Newsgroup sci.geo.geology 33611

Directory

Subject: Searching for Oil and Gas on the Internet--Seminar -- From: wrcrowley@aol.com (WRCrowley)
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: karish@gondwana.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Subject: Re: CME-Fried Comets -- From: karish@gondwana.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Subject: Re: RFD: reorganize sci.geo.earthquakes and sci.geo.geology - 12 Sept 96, version 6 -- From: hatunen@netcom.com (DaveHatunen)
Subject: Re: non-ag nitrates in GW -- From: reichln@ltec.net (Gary Reichlinger)
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: gwangung@u.washington.edu (R. Tang)
Subject: Re: continental plate motion -- From: harper@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (John Harper)
Subject: Re: Mars Life Scam Rigged By NASA, NSF -- From: Kennedy
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: ba137@lafn.org (Brian Hutchings)
Subject: Lost City of Ubar Lecture -- From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Re: Lost City of Ubar Lecture -- From: will@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Will Morse)
Subject: Re: RFD: reorganize sci.geo.earthquakes and sci.geo.geology - 12 Sept 96, version 6 -- From: Richard Adams
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: "Andrew W. Robinson"
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: "Andrew W. Robinson"
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: "Robert D. Brown"
Subject: Re: RFD: reorganize sci.geo.earthquakes and sci.geo.geology - 12 Sept 96, version 6 -- From: williams@pangea.stanford.edu (Tom Williams)
Subject: what's "spudding" ???? -- From: jakala@netcom.com (henry jakala)
Subject: Lite Geology on the WWW -- From: nmbmmr@nmt.edu (NM Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources)
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: matts2@ix.netcom.com (Matt Silberstein)
Subject: Re: Mars Life Scam Rigged By NASA, NSF -- From: meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John Wilkins)
Subject: Repost in response to today's traffic: Flummox Alert -- From: oseeler@mcn.org (Oliver Seeler)
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH -- From: "Robert D. Brown"
Subject: Re: Complexity Unstable (was Creation VS Evolution) -- From: Glenn Anderson
Subject: Weekly USGS Quake Report 9/5-11/96 -- From: michael@garlock.wr.usgs.gov (Andy Michael)

Articles

Subject: Searching for Oil and Gas on the Internet--Seminar
From: wrcrowley@aol.com (WRCrowley)
Date: 12 Sep 1996 18:03:11 -0400
Where are the Oil & Gas Sites on the Internet?  How do I find them
quickly, saving time and on-line costs?  How will this information benefit
me and my company?
  Join the author of Gulf Publishing s 1996 directory  Oil and Gas on the
Internet  for a 3  hour-long working and interactive seminar which shows
you how to search for oil and gas information on the Internet from your
PC.  
  Go online and visit sites for oil companies, service companies, current
prices, government projects, academic research, industry associations,
discussion forums, testing laboratories worldwide.
  receive a copy of Gulf Publishing s  Oil and Gas on the Internet , a $49
value, plus an updated Internet browser-compatible disk containing 1,000
sites already catalogued for you to use on the Internet.  
Where              Holiday Inn, 14703 Park Row (Katy Freeway at Highway 6)
When:	          Tuesday, September 17, 1996
Time:	          Continental breakfast at 8:00am
	          Working seminar 8:30am-12:00noon
Cost:	          $129 tax included, per person.
	          Payable by check or company PO, no credit cards please.
Reservations:    Call 713-370-3846 to book your reservations or for more
information, or email to compete@concentric.net or wrcrowley@aol.com
Bill Crowley
Information retrevial and analysis for oil, 
gas and chemical industries.
Competitive Analysis Technologies
11702-B Grant Road, Suite #112
Cypress, TX  77429
Phone 713-370-3846
Fax     713-376-6231
http://www.concentric.net/~compete
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: karish@gondwana.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Date: 12 Sep 1996 21:33:21 GMT
In article <3231D8AA.2682@navix.net>,
Robert D. Brown, M.D.  wrote:
>Once this "smoke" from the lunar-forming impact (whose total mass was
>some 2,500 times greater than the mass of all Earth's modern
>continental plates) "settled", a single large piece of continental
>crust had been formed via the precipitation of plasma from the ionized
>state.
Why don't other models of the Moon-forming impact include
your requirement that the whole planet be turned into plasma?
>This large land mass formed a veneer of extremely hard and
>brittle rock that extended from one pole of planetary rotation to the
>other, and was widest and thickest at the planetary equator.  This land
>form's perimeter represents the gravitational projection of a co-
>rotating plasma torus created by the lunar-forming impact, and confined
>by the Earth's magnetic field.
This is not a credible way for orbiting plasma to arrive
at the planetary surface.
>The lunar-forming impact excavated
>Earth beneath the contact site down to the core-mantle boundary, and
>this deshielded the planet's core magnetic field.
>
>This first land on Earth covered slightly more than a third of the
>planet's surface and took the geometrical shape of a wedge or segment
>from a grapefruit or orange. There are excellent plasma-coupled and
>orbital mechanic reasons (which I can go into much later) to understand
>that the geocentric midpoint of Pangaea contained a geologically large
>(est. 800 km diameter) surface deposit of metallic iron (originally
>derived from the Mars-sized impactor's planetary core).
So the impactor penetrated to the core-mantle boundaary, but its
iron core wound up at the surface?
>It appears that the Pangaea described above was subsequently fractured
>by a very large land-based impact in its portions that form the African
>Congo in the modern era.  The Appalacian Mountains, the Atlas
>Mountains, and the eastern-most portions of the northern-most segments
>of the Andes Mountains of South American were created by this impact,
>and represent arc segments of this impact's crater rim.
When did all this happen?
>I should point out (as Plato did in the the Timaeus) that there are
>significant differences in the mechanics of very large cratering events
>when the impactors strike land as opposed to sea basins.
Do you understand what a metaphor is?  Can you suggest how
Plato knew about the ancient history of the Solar System?
>Simple-minded folks might, at first, think that this model requires
>that the impactor provide all of the energy required for
>mountain-forming processes, but they would be wrong.  The continental
>plates are rigid structures, and were even more rigid and hardened in
>the past.  Because the Earth's surface is that of a geoidal form, e.g.
>not a perfect sphere, tremendous stress forces are created in the
>plates as they move across the planet's surface.  These enormous plate-
>specific tectonic stress forces are catalytically released by the very
>large oceanic impacts of the type contemplated by this model, but the
>tectonic fracturing that occurs tends toward congruency with the
>shock-associated planetary great circles described above.
