Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

For discussion related to emergency preparedness, survival, self-sufficiency, food and water storage, guns, heat, light, building, gardening, etc.
Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Silver »

Did you know that the US has contracts with these countries to allow thousands of US citizens to live there in case the lava in the Yellowstone caldera erupts?

Elizabeth! We may be in your ward soon!

Click on the link below to see more. (Personally, I don't think my status is sufficient to get me or my family on an outbound flight. We'll walk to the Panama Canal, swim across, and keep going until we get to Argentina because I know more Spanish that Portuguese.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... ut-america

The U.S. is currently under contract with at least 4 countries all of which have agreed to house displaced U.S. citizens in the unfortunate event the Yellowstone supervolcano were to erupt. Hundreds of billions of dollars were paid to foreign governments to facilitate the agreement which spans a ten year period from its signing, ending in 2024.

An excerpt from an article I authored in April of 2014 titled: “Report: Brazil, Argentina and Australia sign contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars to house displaced U.S. populace when Yellowstone supervolcano erupts” reads:

The U.S. plan for relocation was formulated after a recent scientific analysis of the park revealed that Yellowstone’s supervolcano has the potential to violently erupt within the next 10-years as noted by others including the famous astrophysicist Michio Kaku.

In fact, Praag, a Pakistani publication, recently reported:

It may take up to ten years for pressure in the magma chamber of the super volcano to build. According to Dr. Jean-Philippe Perrillat of the National Centre for Scientific Research in Grenoble, France, “it is the difference in density between the molten magma in the caldera and the surrounding rock big enough for the magma from the chamber to the surface to increase “.

“The effect is the same as the extra buoyancy of a soccer ball under water fill with air, after which it rises to the surface because the surrounding water poet,” said dr. Perrillat. “If the magma volume is large enough, it should go to the surface to rise and explode like a champagne bottle that ontkurk be.”

According to Dr. Sipho Mathetwe, the South African government “sympathy for the American challenge (challenge) to Yellowstone, but we have our own challenges in South Africa. There are 200 million white people in America, and if too many of them to South Africa flights, it is a big problem, even though there is enough housing and infrastructure available. It will destabilize the country and may even bring back apartheid. South Africa is not for sale.”

However, according to the report, “Brazil, Argentina and Australia” jumped on the bandwagon, accepting the request from Washington.

Older/wiser?
captain of 100
Posts: 538

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Older/wiser? »

Well we're toast, How would that even work ,if Yellowstone blows the plume would cover and kill so many and those left in their homes would be ok wouldn't they? Anyway my family is from Australia , I'd go there. I just don't think we would live through it. I don't recall any dreamers seeing it blow , actually I believe they say the tent cities will be in SE Idaho so we must be good!

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by lundbaek »

I fail to see how a payment of hundreds of billions of dollars could be made to foreign governments without members of the US Congress approving it and the payments made known to the American public.

User avatar
Jonesy
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1530
Contact:

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Jonesy »

Older/wiser? wrote: June 17th, 2017, 9:02 pm Well we're toast, How would that even work ,if Yellowstone blows the plume would cover and kill so many and those left in their homes would be ok wouldn't they? Anyway my family is from Australia , I'd go there. I just don't think we would live through it. I don't recall any dreamers seeing it blow , actually I believe they say the tent cities will be in SE Idaho so we must be good!
I've never heard of it from dreamers either. However, I've had dreams of earthquakes and lots of volcanic activity...I couldn't say anything of its discernment, though.

Michelle
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1795

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Michelle »

I have zero concerns about the Yellowstone Supervolcano. I'm pretty sure it doesn't actually exist.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the Universal Model of Science explain this?

User avatar
gclayjr
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2727
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by gclayjr »

Well I don't know about that Yellowstone super volcano thing. But I have worked in Brazil, Argentina, and New Zealand. I fell in love with New Zealand. If I ever had to leave the U.S.A., please send me to new Zealand!. If Australia is even close to as good as New Zealand, I would definitely prefer Australia.

