Trip - You and Yellowstone

[txradioguy]

I dont have to back-peddle on the fact that Houston is located on the periphery of the lobate ashflow from Yellowstone's Lava Creek eruption..

And yet you have.  Repeatedly.

But you keep digging, desperately hoping to find that one bone. "It's gotta be here somewhere!"  

Chip you've tossed out enough bones for an entire damn sleleton.  I haven't had to dig one bit.  All I've done is hand you the shovel.

You're doing quite the good job yourself.

Case in point.  You're picking nits on the difference in opinion on periphery to hide the fact that your assertion that there was some sinister plot in why USGS personnel were moved to Houston was just plain wrong.  The insinuation you made was it was done to get them out of some alleged danger zone.

The map I posted from the Teton County Wyoming Emergency Management Agency shows they wouldn't be out of danger.

So then you shifted to the statement of "I doubt there is a significant university system south of Houston".

Until I showed you that quite the opposite was true.

Not content with being wrong or admitting your error...you had to throw out the red herring of not having a competent geo physics department or some such nonesense.

I can't wait to see you wrap on another layer of tinfoil and double down on your crackpot theory.

Or come back with meaningless invesctive and personal attacks on my intelligence...place of employment or some such rubbish while claiming that by somehow showing and exposing the holes in your BS claim...I'm somehow attacking you.

Please...continue on.

[Trip]

Case in point.  You're picking nits on the difference in opinion on periphery to hide the fact that your assertion that there was some sinister plot in why USGS personnel were moved to Houston was just plain wrong.  The insinuation you made was it was done to get them out of some alleged danger zone.

The map I posted from the Teton County Wyoming Emergency Management Agency shows they wouldn't be out of danger.

That map, whether more accurate, or not, shows ash fall, but not significant amounts, as the margins of that ashfall are far removed from from yellowstone itself, and once again, on the periphery of the fallout.  Being "out of danger" does not mean being absolutely free of previous ash fallout. The periphery fallout is insignificant, intermittent, and not likely to pose any real threat to inhalation or building collapse.

Beyond that, you're looking at the previous, historic ash fall, which is dependent upon prevailing winds at the TIME of the eruption.  If you're gaging "danger" by known ash outflow from previous HISTORY, you're fabricating a litmus test that is pure nonsense, and has no absolute bearing on future ash fall. You've no idea in what direction the prevailing winds will trend in during a current eruption, or if  the jetstream now even resembles what was present 640,000 years ago!

 A rough estimate of previous ashfalls from Yellowstone's super eruptions is more than sufficient to establish a suitable command and control center, or safe scientific observation point.

You're picking nits here, but I don't have to do so to recognize that Houston is, in fact, on the periphery of the Yellowstone Lava Creek eruption.

So then you shifted to the statement of "I doubt there is a significant university system south of Houston".

Until I showed you that quite the opposite was true.

Not content with being wrong or admitting your error...you had to throw out the red herring of not having a competent geo physics department or some such nonesense.

I'm pretty certain that the PhD geologists associated with Yellowstone are more interested in establishing a new  association with university having existing graduate studies in geology, and available equipment, rather than one with basket weaving, or even undergrad oceanography.

Why would this be such a mystery to you? When was the last time you had a class in applied science? 9th grade, if even then? Relevance matters.

Or come back with meaningless invesctive and personal attacks on my intelligence...place of employment or some such rubbish while claiming that by somehow showing and exposing the holes in your BS claim...I'm somehow attacking you.

Please...continue on.

I don't have to address your intelligence; you do fine undressing it on your own.

[txradioguy]

That map, whether more accurate, or not, shows ash fall, but not significant amounts, as the margins of that ashfall are far removed from from yellowstone itself, and once again, on the periphery of the fallout.  Being "out of danger" does not mean being absolutely free of previous ash fallout. The periphery fallout is insignificant, intermittent, and not likely to pose any real threat to inhalation or building collapse.

Beyond that, you're looking at the previous, historic ash fall, which is dependent upon prevailing winds at the TIME of the eruption.  If you're gaging "danger" by known ash outflow from previous HISTORY, you're fabricating a litmus test that is pure nonsense, and has no absolute bearing on future ash fall. You've no idea in what direction the prevailing winds will trend in during a current eruption, or if  the jetstream now even resembles what was present 640,000 years ago!

