Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Cinnamon

Mt. St. Helens Volcano Rumbles with 130 Earthquakes, Growing Magma Bulges, New Steam Emissions; Two Quakes Strike Cascadia Subduction Zone .

6 posts in this topic

The most active volcano in the Pacific Northwest USA has begun to stir again with more than 130 small earthquakes beneath Mount St. Helens, and today, two more earthquakes struck the CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE!

This behavior indicates that the volcano is steadily recharging – but while it may sound alarming, the experts say they haven’t yet spotted any signs of an imminent eruption. 

 Washington’s notorious volcano is best known for its ‘cataclysmic’ 1980 eruption, which brought devastation and destruction that stretched on for miles, and visible ash fall nearly 1000 miles away. The event killed 57 people and blasted more than 1,300 feet off the top of the mountain. Now, scientists say its recharging for another eruption.

 

THE NEW ACTIVITY 

Beginning on March 14, 2016, scientists detected low magnitude earthquakes from 1.2 to 4 miles beneath Mount St. Helens. In just the last eight weeks, there have been more than 130 earthquakes, mostly of magnitudes .5 or less. 

The largest so far has been a magnitude 1.3.

Scientists say the earthquakes have been steadily increasing in numbers, with up to 40 occurring per week.

So far, though, there have not been any atypical gas emissions, increases in ground inflation, or shallow seismicity. 

Scientists claim this means that there are currently no signs of a potential eruption.

Washington’s notorious volcano is best known for its ‘cataclysmic’ 1980 eruption, which brought devastation and destruction that stretched on for miles, and visible ash fall nearly 1,000 miles away.

The event has come to be known as one of the 'deadliest eruptions in US history'. 

It reawakened in 2004, spewing steam and ash up to 10,000 feet into the air.

This activity continued until January 2008, and five months later, scientists concluded Mount St. Helens had gone to sleep.

Now, the volcano is once again  recharging.

The blue dots on the graphic below show the locations of the recent spike in earthquakes inside the volcano at Mount St Helens:

<snip>

https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/1279

I'm not that crazy about this source, but seems to be pretty well documented. Take it for what it's worth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

THIS seems to support the above - I am just very glad I do not live next-door to one of these guys! But, the people are living like the lot in Pompeii  so let it be!

 

Quote

WHEN IT COMES down to it, volcanoes spend most of their existence not erupting. If you look at almost any volcano, it might have a bout of eruption for days to months at a time, then go quiet for decades, centuries or more. So when you think about the activity at any given volcano, you should not only concern yourself with what might be happening when the volcano is actually coughing stuff up (erupting), but also when, at the surface, things look perfectly calm.

There are a number of ways to examine what a volcano was/is doing during these periods of repose. My research is like that of a historian, trying to understand what was going on before eruptions that have already happened. I do this by looking at the evidence of changes in the magmatic system recorded in the crystals that are brought up during an eruption. There you find the record of intrusions of new magma occurring frequently, even during times when the volcanic system might not erupt for 100,000 years! So the real action at many volcanoes might be happening kilometers beneath our feet.

And that's suppose to make folk feel more comfortable with the earth having colic and preparing to upchuck?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I flew by the eruption cloud on the way to Oregon in 1980. That is some serious shit.

Do you folks remember the dust that covered everything across the country?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This volcanic eruption would have a bigger and more self-evident impact on "global warming" "climate change" or whatever they call it these days, but yet it is just a volcanic eruption because it's not man-made so it cannot contribute to "global warming" in any way.  And we can't tax the volcano, so even if it does, it won't be a source of tax revenue.  So since people have money and volcanoes don't, we'll just tax the people (their contribution), based on something they didn't do ("global warming") as a result of the volcano. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, counterintelligence said:

This volcanic eruption would have a bigger and more self-evident impact on "global warming" "climate change" or whatever they call it these days, but yet it is just a volcanic eruption because it's not man-made so it cannot contribute to "global warming" in any way.  And we can't tax the volcano, so even if it does, it won't be a source of tax revenue.  So since people have money and volcanoes don't, we'll just tax the people (their contribution), based on something they didn't do ("global warming") as a result of the volcano. 

Yeah when I saw the vids of the fires in Canada, I thought the same thing, what are they going to do charge the property owner for the carbon the trees on their property let loose as they watch their homes burn to the ground... maybe charge carbon tax for the burning houses and all their belongings, too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Cinnamon said:

Yeah when I saw the vids of the fires in Canada, I thought the same thing, what are they going to do charge the property owner for the carbon the trees on their property let loose as they watch their homes burn to the ground... maybe charge carbon tax for the burning houses and all their belongings, too. 

Same thing would've happened had Al Gore been president at the time of 9/11.  Would've been more worried about the pollution occurring from a terrorist act than whether we should be going after them turds.  But then again, he's supporting the terrorists, so he might've not said anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Restore formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.