Maybe I'm simple minded, but I expect that stresses don't
build up in rocks that exceed the strength of the rocks.
I also expect that such stress buildups would be measureable.
Since these stresses haven't been observed by techniques that
should have found them if they existed, I think they probably
don't exist.
>water is a non-compressible substance.  When a very large high velocity
>impactor (whose own diameter may exceed the depth of any terretrial
>ocean)strikes in an oceanic location, there is a near-instantaneous
>shock pulse that may dramatically shift the relative positions of
>smaller continental plates.
Water is more compressible than rock is.  This isn't open
to argument; it's easy to measure.
The shock wave from a major impact event would vaporize much
of the nearby ocean and turn it into a compressible gas,
turning farther-away water into a spray of droplets similarly
inefficient at transmitting stress.
This model is incompatible with physical reality at every
point.
--
    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@pangea.stanford.edu
Return to Top
Subject: Re: CME-Fried Comets
From: karish@gondwana.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Date: 12 Sep 1996 21:38:34 GMT
In article <01bba0d2$f491e900$156860cc@dial.inetnebr.com>,
Robert D. Brown  wrote:
>
>Yes, note that there is a potential for a parity-breaking interaction
>between coronal mass ejections (CME's) and comet tails that may explain the
>asymmetrical distribution of comets in prograde and retrograde moving
>orbits and explain the origin of asteroids as "CME-Fried Comets".
Is this insight really the subject of a research project
now being funded by the US Government?  Would you care to
offer details?
--
    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@pangea.stanford.edu
Return to Top
Subject: Re: RFD: reorganize sci.geo.earthquakes and sci.geo.geology - 12 Sept 96, version 6
From: hatunen@netcom.com (DaveHatunen)
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 22:04:05 GMT
In article <323870BE.7974@oro.net>, Richard Adams   wrote:
>REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) 
[...]
>Newsgroup lines:
>sci.geo.earthquakes               Seismic events and predictions.
>sci.geo.geology                   Geological Science.
>sci.geo.earthquakes.calif-world   Seismic events worldwide.
>sci.geo.earthquakes.predictions   Predictions of seismic events.
[...]
>RATIONALE: sci.geo.earthquakes.calif-world
>
>This discussion includes California and the world.  It is the place
>to read and post nearly everything on the earthquakes topic with
>world wide news coverage including California.
I'm a bit baffled by this. Is California not considered part of the
world, so it must be listed separately?
[...]
-- 
    ********** DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@netcom.com) **********
    *               Daly City California                  *
    *   Between San Francisco and South San Francisco     *
    *******************************************************
Return to Top
Subject: Re: non-ag nitrates in GW
From: reichln@ltec.net (Gary Reichlinger)
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 22:38:14 GMT
Sinjin Eberle  wrote:
>Greetings,
>I am looking for research concerning the possible sources of nitrates in
>groundwater that is not agriculturally derived.  I realize that
>explosives and films are possibilities, but need more information
>concerning the fate and transport and life cycle characteristics of
>these and other possible sources.  
>Thank you
>Sinjin Eberle
>Sandia National Laboratories
>cheberl@envc.sandia.gov
	I remember seeing information concerning natural nitrates in
groundwater in Nebraska. It was from organic matter in very thick
layers of loess soils that would overlay the aquifer. If you had any
interest in this problem, I am sure that some of the State agencies
would have publications.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: gwangung@u.washington.edu (R. Tang)
Date: 12 Sep 1996 21:34:26 GMT
In article <51903a$i16@nntp.Stanford.EDU>,
Chuck Karish  wrote:
>Robert D. Brown  wrote:
>>Chuck Karish wrote:
>>> 
>>> I know any number of people who will consider that Mr. Brown's
>>> position makes no sense at all, as long as he chooses to
>>> ignore geologic data that contradicts his theories.
>>The best of your stratigraphic data can be provided good
>>alternative explanation using the model under development. 
>If your concept of "good" encompasses "correct", I doubt it.
>>Patience, Chuck, patience.  This is a hobby for me.
	And it's Chuck's life and livelihood.
	I find it amusing when an amateur tries to tell a professional 
he's wrong.
-- 
Roger Tang, gwangung@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director  PC Theatre
	Editor, Asian American Theatre Revue: 
	http://weber.u.washington.edu/~gwangung/TC.html
Declared 4-F in the War Between the Sexes
Return to Top
Subject: Re: continental plate motion
From: harper@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (John Harper)
Date: 12 Sep 1996 21:51:38 GMT
In article ,
Scott Barboza   wrote:
>
>More recently, geologists have focused on the edge-force mechanism.
>Calculations were originally carried out by Forsyth & Uyeda (1975)
>and confirmed by Chapple & Tullis (1977). 
Harper (1975) predates both of those. The latest published paper in that 
area is Harper (1990), but Cocksworth (1994), and Cocksworth and Harper 
(1996), suggest that friction at the bottom of slabs is more important, 
and ridge push less important, than they seemed in 1990.
Ridge push can be less important than it looks: Harper (1986) equ (18)
derived a multiplier q which is 1 for simple-minded ridge push 
calculations but could be as low as 0.04 if 2 plates are in contact
only near the top of the lithosphere, with asthenosphere penetrating
between them lower down. Cocksworth and Harper (1996) found q=0.049.  
Cocksworth GR (1994) Modelling plate driving forces for the present and 
  the Cenozoic. PhD thesis, Univ. of Cambridge, UK.
Cocksworth GR and Harper JF (1996, submitted for publication) Plate
  driving forces. 
Harper JF (1975)  On the driving forces of plate tectonics. Geophys. J. 
  R. astr. Soc. 40, 465-474
Harper JF (1986) Mantle flow and plate motions. Geophys. J. R. astr.
  Soc. 87, 155-171 
Harper JF (1990) Plate dynamics: Caribbean map corrections and hotspot
  push. Geophys. J. Int. 100, 423-431.
John Harper Mathematics Dept. Victoria University Wellington New Zealand
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Mars Life Scam Rigged By NASA, NSF
From: Kennedy
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 00:20:33 +0100
In article , meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
writes
>
>No, it wasn't Edison, it was some other guy, Elisha something.  The 30 
>minutes business, though, is true.