 A rough estimate of previous ashfalls from Yellowstone's super eruptions is more than sufficient to establish a suitable command and control center, or safe scientific observation point.

You're picking nits here, but I don't have to do so to recognize that Houston is, in fact, on the periphery of the Yellowstone Lava Creek eruption.


I'm pretty certain that the PhD geologists associated with Yellowstone are more interested in establishing a new  association with university having existing graduate studies in geology, and available equipment, rather than one with basket weaving, or even undergrad oceanography.

Why would this be such a mystery to you? When was the last time you had a class in applied science? 9th grade, if even then? Relevance matters.


I don't have to address your intelligence; you do fine undressing it on your own.

More back peddle.  Don't trip....Trip.

[TVDOC]

Let's keep it on topic folks, and confined to the science........

As an aside, Trips citation of this:

The policy covers all departmental employees when they engage in, supervise or manage scientific activities, analyze and/or publicly communicate information resulting from scientific activities, or use this information or analyses in making agency policy, management or regulatory decisions. It also covers all contractors, cooperators, partners, volunteers, and permitees who assist with scientific activities.

It is exactly this document that has recently been at the center of the NASA/AGW discussions recently seen in the media, and a large group of scientists and engineers that are former NASA employees taking issue with this policy.

It's not a conspiracy when government agencies typically engaged in scientific research are instructed to confine their results to conformation with accepted political parameters..........

Science and politics don't mix.........

doc

[Trip]

Let's keep it on topic folks, and confined to the science........

As an aside, Trips citation of this:

It is exactly this document that has recently been at the center of the NASA/AGW discussions recently seen in the media, and a large group of scientists and engineers that are former NASA employees taking issue with this policy.

It's not a conspiracy when government agencies typically engaged in scientific research are instructed to confine their results to conformation with accepted political parameters..........

Science and politics don't mix.........

doc

Doc,

Thank you, i appreciate your reference to bona fide (good faith) science necessitating a divide between politics and the science itself. Undoubtedly the same undue political influene that has corrupted climate science and even NASA, has affected other sciences, including USGS studies.

As recently as December 16, 2011, four months ago, NASA  had public statements from NASA Administrator, Charles Bolden, as well as a statement on "NASA News", which indicted:

• To support this culture of transparency, the framework reaffirms NASA's public communications policy of 2006, which states NASA scientists may speak freely with the public about scientific and technical matters.
  
  "The ability to accurately and widely communicate our amazing science discoveries is one of our highest priorities," said NASA Chief Scientist Waleed Abdalati at the agency's headquarters in Washington. "NASA set a high standard with its forward-looking communications policy in 2006, and today we welcome the opportunity to join other agencies that are re-dedicating themselves to the highest standards of scientific excellence and advancing public trust in our discoveries."

This "Scientific Integrity" is anything but a "culture of transparency" and scientists are not at all able to speak freely, neither with the public, nor within the internal chain of command.

The "Scientific Integrity" policy is nothing but an Orwellian titled doctrine, that prohibits any sort of scientific integrity at all, disallowing dissent from accepted theories, defining "integrity" in science by political consensus, and even deciding what constitutes "whistle blowers" based on their corrupt preconception of legitimacy.

The emphasis of this policy in December of last year, is what finally brought the 49 RETIRED NASA scientists, no longer under the boot-heel of NASA control, to make public statement of their rejection of this corrupt policy, on April 10th of this year.


With regard to this discussion, the USGS site, usgs.gov, has main menu selections to such politicized ideologies as "Climate and Land Use Changes", and "human health", all of which entail the application of political agendas, a not the exercise of science without any sort of a priori conclusion.

USGS site has 9,230 links on that site containing "Climate change".  But even more disturbing is that USGS has 27 hits for "Sustainable Development", which is a political agenda from the United Nations, intending nothing less than replacement of the U.S. Constitution with a Marxist ideology of collectively owned property, where "individual rights" are non existent.  If anyone doubts the significance of Sustainable Development, this video is a good place to start your research: "America's Choice: Liberty or Sustainable Development".