Regards,

George Clay

Sasquatch
captain of 50
Posts: 87
Location: Oregon

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Sasquatch »

If Yellowstone erupts, it's more likely that the ash will be blown to the east than to the west. Agriculture in the Midwest would come to a screeching halt and would take a few years to recover, so expect food shortages and high prices if it ever occurs. Looking at this map, it might be better for the ash to be blown towards the Cascades, which seem to limit the range of deep ashfall if the map is accurate.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Silver »

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-1 ... ast-7-days

There Have Been 296 Earthquakes Near The Yellowstone Supervolcano Within The Last 7 Days

by Tyler Durden
Jun 19, 2017 11:22 PM

Authored by Michael Snyder via The American Dream blog,

Is it possible that the Yellowstone supervolcano is gearing up for a major eruption? If you follow my work on a regular basis, then you already know that I spend a lot of time documenting how the crust of our planet is becoming increasingly unstable. Most of this shaking is taking place far away from the continental United States, and so most Americans are not too concerned about it. But we should be concerned about it, because a major seismic event could change all of our lives in a single instant. For instance, a full-blown eruption of the Yellowstone supervolcano would have the potential of being an E.L.E. (extinction level event). That is why it is so alarming that there have been 296 earthquakes in the vicinity of the Yellowstone supervolcano within the last 7 days. Scientists are trying to convince us that everything is going to be okay, but there are others that are not so sure.

The biggest earthquake in this swarm occurred last Thursday evening. It was initially measured to be a magnitude 4.5 earthquake, but it was later downgraded to a 4.4. It was the biggest quake in the region since a magnitude 4.8 earthquake struck close to Norris Geyser Basin in March 2014. This magnitude 4.4 earthquake was so powerful that people felt it as far away as Bozeman…

The main quake was centered about 5.8 miles underground.

The quake and aftershocks occurred just over 8 miles northeast from West Yellowstone, according to the U.S. Geological Service.

A witness reported that she felt the building she was in move.

Dozens of people reported that they felt it in and around West Yellowstone, Gardiner, Ennis, and Bozeman.
But by itself that one quake would only be of minor concern. What is troubling many of the experts is that this earthquake has been accompanied by 295 smaller ones.

There is normally a rise in seismic activity before a volcano erupts, and according to theoretical physicist Michio Kaku, a long overdue eruption at Yellowstone could “rip the guts out of the USA”…

Scientists currently believe that there’s a 10% chance that a “supervolcanic Category 7 eruption” could take place this century, as pointed out by theoretical physicist Michio Kaku who appeared on a segment for Fox News.

The grey haired physicist told Shepard Smith that the “danger” we are now facing with the caldera is that it’s long overdue for an eruption which Kaku said could “rip the guts out of the USA.”

Kaku said that a “pocket of lava” located under the park has turned out to be twice as big as scientists originally thought.
I would like to try to describe for you what a full-blown eruption of the Yellowstone supervolcano would mean for this country.

Hundreds of cubic miles of ash, rock and lava would be blasted into the atmosphere, and this would likely plunge much of the northern hemisphere into several days of complete darkness. Virtually everything within 100 miles of Yellowstone would be immediately killed, but a much more cruel fate would befall those that live in major cities outside of the immediate blast zone such as Salt Lake City and Denver.

Hot volcanic ash, rock and dust would rain down on those cities literally for weeks. In the end, it would be extremely difficult for anyone living in those communities to survive. In fact, it has been estimated that 90 percent of all people living within 600 miles of Yellowstone would be killed.

Experts project that such an eruption would dump a layer of volcanic ash that is at least 10 feet deep up to 1,000 miles away, and approximately two-thirds of the United States would suddenly become uninhabitable. The volcanic ash would severely contaminate most of our water supplies, and growing food in the middle of the country would become next to impossible.

In other words, it would be the end of our country as we know it today.

The rest of the planet, and this would especially be true for the northern hemisphere, would experience what is known as a “nuclear winter”. An extreme period of “global cooling” would take place, and temperatures around the world would fall by up to 20 degrees. Crops would fail all over the planet, and severe famine would sweep the globe.

In the end, billions could die.

So yes, this is a threat that we should take very seriously.

But today, most Americans think of Yellowstone as little more than a fun tourist attraction. But the truth is that many tourists have discovered just how dangerous Yellowstone can be. Some have been scalded by boiling water from geysers that can get as hot as 250 degrees Fahrenheit, and one man from North Carolina recently had to be flown to a burn center after he mistakenly fell into a hot spring…

A North Carolina man was flown to the University of Utah Burn Center after falling into a hot spring at Yellowstone National Park late Tuesday night.