>>
>
Not often wrong, but you're right again ;=)
Elisha Grey, I think - just needed the memory jogged - Edison came into
the story because he was tasked with working a way around Bell's patent
while he worked for Western Union.
--______________________________________________________
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: ba137@lafn.org (Brian Hutchings)
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 23:35:57 GMT
In a previous article, schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) says:
it's very good to have a plasma-based stab at a model
for origins, since it is, after all, 99.44% of known matter
in Universe; it did seem, doc.Brown, that you were saying that
the supposed impact actually plama-ized most of Earth;
is this correct?...  there's nothing wrong with thinking BIG, so long
as you can scale it down to Earthsize!...  now, if
you could tie it into Alfven's cosmogeny,
we'd have Plasmoid Soup-to-nuts (sorry .-)
	in any case, I was very glad that you showed us that fact that
Mauna Loa is in the center of the ring of fire, as obvious as
it should have been, as this is of some importance (esp.if
it is, indeed, iridium-enriched, as you stated) to *any* theory
that is "supercontinental".  my sugestion about Olympus Mons
as a parallel, though, must be helped by noting that,
since Mars is so-much smaller, it's "life" was apparently faster,
by billions of years, than Earth's, and
Olympus Mons might reperesent a near-final stage
of tectonic activity.
	personally, in line with Moore, I feel that
the impact enthusiasts have gone too-wildly in the other direction,
and that it may well be that the solar system does act,
after the initial periods of acretion, to keep really threatening impacts
at bay; after all, does not most of the visible stuff
of this galaxy rotate in a rather confined manner,]
mostly in one direction around one center (and lesser centers,
like stars) ??...  in other words,
the lunar cratering may be seen to be a good example
of the freezing-up of a tectonic system,
with some final blockages resulting in explosive cratering,
the kind that could release iridium form the interior.
	in this light, the mention by another of slab-bottom friction
may be relavent to another model; how, for instance,
is the conundrum about the mantle being both solid (by telemetry) and
liquid (by neccesity of mantle currents) currently handled?...
and I did remember, today, the name of that shoptool;
it's a "toggle press" -- don't get your fingers caught in one!
also, the newpaper coverage that I read of the Shoemaker-Levy impact,
before it happenned, was quite open to any possibility, and
it was certainly derived from expert opinion; in other words,
some of your science-history is a bit pointless, doctor.
>So your ideas are that the impact which formed the Moon also
>formed the Pacifc Basin, started and powers plate tectonics, 
>and created life? Oh, boy. When do you believe this miracle
>impact occured?
-- 
There is no dimension without time.  --RBF (Synergetics, 527.01)
(Brian Hutchings -- ba137@lafn.org)
Return to Top
Subject: Lost City of Ubar Lecture
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Date: 12 Sep 1996 22:51 UT
                     Jet Propulsion Laboratory's
                      Public Information Office
                      von Karman Lecture Series
                          "The Road to Ubar"
                          a film directed by
                               Nick Clapp
              Introduced by Dr. Ron Blom & Nicholas Clapp
                    Thursday, September 19, 7pm
                    JPL's von Karman Auditorium
                         4800 Oak Grove Blvd.
                        Pasadena, California
                           Free admission
                    (818) 354-5011 for information
Emmy-award winning director Nick Clapp presents an exciting film describing the
discovery of the lost city of Ubar in ancient Arabia. Ubar, a major center in
Arabia for the frankincense trade thousands of years ago, existed only in myth
until its discovery in the early 1990's, when its location was revealed by
various remote sensing technologies, historical research, and traditional
archaeology. Dr. Ron Blom is a remote sensing specialist and a geologist at
JPL, whose participation in expeditions to Ubar in 1991-92 helped to locate,
excavate and further understand the lost city. 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Lost City of Ubar Lecture
From: will@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Will Morse)
Date: 12 Sep 1996 18:23:30 -0500
We presume this is no relation to the famous lost city of Fubar.
Will
In article <12SEP199622511279@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>,
Ron Baalke  wrote:
>                     Jet Propulsion Laboratory's
>                      Public Information Office
>                      von Karman Lecture Series
>
>
>                          "The Road to Ubar"
>                          a film directed by
>                               Nick Clapp
>
>              Introduced by Dr. Ron Blom & Nicholas Clapp
>
>                    Thursday, September 19, 7pm
>                    JPL's von Karman Auditorium
>                         4800 Oak Grove Blvd.
>                        Pasadena, California
>                           Free admission
>                    (818) 354-5011 for information
>
>Emmy-award winning director Nick Clapp presents an exciting film describing the
>discovery of the lost city of Ubar in ancient Arabia. Ubar, a major center in
>Arabia for the frankincense trade thousands of years ago, existed only in myth
>until its discovery in the early 1990's, when its location was revealed by
>various remote sensing technologies, historical research, and traditional
>archaeology. Dr. Ron Blom is a remote sensing specialist and a geologist at
>JPL, whose participation in expeditions to Ubar in 1991-92 helped to locate,
>excavate and further understand the lost city. 
-- 
#      Gravity,                    #    Will Morse
#      not just a good idea,       #    BHP Petroleum (Americas) Inc.
#              it's the law.       #    Houston, Texas 
#                                  #    will@starbase.neosoft.com
#
#   These are my views and do not necessarly reflect the views of BHP !
Return to Top
Subject: Re: RFD: reorganize sci.geo.earthquakes and sci.geo.geology - 12 Sept 96, version 6
From: Richard Adams
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 16:12:35 -0700
DaveHatunen wrote:
> 
> In article <323870BE.7974@oro.net>, Richard Adams   wrote:
> >REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
> 
> [...]
> 
> >Newsgroup lines:
> >sci.geo.earthquakes               Seismic events and predictions.
> >sci.geo.geology                   Geological Science.
> >sci.geo.earthquakes.calif-world   Seismic events worldwide.
> >sci.geo.earthquakes.predictions   Predictions of seismic events.
> 
> [...]
> 
> >RATIONALE: sci.geo.earthquakes.calif-world
> >
> >This discussion includes California and the world.  It is the place
> >to read and post nearly everything on the earthquakes topic with
> >world wide news coverage including California.
> 
> I'm a bit baffled by this. Is California not considered part of the
> world, so it must be listed separately?
We have the existing group sci.geo.earthquakes which would
remain unmoderated to allow the fastest propagation of earthquake
news from a point near the post originator's news server.
Then we want to focus the group by moderation to eliminate
the spam and separate the subjects that have historically
lead to the most flames.