These, and other similar interests are NOT the legitimate domain of the USGS, which is allegedly a science organization, not one for promoting political agendas, particularly those agendas in conflict with this nation's Constitution.

[CG6468]

Never use 50 words when 10,000 will do.

[Trip]

Never use 50 words when 10,000 will do.

Yeah, that'll do well to decrease the odds over fighting about one word.

[Trip]

Here is a map of earlier ground displacement, made via satellite GPS from benchmarks, brought about from focus on the results of a series of quake swarms 2008-2009, occurring in the northern area of Yellowstone Lake, which were a part of the period of "extraordinary caldera expansion" from 2004-2010.



source

This image shows the crustal expansion from the result of one dike, causing an uplift in the lake bottom meters high.


Below is a much larger area of coverage than just the yellowstone lake area, including several states.

GPS Displacement Map, Feb 2005-Jan 2012



source

Examination of the vector arrows, shows a clear area of expansion, in the northern area of the park, into western Montana, trending in an east-west direction.  This differential in motion between local vectors represents an expansion "zipper" of instability for any potential future eruption.

The above GPS displacement vectors are derived from the below GPS station map,with each location being clickable, and leading to graphs of that station's motion over time.

Yellowstone-Snake-River-Plain GPS Network

The idea that Yellowstone activity and expansion has somehow "subsided" or quieted down, is just not supported by the data. The scale of the area effected by the Snake River plume is nothing short of enormous.




,

[Billy_Bob]

Note the "zipper" has rotated 90 deg and is about 100 miles long...

crustal deformation and tectonic stresses are placing a huge strain in this one location. I'm beginning to think that there are other factors at work here and the triggers for an eruption are much more than just those that a strata volcano have..

[Trip]

Note the "zipper" has rotated 90 deg and is about 100 miles long...

crustal deformation and tectonic stresses are placing a huge strain in this one location. I'm beginning to think that there are other factors at work here and the triggers for an eruption are much more than just those that a strata volcano have..

That's for damn sure.

Stratovolcanoes are commonly fed by the melt coming off of plate subduction, resulting in small scale dike and magma chamber, which are periodically fed by the subduction. The scale of the snake river plume and the amount of magma, dwarfs stratovolcanoes, and this is why the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory Hazard Response Protocols, based on stratovolcano time-scales, is so inadequate.

[Ballygrl]

So where are we now in all this? I haven't heard anything since last year.

[Billy_Bob]

That's for damn sure.

Stratovolcanoes are commonly fed by the melt coming off of plate subduction, resulting in small scale dike and magma chamber, which are periodically fed by the subduction. The scale of the snake river plume and the amount of magma, dwarfs stratovolcanoes, and this is why the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory Hazard Response Protocols, based on stratovolcano time-scales, is so inadequate.

I was noticing the rise is pretty consistent over about a 100 mile in diameter circle. this would be consistent with a rather large build up under the surface of magma.. not steam as that would be localized to a very small area as with the original assessment by YVO.  its no wonder they have become deathly silent... the silence is deafening..

[Ballygrl]

:::::waves::::: to BillyBob, hope you're doing well.

[Billy_Bob]

So where are we now in all this? I haven't heard anything since last year.

just getting a good look now bally.. it appears things have changed dramatically in the last 6 months. the original weak spot has dissipated and a new one taken its place. the new one is 10X the size of the original... and the weak "zipper" lengthened and directional change...things are interesting and it will take a few days to fully look into it.

 

[Ballygrl]

just getting a good look now bally.. it appears things have changed dramatically in the last 6 months. the original weak spot has dissipated and a new one taken its place. the new one is 10X the size of the original... and the weak "zipper" lengthened and directional change...things are interesting and it will take a few days to fully look into it.

OK, so in English (LOL) is that good or bad news?

[Trip]

I was noticing the rise is pretty consistent over about a 100 mile in diameter circle. this would be consistent with a rather large build up under the surface of magma.. not steam as that would be localized to a very small area as with the original assessment by YVO.  its no wonder they have become deathly silent... the silence is deafening..