Gervais Dylan Gatete, 21, was with seven other people in the Lower Geyser Basin north of Old Faithful when he fell, according to a park news release.

The group attempted to transport Gatete, an employee with Xanterra Parks and Resorts, by car for medical treatment. Just before midnight, they flagged down a park ranger near Seven Mile Bridge on the West Entrance Road.
Since Yellowstone is still very active, scientists assure us that it will erupt again one day.

And when that happens, all of our lives will be completely turned upside down in a single moment.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Silver »

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-2 ... -soars-800

Scientists Fear "Supervolcano" Eruption As Earthquake Swarm Near Yellowstone Soars To 800
by Tyler Durden
Jun 29, 2017 12:05 AM

More than 800 earthquakes have now been recorded at the Yellowstone Caldera, a long-dormant supervolcano located in Yellowstone National Park, over the last two weeks - an ominous sign that a potentially catastrophic eruption could be brewing. However, despite earthquakes occurring at a frequency unseen during any period in the past five years, the US Geological Survey says the risk level remains in the “green,” unchanged from its normal levels, according to Newsweek.

The biggest earthquake in this “swarm” - which registered a magnitude of 4.4 – took place on June 15, three days after the rumblings started. That quake was the biggest in the region since a magnitude 4.8 earthquake struck close to Norris Geyser Basin in March 2014. This magnitude 4.4 earthquake was so powerful that people felt it in Bozman Montana, about eight miles away.

A scientist from the University of Utah said the quakes have also included five in the magnitude three range, and 68 in the magnitude two range.

“The swarm consists of one earthquake in the magnitude 4 range, five earthquakes in the magnitude 3 range, 68 earthquakes in the magnitude 2 range, 277 earthquakes in the magnitude 1 range, 508 earthquakes in the magnitude 0 range, and 19 earthquakes with magnitudes of less than zero,” the latest report said.

An earthquake with a magnitude less than zero is a very small event that can only be detected with the extremely sensitive instruments used in earthquake monitoring.”

The 'Sunset Lake' hot spring in Yellowstone National Park.

There is normally a rise in seismic activity before a volcano erupts. And scientists currently believe there’s a 10% chance that a “supervolcanic Category 7 eruption” could take place this century, as pointed out by theoretical physicist Michio Kaku.

An eruption, Kaku said, is long overdue: The last one occurred 640,000 years ago.

To be sure, the swarm has slowed down considerably this week, and larger swarms have been recorded in the past, according to Jacob Lowenstern, the scientists in charge of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory.

Yet the possibility that the volcano could be on the verge of what’s called a “supereruption” should be enough to give the government pause. But scientists have said recently that there’s some evidence to suggest the next one could occur this century.

"Grand Prismatic" Hot Spring at Yellowstone.

So how would a supervolcanic eruption at Yellowstone impact the regional ecosystem, and the US more broadly? Well, as Liberty Blog’s Michael Snyder points out, it would be nothing short of catastrophic.

Hundreds of cubic miles of ash, rock and lava would be blasted into the atmosphere, and this would likely plunge much of the northern hemisphere into several days of complete darkness. Virtually everything within 100 miles of Yellowstone would be immediately killed, but a much more cruel fate would befall those living in major cities outside of the immediate blast zone such as Salt Lake City and Denver.

Hot volcanic ash, rock and dust would rain down on those cities literally for weeks. In the end, it would be extremely difficult for anyone living in those communities to survive. In fact, it has been estimated that 90 percent of all people living within 600 miles of Yellowstone would be killed.

Experts project that such an eruption would dump a layer of volcanic ash that is at least 10 feet deep up to 1,000 miles away, and approximately two-thirds of the United States would suddenly become uninhabitable. The volcanic ash would severely contaminate most of our water supplies, and growing food in the middle of the country would become next to impossible.

In other words, it would be the end of our country as we know it today.

The rest of the planet, and this would especially be true for the northern hemisphere, would experience what is known as a “nuclear winter”. An extreme period of “global cooling” would take place, and temperatures around the world would fall by up to 20 degrees. Crops would fail all over the planet, and severe famine would sweep the globe.

In the end, billions could die.