Predicitions versus non-predictions is a workable division
of topics that would promote meaningful discussions in the
two groups, and permit moderation to be effective for both,
with each having their own standard for post acceptance.
Name for prediction group = sci.geo.earthquakes.predictions
Name for non-predicitions group = under scrutiny here
...So what do we call the new moderated earthquakes group?
Yes, California is a major producer of many things, not the least
of which is news worthy earthquakes.  They don't have a monopoly
on earthquakes, sensors, scientists, theoriticians, improved
building codes, and experience with events but they have have
a disproportionate share of these.
Recognizing that the original purpose for sci.geo.earthquakes
was to spread information from ca.earthquakes to the rest
of the world, the new group name continues that purpose.
My previous surveys on this had this one chosen. (calif-world)
Are there additional suggestions for a moderated group name
which invites contribution by Californians?
The name sci.geo.earthquakes.moderated is just too plain
...or is it.  (e-mail me if you don't want to post)
Richard Adams 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: "Andrew W. Robinson"
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 18:11:07 -0500
Robert D. Brown wrote:
> 
> My discussion thread relates to the global system of mountains (Rockies, Central America, Andes,
> trans-Antarctic, western Australian Rise, Phillipine Island Chain, Kolyma Range of Asia, Brooks Range of
> Alaska, and McKenzies of Canada) that, in fact, forms a great circle (correcting for 65 million years of plate
> motions) centered on the world's largest igneous-enriched volcanic mountain, e.g. Hawaii.  Estimates in the
> literature for the age of the volcanism at the Hawaii mantle site range from 65 to 70 million years, placing
> its temporal origins near or at the KT boundary.
> 
As I understand this, you are arguing that this global system of mountains represents 
essentially a single crater with Hawaii (or the orginal Emperor Seamount) as its central 
peak. One of the Voyager spacecraft returned images of a moon of Jupiter or Saturn that 
had undergone an impact similar to the one you describe, with a crater on the scale of 
the moon itself. (I cannot recall the moon or planet now, but I could look it up.) A 
documentary on the Voyager mission discussed the particulars for such an impact at some 
length. It even offered a very interesting simulation using a rifle and rocks of various 
sizes. 
The upshot was that there was a critical range of relative sizes between the impactor 
and the impactee to create such a feature. The problem this demonstration raises for 
your hypothesis is that such an impact reworks the entire surface of the impactee. To 
my knowledge, the geologic evidence does not support a reworking of the entire earth's 
surface 65 millions years ago. There are places with demonstrated stratigraphic continuity 
across the KT boundary, and there are lots of places with demonstrated ages greater than 
65 million years.
At the very least, such an impact would have reworked the entire Pacific basin. Correct 
me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the entire Pacific is younger than 65 ma.
Andrew Robinson
-- 
Offshore Business Unit                    email: awrobinson@amoco.com
Amoco Production Co.                            phone: (504) 586-6888
New Orleans, LA                                   fax: (504) 586-2637
-----
The events depicted herein are fictional. Any similarity to persons 
living or dead is entirely coincidental...oops, wrong disclaimer
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: "Andrew W. Robinson"
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 18:11:07 -0500
Robert D. Brown wrote:
> 
> My discussion thread relates to the global system of mountains (Rockies, Central America, Andes,
> trans-Antarctic, western Australian Rise, Phillipine Island Chain, Kolyma Range of Asia, Brooks Range of
> Alaska, and McKenzies of Canada) that, in fact, forms a great circle (correcting for 65 million years of plate
> motions) centered on the world's largest igneous-enriched volcanic mountain, e.g. Hawaii.  Estimates in the
> literature for the age of the volcanism at the Hawaii mantle site range from 65 to 70 million years, placing
> its temporal origins near or at the KT boundary.
> 
As I understand this, you are arguing that this global system of mountains represents 
essentially a single crater with Hawaii (or the orginal Emperor Seamount) as its central 
peak. One of the Voyager spacecraft returned images of a moon of Jupiter or Saturn that 
had undergone an impact similar to the one you describe, with a crater on the scale of 
the moon itself. (I cannot recall the moon or planet now, but I could look it up.) A 
documentary on the Voyager mission discussed the particulars for such an impact at some 
length. It even offered a very interesting simulation using a rifle and rocks of various 
sizes. 
The upshot was that there was a critical range of relative sizes between the impactor 
and the impactee to create such a feature. The problem this demonstration raises for 
your hypothesis is that such an impact reworks the entire surface of the impactee. To 
my knowledge, the geologic evidence does not support a reworking of the entire earth's 
surface 65 millions years ago. There are places with demonstrated stratigraphic continuity 
across the KT boundary, and there are lots of places with demonstrated ages greater than 
65 million years.
At the very least, such an impact would have reworked the entire Pacific basin. Correct 
me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the entire Pacific is younger than 65 ma.
Andrew Robinson
-- 
Offshore Business Unit                    email: awrobinson@amoco.com
Amoco Production Co.                            phone: (504) 586-6888
New Orleans, LA                                   fax: (504) 586-2637
-----
The events depicted herein are fictional. Any similarity to persons 
living or dead is entirely coincidental...oops, wrong disclaimer
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: "Robert D. Brown"
Date: 13 Sep 1996 02:10:01 GMT
Andrew W. Robinson  wrote in article
<3238988B.5648@amoco.com>...
> Robert D. Brown wrote:
> > 
> > My discussion thread relates to the global system of mountains
(Rockies, Central America, Andes,
> > trans-Antarctic, western Australian Rise, Phillipine Island Chain,
Kolyma Range of Asia, Brooks Range of
> > Alaska, and McKenzies of Canada) that, in fact, forms a great circle
(correcting for 65 million years of plate
> > motions) centered on the world's largest igneous-enriched volcanic
mountain, e.g. Hawaii.  Estimates in the
> > literature for the age of the volcanism at the Hawaii mantle site range
from 65 to 70 million years, placing
> > its temporal origins near or at the KT boundary.
> > 
> 
> 
> As I understand this, you are arguing that this global system of
mountains represents 
> essentially a single crater with Hawaii (or the orginal Emperor Seamount)
as its central 
> peak. 
That is correct.  RDB
One of the Voyager spacecraft returned images of a moon of Jupiter or
Saturn that 
> had undergone an impact similar to the one you describe, with a crater on
the scale of 
> the moon itself. 