I think part of the problem is that the Snake River plume itself has had a "plateau" diverge to the west from its shallowest peak, and this results in a greater surface area effected, not to mention further opportunity for magma feed upwards.   As a result, it's conceivable that there may be more than just the one magma chamber located roughly in the center of the park caldera.

(Magma "chambers" are much smaller and more shallow, than the "plume" itself, which is what is represented in the image below.)



Source

[Billy_Bob]

OK, so in English (LOL) is that good or bad news?

Ballygirl....

things are changing.. and rather rapidly at that.. good or bad?  couldn't tell ya right now.. but this thing is no strata volcano.. so the signs of per-eruption stress could be very different.. and we could be missing them all together..

[Billy_Bob]

I think part of the problem is that the Snake River plume itself has had a "plateau" diverge to the west from its shallowest peak, and this results in a greater surface area effected, not to mention further opportunity for magma feed upwards.   As a result, it's conceivable that there may be more than just the one magma chamber located roughly in the center of the park caldera.

(Magma "chambers" are much smaller and more shallow, than the "plume" itself, which is what is represented in the image below.)



Source

the complexities of a super volcano... LOL

the fact that previous eruptions have weakend the areas above the chamber makes them all suspect.  just the change in the last 6 months of stress is wild..  a rapid one at that.  going to take some time to see whats going on up there.. i live to close to this thing to not know what is happening..

[Billy_Bob]

Ballygirl..

over the last 9 months many monitoring wells were drilled up there. lots of funky timing of the geysers and such.. ground temps in Norris area are above 115 degrees at 16" in depth which is s huge jump over the last year.. many things point to serious problems on the horizon.. I just dont have it all together yet.


by the way... i am fine how are you!

[Ballygrl]

If an eruption is minor can we assume damage would be minimal? or does it not matter at all, any size eruption would be dangerous?

[Billy_Bob]

If an eruption is minor can we assume damage would be minimal? or does it not matter at all, any size eruption would be dangerous?

Ballygirl..

many eruptions have occurred in YS over time. most have been steam events and minor localized damage.  that said, were 60,000 years overdue for a large eruption.  so it all depends on what causes the eruption and what stress is being applied to the magma chamber at the time.  ODDs are for a minor eruption.. but even that could cascade the caldera to collapse..

its hard to quantify what no one understands fully..

[Trip]

If an eruption is minor can we assume damage would be minimal? or does it not matter at all, any size eruption would be dangerous?

Generally, the nature of the eruption is determined by the composition of the melt in the magma chamber (not the plume itself).  If that chamber has a high sialic (silica and aluminum) continental crust melt, generally 50% and above, then it will (more likely) be an explosive eruption.

The scale of the eruption itself, not explosivity,  is based on the amount of eruptible magma itself, which increases at a greater rate as the surface area of the chamber(s).

The make up of the melt can be guess-timated by seismic refraction surveys, which we know they've been doing.  While there were statements of the melt composition some years ago,  there really has not been any more recent statement at all... which is somewhat disturbing.

Is the absence of any statement of the melt constitution from that "Scientific Integrity" at work? Who knows...    This is yet another reason why scientists should be able to speak freely, outside of any government political constraints.

[Billy_Bob]

Generally, the nature of the eruption is determined by the composition of the melt in the magma chamber (not the plume itself).  If that chamber has a high sialic (silica and aluminum) continental crust melt, generally 50% and above, then it will likely be an explosive eruption.

The scale of the eruption itself, not explosivity,  is based on the amount of eruptible magma itself, which increases at a greater rate as the surface area of the chamber(s).

The make up of the melt can be guess-timated by seismic refraction surveys, which we know they've been doing.  While there were statements of the melt composition some years ago,  there really has not been any more recent statement at all... which is somewhat disturbing.

Is it that "Scientific Integrity" at work? Who knows...    This is yet another reason why scientists should be able to speak freely, outside of any government political constraints.

there have been two surveys in the last year.. yet nothing is being published. scientific chatter has stopped.  there is no open discussion at all.  its like everyone is scared of telling the truth..

if there is truly nothing going on and no concern than the "chatter" would reinforce that belief..  the silence lends itself to distrust... climate-gate just reinforced the distrust and now the Obama EO shoves it into the "your hiding stuff" realm..

it just dawned on me that hiding stuff is what Climate scientists did and wanted hid... this EO allows their bad behavior to go unchecked and uncorrected...  I wonder why it is being allowed?  what scam they are trying to pull..