So yes, this is a threat that we should take seriously.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Robin Hood »

It's got to be Australia.
The Queen's head of state, they drive on the left, they eat fish and chips, they play cricket and rugby, they spell correctly..... they even have a Union Jack on the flag!

I'LLMAKEYAFAMOUS
captain of 100
Posts: 800

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by I'LLMAKEYAFAMOUS »

IF ( and that's a big 'if') it were true that the U.S. gov paid these countries to allow U.S. citizens to settle there, and the contract were for 10 years from 2014-2024, then their analysis would have been that the risk of eruption in that time warranted making the deal. I'm skeptical.

Spaced_Out
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1795

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Spaced_Out »

The Aussies don't want all you druggie down under. The leading cause of death in the US for people under 50years of age is drug overdose.
Well if you do have to come, you must bring all those Californian girls with you.

Good to see people are reading ZeroHedge and not all that fake CNN news.

User avatar
Yahtzee
captain of 100
Posts: 710

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Yahtzee »

http://mtpr.org/post/yellowstone-earthq ... rcher-says
University of Utah seismologist Jamie Farrell says the current swarm, though bigger, more frequent and longer lasting than average, is no cause for alarm.

"Yellowstone is an active volcano, and this is kind of how they act. Doesn't mean we shouldn't be paying attention to it, but it doesn't mean it's the end of the world either. This is the way the earth works," Farrell says.

More than 100 people reported feeling a magnitude 4.4 quake on June 15. That’s the biggest recorded in the current swarm so far.

Yellowstone’s largest swarm happened in 1985, when more than 3,000 earthquakes shook the park for about three months. More recently, a swarm in 2010 saw 2,000 quakes over the course of a few weeks.
So I'm not worried yet. Though admittedly I've wondered if my family should cancel our plans to head north for the solar eclipse Aug 21.

But I'd pick Argentina. I've watched enough Discovery Channel to decide humans were not meant to live in Australia.

User avatar
BeNotDeceived
Agent38
Posts: 8960
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by BeNotDeceived »

Robin Hood wrote: June 28th, 2017, 11:55 pm It's got to be Australia.
The Queen's head of state, they drive on the left, they eat fish and chips, they play cricket and rugby, they spell correctly..... they even have a Union Jack on the flag!
... Australia’s OTEC resource is limited to the coast of Far North Queensland. Given the limited resource for Australia, and unproven nature of this technology, further assessments of OTEC viability for Australia are of lower priority. ... http://www.otecnews.org/locations/australia/

OTEC can be used for many purposes such as suppling tons of irrigation water to arid coasts in Africa. Cold water irrigation greatly increases what crops can be grown and speeds growth for three times normal output from an acre of land. The Mad Genius from the Bottom of the Sea | WIRED https://www.wired.com/2005/06/craven/

Engineering students from The University of Sydney have devised a scheme to produce reactive nitrogen for fertilization of the ocean from an OTEC plant. They claim that “Each floating structure could stimulate the growth of 370,000 tonnes of sardines a year, enough protein for three million people, at a cost of $US400 a tonne, or eight cents per person per day.” The University of Sydney News has a recent article about it and also one from January. ... http://www.otecnews.org/locations/australia/

User avatar
BeNotDeceived
Agent38
Posts: 8960
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by BeNotDeceived »

OTEC can free many from their current dependence on OPEC. :ymapplause:

Image

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTEC

Must be in or near the red and have water depth of at least 600 ft. Image

Cold Fusion or something better will one day become available; until then fusion of the sun will indirectly power the world via OTEC and other renewables as fossil fuels quickly become depleted or fracking gets out of hand which may set off Yellowstone or New Madrid EQ.

Image Jeremy Feakin or Freakin Frackin; time will tell :-?


Trump is going nuclear which is good for generating electricity, but OTEC does plenty other cool things, and it actually cools the planet or selected areas rather than generating heat and nuclear waste.
Last edited by BeNotDeceived on July 1st, 2017, 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by brianj »

Silver wrote: June 28th, 2017, 10:23 pm http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-2 ... -soars-800

Scientists Fear "Supervolcano" Eruption As Earthquake Swarm Near Yellowstone Soars To 800
by Tyler Durden
Jun 29, 2017 12:05 AM

An earthquake with a magnitude less than zero is a very small event that can only be detected with the extremely sensitive instruments used in earthquake monitoring.”
Once again my mathematical background will rear its ugly head. Since the Richter scale is logarithmic, how do you get a magnitude less than zero?