Proud to say I have my fingerprints on components of Voyager I & II.   RDB
(I cannot recall the moon or planet now, but I could look it up.) A 
> documentary on the Voyager mission discussed the particulars for such an
impact at some 
> length. It even offered a very interesting simulation using a rifle and
rocks of various 
> sizes. 
Please do look it up, there was a lot of Voyager data, and I am not
familiar with this.  Sounds very interesting to me.  RDB
> 
> The upshot was that there was a critical range of relative sizes between
the impactor 
> and the impactee to create such a feature. The problem this demonstration
raises for 
> your hypothesis is that such an impact reworks the entire surface of the
impactee. 
Firstly, the Hawaii impact did rework the entire planet's structure.  The
ring of mountains wasn't there prior to the impact, and their circular
fracture line is a fairly significant manifestation on the continents where
it appears.
Secondly, the path of shock propagation that I propose is one that
distributes the energy of the impact over time and distance.  It
distributes the impact shock in a global manner, one that propagates much
of its energy into space.  The atmosphere is pretty much blown away in the
regions where the shock wave punches up from beneath the plates, creates
mountainous fractures, and moves off into space.
Third:  Impact heat is partially "negated" by the vast quantities of cold
sea water that vaporize during these events.
Finally, much of the heat of the impact is dissipated over  time by being
buried beneath the Moho.  This doesn't occur with impacts on continental
plates.  Also, the uplift of the continents that occurs on sides facing the
oceanic basin (because of impact-associated thrusting of the basalts) is
only gradually released over time.  There is not a tremendous differential
produced by this effect, but it is enough that gravity ultimately causes
the oceanic plates to reseal using the same material.  I'm not sure about
this, but there is probably a very rapid phase of reflow toward the impact
site and a much prolonged course of basalt underflow that produces the
mid-oceanic MORBs.  RDB
To 
> my knowledge, the geologic evidence does not support a reworking of the
entire earth's 
> surface 65 millions years ago. There are places with demonstrated
stratigraphic continuity 
> across the KT boundary, and there are lots of places with demonstrated
ages greater than 
> 65 million years.
The Hawaii impact is a geometrical proof for a model of land formation in
the aftermath of lunar genesis.  This model involves the establishment of
fixed ANISOTROPIC shifts in the radiometric series as they precipitated
from a plasma in the aftermath of lunar genesis.  This is an extremely
complex discussion, the crowd isn't quite ready, and there are some out
there who still don't understand the singular importance of geometrical
proofs in the workings of scientific debates.  I'll get to the rock dates
over the course of the next several posts. RDB
> 
> At the very least, such an impact would have reworked the entire Pacific
basin. Correct 
> me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the entire Pacific is younger than 65
ma.
As it should be.  RDB
> 
> Andrew Robinson
> -- 
> Offshore Business Unit                    email: awrobinson@amoco.com
> Amoco Production Co.                            phone: (504) 586-6888
> New Orleans, LA                                   fax: (504) 586-2637
> -----
> The events depicted herein are fictional. Any similarity to persons 
> living or dead is entirely coincidental...oops, wrong disclaimer
> 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: RFD: reorganize sci.geo.earthquakes and sci.geo.geology - 12 Sept 96, version 6
From: williams@pangea.stanford.edu (Tom Williams)
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 16:55:26 -0700
As the person who wrote the sci.geo.geology charter, I thought
I'd like to try to be the first to express my unmitigated 
opposition to this proposal.
(although I did originally propose that s.g.g. be moderated,
a proposal that was shot down by overwhelming demand).
I now think that even though there's a lot of garbage
on the group, leaving it unmoderated and judiciously
using killfiles to weed out the junk is the way to 
go.  I'm opposed to trying to censor the group, and
particularly to putting that censorship in the hands
of any automated service.
I also oppose putting control of the group into the
hands of any one person.  Most especially, I oppose 
putting the moderation into the hands of a self-appointed 
moderator who, as far as I can tell, has contributed 
little or nothing to geologic topics of discussion that 
fall within the realm of the existing charter or the 
charter he proposes.
I might have considered the proposal for a little longer
if Mr. Adams had not unilaterally proposed himself,
and solely himself as the moderator.  Since he did,
however, this proposal can hardly be read as anything other
than a personal desire on his part to personally take 
control of this newsgroup.
-- 
Tom Williams             williams@pangea.stanford.edu
Basin Analysis, Sequence Stratigraphy
Stanford Program on Deep-Sea Depositional Systems
http://pangea.stanford.edu/~williams/williams.html
Return to Top
Subject: what's "spudding" ????
From: jakala@netcom.com (henry jakala)
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 02:08:00 GMT
     i know it's an oil-drilling term but not exactly sure what
    it means or describes
     thnaks for any insights
     ps - any other oil business slang that you can come up with
          and assocaited definitions would be much appreciated
     pps - email reply if you can - thnaks
Return to Top
Subject: Lite Geology on the WWW
From: nmbmmr@nmt.edu (NM Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources)
Date: 13 Sep 1996 00:11:13 GMT
The most recent issue (Spring 1996) of Lite Geology is now available
over the World Wide Web. To see it, go to
	http://geoinfo.nmt.edu/
and click on the "Lite Geology" item. Near the top of the Lite Geology
page, you will find a list of issues that are in hypertext. Click on
them as you like. Each issue contains geology-related articles,
stories, photographs, cartoons, and other things worth catching.
While you're around, feel free to explore the rest of the website for
the New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources. We have an exhibit
of New Mexico Minerals, a catalog of NMBMMR publications, and other
useful items.
-Toby Click
 NMBMMR
-=-=-=-=-=-=- New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources -=-=-=-=-=-=-
                      Campus Station, Socorro, NM 87801
E-mail: nmbmmr@nmt.edu                                 Phone: (505) 835-5420 
-=-=-=-=-=-= See our page on the WWW -> http://geoinfo.nmt.edu/ =-=-=-=-=-=-
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: matts2@ix.netcom.com (Matt Silberstein)
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 02:56:29 GMT
In talk.origins Archae Solenhofen (jmcarth1@gtn.net) wrote:
>Just what is "continental rock" in this model? And where can I see some?
Kraftwerk and Golden Earing come to mind. I think they both still
perform.
Matt Silberstein
-----------------------------
The opinions expressed in this post reflect those of the Walt
Disney Corp. Which might come as a surprise to them.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Mars Life Scam Rigged By NASA, NSF
From: meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 03:14:29 GMT
In article , Kennedy  writes:
>In article , meron@cars3.uchicago.edu
>writes
>>
>>No, it wasn't Edison, it was some other guy, Elisha something.  The 30 
>>minutes business, though, is true.