[Trip]

there have been two surveys in the last year.. yet nothing is being published. scientific chatter has stopped.  there is no open discussion at all.  its like everyone is scared of telling the truth..

if there is truly nothing going on and no concern than the "chatter" would reinforce that belief..  the silence lends itself to distrust... climate-gate just reinforced the distrust and now the Obama EO shoves it into the "your hiding stuff" realm..

it just dawned on me that hiding stuff is what Climate scientists did and wanted hid... this EO allows their bad behavior ro go unchecked and un corrected...

Those "two surveys" that we know of are active seismic refraction surveys where they generate the seismic impulse for the refraction mapping (commonly with explosives).  

They can also use passive seismic refraction, using the P-waves from larger earthquakes to do a further, and deeper mapping. We don't have any idea how many of those they've actually done.

[added] The first, local active seismic refraction, is sort of like laying down flush on top of an elephant. You know the elephant is "big" and you get some good local details of the elephant, but you have no idea how big the elephant really is until you step further away... which is what using more remote p-waves from earthquakes allows. However you no longer have that local detail of the "elephant" when using those remote earthquake p-waves.

[Trip]

This is a hypothesis, one not seen corroborated by other geologists, to my knowledge, but in agreement with plate tectonics, the Wilson Cycle, isostasy, and physical mechanics.

The town of McAdams, New Brunswick Canada, located just north of Maine, was in the news recently as a result of earthquake swarms there.

• McAdam plagued for weeks by ‘earthquake swarms'
  
  McAdam Quakes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g49dnP78L8A
  
  Google Map: McAdam, New Brunswick, Canada: http://g.co/maps/s4qbr

NORTH AMERICAN CRATON

The north American craton is the portion of the continental plate that is stable, and has been undisturbed by previous tactonic events.  The eastern edge of the north American Craton is marked by the Appalachian mountains which were formed from a plate collision with the Eurasian plate, and the western boundary represents from disruption and accretion resulting form plate subduction, volcanism, and notably the Snake River plume moving in an east-northeastern directon relative to the North American plate.

The indentation in the craton, caused by the Snake River Plume, which feeds Yellowstone,   is readily apparent in the below maps.




How Do The McAdam Quakes Relate To Yellowstone?
McAdam, New Brunswick is located outside the eastern edge of the north American craton and the plate is roughly 80 to 100 km thinner there.

The below map is a "Gnomonic projection", which means that any straight line indicates a it is following a "great circle", or a path following a circle going through the center of the earth, which means it is the least distance between two points on the map. Seismology commonly uses Gnomonic maps because seismic waves follow the crust along lines of a great circle for first arrival time of the seismic events..

The inset map of ANSS quakes on the west coast in the last 7 days, shows the quake dispersal is roughly disseminating from Yellowstone and radiating toward the west coast of the United States. This is supported by the fact that the Yellowstone Snake River Plume has doubled back toward the west-southwest[1], likely from resistance to the north American craton, making both the west coast quakes, and the quakes in McAdam, seem to be resultant effects of forces applied by the Snake River plume upon the north



The snake river plume is doing the pushing (toward the northeast), and the craton is just resisting that force.

Picture  a houseboat, with a big engine attached on the back. And that houseboat gets caught on a "snag", something like a shoal, or submerged tree.  The houseboat is no longer moving forward, and instead the force put on it by the "engine", is now all directed backwards (westward), and no longer pushing the houseboat forward. But the houseboat rocks forward and spins somewhat, since the submerged tree isn't centered with the  "engine" and that houseboat itself.

The craton is the houseboat and it is the thickest portion of the plate, being the original part of that plate that was not ever really disturbed, and this acts like the "snag". However in this case, the "engine", the Snake River Plume, isnt really attached to the houseboat at all, but just pushing on it, and yet also "chewing up" that "houseboat". That portion of the craton that is being chewed up is seen in the image as the purple area to the southwest labeled "deformed craton".