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Silver »

brianj wrote: June 30th, 2017, 6:58 pm
Silver wrote: June 28th, 2017, 10:23 pm http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-2 ... -soars-800

Scientists Fear "Supervolcano" Eruption As Earthquake Swarm Near Yellowstone Soars To 800
by Tyler Durden
Jun 29, 2017 12:05 AM

An earthquake with a magnitude less than zero is a very small event that can only be detected with the extremely sensitive instruments used in earthquake monitoring.”
Once again my mathematical background will rear its ugly head. Since the Richter scale is logarithmic, how do you get a magnitude less than zero?
I've never heard of that either. Found this: https://www2.usgs.gov/faq/categories/9828/3775

How can an earthquake have a negative magnitude?
Magnitude calculations are based on a logarithmic scale, so a ten-fold drop in amplitude decreases the magnitude by 1.
If an amplitude of 20 millimetres as measured on a seismic signal corresponds to a magnitude 2 earthquake, then:
10 times less (2 millimetres) corresponds to a magnitude of 1;
100 times less (0.2 millimetres) corresponds to magnitude 0;
1000 times less (0.02 millimetres) corresponds to magnitude -1.
An earthquake of negative magnitude is a very small earthquake that is not felt by humans.

User avatar
BeNotDeceived
Agent38
Posts: 8960
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by BeNotDeceived »

brianj wrote: June 30th, 2017, 6:58 pm
Silver wrote: June 28th, 2017, 10:23 pm http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-2 ... -soars-800

Scientists Fear "Supervolcano" Eruption As Earthquake Swarm Near Yellowstone Soars To 800
by Tyler Durden
Jun 29, 2017 12:05 AM

An earthquake with a magnitude less than zero is a very small event that can only be detected with the extremely sensitive instruments used in earthquake monitoring.”
Once again my mathematical background will rear its ugly head. Since the Richter scale is logarithmic, how do you get a magnitude less than zero?
dBm means decibel scale when 0 represents 1 milliWatt. So any power measurement less than 1 milliWatt is negative.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Silver »

Did anybody on LDSFF feel this one? Cool stuff at the link that is not pasted below.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-0 ... e-20-years

"Supervolcano" Concerns Rise After Montana Hit By Strongest Earthquake In 20 Years


by Tyler Durden
Jul 6, 2017 9:05 AM

Following a swarm of over 1100 earthquakes recorded in the Yellowstone caldera over the past month, prompting scientists to voice concerns about a dormant Yellowstone "Supervolcano" slowly waking up, overnight these concerns escalated after a strong M5.8 earthquake hit western Montana early on Thursday morning - the strongest quake to hit the area in the past 20 years - the U.S. Geological Survey reported, with Reuters adding that the tremor was felt hundreds of miles away, from Missoula to Billings and some surrounding states.

The quake appears to be the largest to hit Montana since a slightly weaker M5.6 struck outside of Dillon a dozen years ago. By comparison, the state's largest quake which struck the West Yellowstone region 58-years ago was 7.2 magnitude.

The quake's epicenter was about 6 miles south of Lincoln, originating from a depth of nearly 3 miles underground, according to a preliminary report from the U.S. Geological Service.

Subsequently the USGS recorded seven more tremors in the same area within an hour of the initial quake, which ranged in magnitude from 4.9 to 3.8.

The quake which struck at 12:30 a.m. local time was strong enough to knock items off of walls and shelves in Helena and Missoula. Some Twitter users posted feeling tremors as far as Spokane, Wash., Boise, Idaho and Calgary, Canada.

Mike Stickney, seismologist at the Earthquake Studies Office, Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology on the Montana Tech campus in Butte, said the quake was probably the strongest in Montana since October 1964. The location, he said, is not surprising. “It’s right along the axis of the intermountain seismic belt.” He said the quake occurred on a strike/slip fault, a vertical fault where one side moves horizontally against the other, similar to the kind of movement experienced along the San Andreas Fault in California.

That said, he said he "does not believe" the quake is seismically tied to the recent “swarm” of smaller earthquakes in the Yellowstone National Park area. “I don’t see any direct relationship between these two sequences,” he said. “This is a pretty sizeable earthquake. It would certainly have the potential to do structural damage near the epicenter, but we’ve had no reports indicating damage yet.” Others, however, disagree.