>>>
>>
>Not often wrong, but you're right again ;=)
>Elisha Grey, I think - just needed the memory jogged - Edison came into
>the story because he was tasked with working a way around Bell's patent
>while he worked for Western Union.
That I believe.  Edison was a grandmaster of manipulating patent laws.
This one, however, even he couldn't find a way around.  Funny thing 
is, right after he got the patent, Bell wanted to sell it to Western 
Union for a pittance (something like $100k) and they didn't want it.  
Later they spent millions trying to challenge it.  Corporate wisdom.
Mati Meron			| "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu		|  chances are he is doing just the same"
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: wilkins@wehi.edu.au (John Wilkins)
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 10:34:40 +1000
In article <519hdj$jn3@starman.rsn.hp.com>, schumach@convex.com (Richard
A. Schumacher) wrote:
| >> You mean like a computer program or video of plate motions? What,
| >> exactly? 
| 
| >It is a fairly straight-forward depiction of:
| [...]
| 
| So your ideas are that the impact which formed the Moon also
| formed the Pacifc Basin, started and powers plate tectonics, 
| and created life? Oh, boy. When do you believe this miracle
| impact occured?
I am a bit confused, as a non-geologist of major proportions.
I, too, understood that there was an impact early in the solar system's
history of a body that sheared away considerable terrestrial material to
form the moon. I have even seen on TV a computer simulation of the
physics. Whether that left any deformation that remains as the Pacific (or
tectonic plates in general) is unclear.
Does anyone know of this?
-- 
John Wilkins, Head of Communication Services, Walter and Eliza
Hall Institute of Medical Research

It is the glory of science that it finds the patterns 
in spite of the noise - Daniel Dennett
Return to Top
Subject: Repost in response to today's traffic: Flummox Alert
From: oseeler@mcn.org (Oliver Seeler)
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 01:02:20 GMT
The following is intended for new and casual visitors to this
newsgroup. It will be posted periodically for as long as necessary.  
Due to the large number and great size of the articles in this
newsgroup posted by Mr. Richard Adams regarding his current
controversial proposals to alter the structure of certain Usenet
newsgroups, it is no longer possible to obtain a clear picture of what
is going on here by taking a casual look around. Opponents of Mr.
Adam's ideas, including this writer, are simply being overwhelmed by
the sheer volume of Adams' articles. The most simple public question
to Mr. Adams commonly results in a response from him of from 300 to
900 lines; the traffic from Adams often exceeds 1000 lines per day. In
the opinion of some, this bloat constitutes intentional obfuscation
and confusion of the issues (with a not insubstantial measure of
intimidation tossed in), and is being employed as a primary tactic by
Adams in what to more than a few observers appears to be his effort to
gain control of all substantial discussion of earthquakes on Usenet
(notwithstanding his claim that ca.earthquakes would be unaffected).
Intentional or not, the effect is the same and anyone newly arrived
here, and who happens to be curious or concerned about the issues, is
strongly cautioned that without spending a great deal of time perusing
past articles, incorrect conclusions and misunderstandings concerning
not only Mr. Adams and his proposals but also his opponents are
inevitable.
In view of the above, for the moment I find it a pointless to address
this issue further other than by the re-posting this warning. I will
not respond in public to public comments on this article.
    Yours for freedom on the net,
                      Oliver Seeler  
Return to Top
Subject: Re: IMPACT OROGENY ON EARTH
From: "Robert D. Brown"
Date: 13 Sep 1996 01:31:20 GMT
William E. Todd  wrote in article
<3238219E.69FA@usit.net>...
> p> This article was posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja
> News:
> >     http://www.dejanews.com/      [Search, Post, and Read Usenet News!]
> 
> 
> I'm just an amateur, but I don't think that you are covering all of the
> bases. 
Dear Bill:  I'm not a professional geologist, either.  I am a medical
doctor who practices internal medicine and neurology.  I like this type of
work because it involves problem solving, the pay is good, and our society
is structured in a way such that I have a whole bunch of college-educated
science majors who do free literature searches for me on any subject I want
to study if I occasionally listen to their stories about new medicines that
their employers are marketing.  
These are some of the benefits of being a medical doctor, but they aren't
the reasons I chose to be a physician.  I was a philosophy major (symbolic
logic) as an undergraduate who worked full time as a Fortran programmer in
the department of physics at Columbia University.  My boss in those days
was/is one of the world's most celebrated mathematicians.  His group
designed and built positron detector systems for military satellites that
were/are used to detect nuclear warheads buried under the ground in Russian
silos.  I was just a teenager at the time and really liked having access to
several of the world's largest computer systems at a time when few others
did.  The laboratory was Columbia U's last "defense-industry" lab and was
originally established as Columbia's contribution to the design and
fabrication of the first atomic weapons.  Because it was a "secret" lab, it
was hidden on the university's medical college campus, physically
positioned between the outpatient departments of obstetrics and pediatrics.
 People who made decisions in the 1940's about these things thought the
babies and kiddies surrounding the lab would prevent Hitler from blowing up
the lab.
It was this situation that first exposed me to medicine.  Its sort of
funny, Bill, but the mathematics of particle physics aren't all that
different from the mathematics used to characterize biostatistical
problems.  In those days PC's hadn't been invented, so I did all kinds of
statistical work for medical doctors at Columbia who needed help with their
research publications.  After I graduated from college, this background
allowed me to step right into a position as a biostatistician for the
American Cancer Society.  My work there involved the characterization of
lung cancers in uranium miners and the first determination of the
usefulness of mammography in breast cancer screening.  My analytical role
in this work made me appreciate that I really needed to understand the
workings of the human body better than I did, so when Cornell offered me a
full scholarship to go to medical school, I took it.  
While in medical school I became interested in the ways that cells generate
and utilize energy at the sub-molecular level.  My study of this subject
made me something of an admiring "groupie" of Peter Mitchell, who
subsequently won a Nobel Prize (1978) for his development of the
"chemiosmotic theory of membrane energetics".  Peter was recognized as a
"bad boy" of biophysics because he liked to poke fun at his contemporaries
who couldn't comprehend the value of his theoretical models.  There were a
lot of other reasons why Mitchell didn't get along with his contemporaries,
but this isn't the place to discuss his personal life history (which I do
in my forthcoming book "Babel Rebuilt: The Biological Derivation of
Planck's Constant").  
