rain here in California has washed out a construction project in our neighborhood, creating a sinkhole at a nearby intersection, and interrupting our water supply. This makes for a nice training exercise. I am collecting gutter runoff for gray water applications and digging out our stash of bottled water. Utility workers have hooked us up temporarily, but I have found that we have water pressure in sink faucets, but not from the showerheads... When the DW and DD arise, they will have their choice of a Sunshower or a waterless shower/hair wash kit I purchased from Brigade Quartermaster a few years ago. It will make for some interesting experiments and learning experiences.

All of this should help us cope when we have a real emergency, like a significant earthquake.
Posted by: Susan

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/21/10 07:50 PM

"When the DW and DD arise, they will have their choice of a Sunshower or a waterless shower/hair wash kit ..."

Don't forget the simple little bird-bath: a coffee-spoon of baking soda in a half-gallon of warm water. It cleans very well (esp body oil and odor), is neutral and easy on the skin, needs no rinsing (unless you've added too much soda), and can be applied with a washcloth or sponge.

Sue
Posted by: Russ

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/21/10 08:10 PM

Another reason to keep baking soda in stock.
Posted by: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/21/10 10:03 PM

Quote:
And then there is the big daddy of them all, Yellowstone and the recent earthquake swarm. Not a prediction but a good read and a discussion of an issue to keep an eye on.


I don't really keep an eye on the Yellowstone Caldera simply because if the cork pops it really is just simply the end of the world (this would be a TEOTWAWKI in which no level of preparedness would be useful), although this link is a little disconcerting.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_all.php

The depths Earthquakes of 8.9 Km is just where the magma bubble depth boundary is located.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wrhcvA0n3A

'Old Faithful' could well be where the cork pops.



Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/22/10 03:55 AM

Originally Posted By: Susan
"When the DW and DD arise, they will have their choice of a Sunshower or a waterless shower/hair wash kit ..."
Don't forget the simple little bird-bath: a coffee-spoon of baking soda in a half-gallon of warm water. It cleans very well (esp body oil and odor), is neutral and easy on the skin, needs no rinsing (unless you've added too much soda), and can be applied with a washcloth or sponge. Sue


Interesting. I don't recall ever having hear that formula before. I've been around a few years and I'm still picking up handy tips. Thanks.
Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/22/10 04:12 AM

Originally Posted By: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor

I don't really keep an eye on the Yellowstone Caldera simply because if the cork pops it really is just simply the end of the world (this would be a TEOTWAWKI in which no level of preparedness would be useful), although this link is a little disconcerting.


I guess it all depends on how close you are. And which way the wind is blowing. One wag suggested that people close to Yellowstone might surf the pyroplastic flow, all the way to the gulf of Mexico. Up side is that if you make it you have one hell of a story to tell the grand kids. There I was ...

Posted by: CJK

Re: 'Significant' quake in CA may be a foreshock - 01/23/10 06:59 PM

I am begining to believe that everything East of the San Andreas will plunge into the Atlantic.....lol.