Residents in Lincoln briefly lost power and there was a gas leak in Helena, the National Weather Service in Great Falls said on Twitter. Lewis and Clark County Sheriff Leo Dutton said Lincoln lost electricity as a result of the quake, but the power has since been restored.

Lisa Large, a bartender at the Wheel Inn Tavern in Lincoln, said the power went out and bottles flew off the shelves when the earthquake hit. Other than that, she said, there wasn’t any major damage there. She was in a fairly jovial mood when called by a Missoulian reporter near closing time at 1:50 a.m. “It slopped all the grease outta the fryer,” she said. “The kitchen’s a mess right now. The lights have been out and they just came back on. Hopefully we don’t get any more aftershocks.”

Quoted by the Missoulian, Dutton said the fire chief in Lincoln was sending people out to check for damage, but they have not found any yet. Missoula Police Department Corporal Mick McCarthy said the department has had calls from people asking what was going on with the earthquake and some medical calls, but no power outages reported or gas leaks. "No property damage reported yet, but it's still early," McCarthy said.

Ray Anderson, 76, told the Associated Press that it was the strongest quake he had ever felt.

Carolyn Kennedy, who lives in South Calgary, said she felt about 20 seconds “of waves” from the tremors. “We heard rumbling noises,” she messages FoxNews.com, adding that perfume bottles on her desk shook from the tremblor.

Twitter lit up around Montana seconds after the quake, with people weighing in from Bozeman to Kalispell to Glacier National Park to Billings and elsewhere in Montana.

"Did the entire state of Montana just have an earthquake?" tweeted Brandon Furr. Sean Ryan of Butte tweeted, "Now that everyone in Montana is awake from that earthquake ... you guys want to play Monopoly or something?" Glacier National Park account tweeted, "Western Montana just had a decent-sized earthquake. Good shake here at Park HQ in West Glacier #geology."

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by brianj »

I didn't feel it in Utah. And the reporter who wrote this story is a shameless fear monger. The epicenter of these quakes is about 175 miles from the Yellowstone caldera so there's no rational reason to link today's activity to Yellowstone. The only reason for doing so is to scare people so they share the story and his employer makes more advertising money off the page hits.

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Elizabeth »

=)) How dumb can you be.
Yahtzee wrote: June 29th, 2017, 10:40 am But I'd pick Argentina. I've watched enough Discovery Channel to decide humans were not meant to live in Australia.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Robin Hood »

Elizabeth wrote: July 7th, 2017, 3:48 am =)) How dumb can you be.
Yahtzee wrote: June 29th, 2017, 10:40 am But I'd pick Argentina. I've watched enough Discovery Channel to decide humans were not meant to live in Australia.
You do have some nasty spiders Elizabeth. :)

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Elizabeth »

No bears, nor lions or tigers nor rattle snakes.

Spaced_Out
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1795

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Spaced_Out »

Robin Hood wrote: July 7th, 2017, 3:51 am
Elizabeth wrote: July 7th, 2017, 3:48 am =)) How dumb can you be.
Yahtzee wrote: June 29th, 2017, 10:40 am But I'd pick Argentina. I've watched enough Discovery Channel to decide humans were not meant to live in Australia.
most of
You do have some nasty spiders Elizabeth. :)
Yip spiders are cool,,,, No second amendment in Australia -so have to leave the guns behind. Poor buggers will be left defenceless against the spiders. @-)

Spaced_Out
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1795

Re: Which do you prefer, Brazil, Argentina or Australia?

Post by Spaced_Out »

brianj wrote: July 6th, 2017, 9:18 pm I didn't feel it in Utah. And the reporter who wrote this story is a shameless fear monger. The epicenter of these quakes is about 175 miles from the Yellowstone caldera so there's no rational reason to link today's activity to Yellowstone. The only reason for doing so is to scare people so they share the story and his employer makes more advertising money off the page hits.
It is connected to the same fault system so movement in one area can affect other areas. It also indicates with all the other micro seismic events that have occurred leading up to the recent multi-decade medium quake is symptomatic of the region becoming active. What surprised me about the recent quake is how shallow it was - very close to surface which is never a good sign.

Post Reply