I don't know what you do, Bill, besides contribute your readings to this
Internet news group, but from what I've already seen, you appear to have a
genuine interest in our solar system.  I do, too, and that's why you'll
find some of my comments here.  It doesn't bother me that you are an
"amateur", like me, because I know that the history of scientific progress
is characterized by the appearance of many of the very best ideas in any
specific subdiscipline from individuals who work outside of those same
subdisciplines.  This is because people who work inside any specific
discipline have to deal with all types of pressures, influences, and
realities (in their professional lives) in a way that preserves their
membership within their chosen group.  This is not a criticism, just an
observation about which others have written volumes.  Richard Feynman, who
you'll learn more about if you ever take up readings in quantum
electrodynamics, summarized this whole subject when he said: "The best
science is always subversive".  He made this comment in an effort to
explain to his students why "revolutionary" science theories are so
frequently met by the contempt of the disciplinarians, e.g. the
"professionals", of those fields of investigation undergoing change.
So, Bill, now that this has been said, let's get on to some of your other
comments.  
For instance, the volcanic peaks of Hawaii are formed by the
> Pacific plate moving across a hot spot on the mantle boundary that has a
> large magma reservoir (in fact, the newest Hawaiian Island is forming
> now as an underwater and VERY active volcano that should breech the
> surface of the ocean in a relatively short {geologically speaking}
> time). 
All of what you say here is true, and I know first hand because I spent
most of the past decade living in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii immediately downwind
from the volcanic vent that dumps 100,000 tons of sulfur emissions into the
Hawaiian sunset every 24 hours.  I had moved to Hawaii from New York City
to help in the effort to block geothermal development on the Big Island. 
There were some mercenary politicians and geologists who wanted to develop
a 500,000 kilowatt geothermal power plant over the magma chamber, running
undersea cables from Hawaii to Oahu and Maui.  I'd been doing a lot of
reading about Hawaii because the volcano plays an important role in this
model I have for adjusting the use and interpretation of radiometric rock
dates.  Anyway, these geologists were so focused on energy production that
they didn't realize that they had figured out just about the only way human
activity might combine with magnitude 7 earthquakes to deshield the magma
chamber, converting the island into a Krakatoa-style disaster for our
planet.  
So, Bill, I moved to Hawaii, set up an office in town, and got a part time
unpaid job writing regular sci-med articles for the most widely read
newspaper in the area.  Shortly thereafter, the editor asked me to write an
article about the health consequences of breathing volcanic emissions of a
daily basis for the newspaper's Earth Day edition, so I did.  Wow, did that
ever piss off the Hawaii Department of Health officials who couldn't ever
see any of the vog (volcanic fog) from Honolulu.  Worse than that, I had
slipped in a few comments about the way the new geothermal venture would
make a Pompeii-class problem once the cold waters of a 500,000 kilowatt
geothermal well converted massive quantities of plastically-solid
peri-chamber rocks into millions of hard, highly fractured rocks.  You see,
Bill, that's how geothermal power plants achieve their design purpose.  In
my article I noted that large earthquakes routinely roll through that part
of the globe and, as every geologist knows, earthquake shock energy passes
right through solid rocks but gets released in fractured rocks.  Since the
geothermal well was located on a steep slope, I felt that it wouldn't take
too many millions of kilowatts before a package that would impress the
Unabomber had been designed and charged.  I'm not really sure how it
happened, Bill, because so many people got involved in the thing after that
that I really didn't have to say much more.  Somehow environmental groups
went into federal court with this new idea and the judge, an amateur
geologist like yourself, decided that it probably wasn't a good idea to do
anything that might blow off the lid of the world's largest volcano. 
Over-night they pulled the plug on that one.  Whew, Bill, that was a close
one!
After that, some friends of mine invited me to help work on a futuristic
report designed to help guide the development of very long-range planning
for the federal government.  No, Bill, it wasn't work on Hillary's Health
Plan.  Hawaii had Michael Dukakis working in Hilo on that one.  I was asked
to write out the most compelling reasons that humankind should develop
systems that might someday be used to deflect Earth-heading asteroids and
comets.  You might not recognize the connections here, Bill, so let me
expand on the details for a moment.  You recall that I was a philosophy
major.  Plato was my very favorite philosopher, and I had read his Timaeus 
when I was in junior high school.  The Timaeus was the "handbook" of
"cosmology" and "medicine" in Plato's Academy at the beginning of our
cultural history.  Isn't it strange how Plato linked those two subjects
together, Bill.  Did you know, Bill, that Plato was that fellow who thought
the most perfect thing that humans can appreciate is the "circle".  Think
maybe Plato was an idiot, Bill?
I don't think Plato was an idiot, Bill, but do you know what else he
thought--and taught--in the Timaeus?  Plato said that his own civilization
prided itself for its accomplishments, and had good reasons to do so, but
that its citizens really didn't comprehend their own heritage, their
origins.  Because they didn't comprehend their past or that they actually
had one, most Greeks thought humans were something "new" on this planet
called Earth.  Lacking an indisputable record of the true past, but needing
a sentient sense of self, his fellow citizens maintained a mythical
tradition that provided some sense of their past.  I hope you read the book
itself, Bill, because it really is quite remarkable how Plato spells out an
understanding of the past that is only becoming obvious to many of us
living today.  You can find a copy of the Timaeus right here on the
Internet: just do a search and you'll discover where to find the Loeb
translation of the text.  It is sort of long and complicated, the
relationship between medicine and cosmology that Plato outlines, so I'll
just continue to summarize some of the more important principles of human
existence on Earth that Plato describes in his handbook for Academicians. 
Still with me, Bill?  Don't worry, I'm sure we can cover many details in
later posts.
Plato liked to make his points with parable-like stories.  He was playful
of knowledge this way, but he also knew when to get right down to the point
of a matter.  In the Timaeus Plato describes some of the mythical
explanations for human existence popular in his day and then he goes on to
explain that the true fact of the matter is that the intelligent creature
idealized in the form of humans beings has an ancestry that goes back to
times as old as the planet itself.  Plato recognized this understanding as
the single most important insight we can have about our extended selves,
considered this notion the most important teaching of his philosophy, and
embedded the realization at the core of the handbook, just to see if any
new students skipped central chapters.  Plato, you see, linked his
discussion of the nature of the hard ground beneath our feet (in the first
half of the book) to his discussion of medicine (a characterization of the
human form) in the second half of the book, via the summary conclusion that
the intelligent human specie is nearly as old as the planet itself, and was
formed from it.
No, Bill, Plato doesn't get lost in a discussion of evolution in the
Timaeus.  He may have been too smart to do that, but we can't really say
that he took change for granted, either, because so much of his philosophy
is devoted to the analysis of transitional forms and the way we have to use
these mirage-like impressions of reality to comprehend ourselves and the
true nature of existence.   An ancient age for our lineage, fleeting and
highly transitional glimpses of lasting truth, and perfect circles were
really important things to Plato, who I read in my youth, before I became
involved in ways to protect our planet from asteroids and comets.
Anyway, Bill, Plato said that the reason his civilization had such a fuzzy
understanding of itself was really fairly easy to understand.  The true
fact of the matter, he said, was that big rocks fell from the skies on an
episodic basis, wiping from the surface of the planet any record of what
humans past had endured.  He was very specific about this, too, noting that
these events occurred in two different forms.  When cosmic rocks
episodically fell into the seas, civilizations were washed away by the
deluge of a tsunami wave hundreds and thousands of meters in height
sweeping across the surface of the land.  Only uneducated shephards living
high up in the mountains would survive these types of disasters.  In
contrast, when one of these cosmic rocks hit on land, great atmospheric
fires destroyed all but those few people who resided near and along
mountain basal streams and rivers.  In either event, Plato said, these
cosmic disasters were the true cause of most change on Earth and the
contents of the human mind.  These events changed the structure of the
Earth he said, and told the story of Atlantis (the only ancient record of
the place) to illustrate his point.  These catastrophe's changed the
essence of human contemplative existence as well, he thought, because the
human survivors of large planetary impacts were (by virtue of their
existence as mountain shephards and backwater stream-dwellers) untrained
and uneducated people who knew little about science or history.  All of
those understandings that pass between the generations become lost when
rocks fall from the heavens, he said, and only the dull-witted are left to
carry on our specie.  Plato knew that it requires centuries of genetic
learning to make any scientific knowledge "hoary with age", sufficiently
wise to comprehend the critical fact that the human being is as old as
mother Earth.
I remembered Plato's Timaeus, Bill, when I was asked to help lay out a
plan, a reason, and a way to protect ourselves from cosmic hazards falling
on our heads, changing our planet's structure and our knowledge of
ourselves and our past.  At first, Bill, I thought it was a ridiculous
idea, the notion that humans might determine their own fate and truly shape
their destiny in and over time.  Now I'm not much of a religious scholar,
Bill, but one thing I did get from my up-bringing was a sense that man was
placed on Earth to function as its protector.  I know that some people
think this is a silly and simple idea, Bill, but I think it a noble sense
of purpose in life no matter what else may also be true.  Egotistic,
perhaps, but not when we realize that there are a thousand different ways
that each of us can lead lives that help protect Earth and its inhabitants.
 As a lifestyle.  As an assumption of existence here now.
So I got over my skeptic's reticence, quit my life in Hawaii, and moved
back to the mainland to write my invited thesis about Hawaii, mountains
falling from the sky, and perfect circles written in the rocks.
So, Bill, its OK if you're just an amateur in this business.  We all are. 
Now what were you saying about Hawaii?
Back to Bill's question:
This volcano is forming from the bottom up and I don't see how a giant
> impactor could have caused this. Granted, an impactor many kilometers
> across could fracture the crust and cause an upwelling uf magma and
> molten debris (as on the moon), but I do not think that Hawaii is this
> case and know of none active today.
Aren't you sort of contradicting yourself here, Bill.  You have made an
observation in your first sentence, explained its cause in the second. 
Then, you say you don't believe your eyes.  Hawaii is very active today. 
Believe me Bill, I've lived there.
Back to Bill:
> 
> Also, I believe that the experts have pretty well established that at
> least a major reason for the extinct of the dinosaurs was because of a
> giant impact. 
That's right, Bill, I've heard that rumor, too.  Why do they think that
sort of thing?
Bill goes on:
I believe that they have found an iridium isotope from the
> bollide that was ejected into the atmosphere and settled in a peculiar
> clay layer over virtually the whole world. 
That's what I heard, too.  Do you think its true?  Just yesterday, Bill,
one of those experts told me that wasn't really true, that the calculations
of iridium are way off the mark.  There is that clay layer at the KT
boundary, though.  Does it really matter how much iridium is in it?  Not
really, I think.
Bill says:
I also believe that they have
> found the impact crater, through means of satellite photos,
> magnetometry, radar imagery, core samples, and seismic wave analysis.
> This crater is almost impossible to see by any one of the above methods,
> because as you said, erosion by various means has almost erased it. I
> believe the crater measures hundreds of miles in diameter and is partly
> on (under) the Yucatan Peninsula and partly underwater in the Gulf. I
> also believe that they have pretty much confirmed the existence of about
> a half dozen other such craters around the world by the same means, some
> of them older, and some younger. The only location that I can remember
> right off hand is one in the US midwest, maybe verging into Canada. I
> also think that this huge crater has accompanying smaller craters, as if
> the impactor broke up before impact like Shoemaker-Levy did at Jupiter.
Wow, Bill!  That must have been some fireworks show.  I've wondered
sometimes about that Hawaii Emperor Chain stretching across the Pacific in
a similar way.  A tidally-fragmented impactor generates a slew of
individual fragments that splay out in a mass-dependent manner, heaviest
fragment at the end of a series of impacts.  Do you think that maybe each
one of those volcanic islands forming the Hawaiian Emperor Chain might have
been punched in the seafloor by an individual fragment, each one created a
volcanic degassing site in the Pacific Ocean?  I don't, but it is a
thought, isn't it?
Bill says:
> 
> I have also read something about the craters on the moon, Mars, and
> other bodies seem to fit a picture of several imact-rich eras in the
> past history of the solar system, and that the last age of 'big hits'
> was several billion years ago. 
Don't you think that's a bit of good-spirited wishful thinking, Bill?  Sort
of like whistling in the dark?  "Billions of years ago" is a really long
time.  I'm fairly certain there's been a really big flood more recently
than that, look at all the glaciations that have occurred more recently
than that.  That's another part of the flood business, Bill.  A lot of that
oceanic water that gets thrown about after an oceanic impact gets
vaporized, cools up in space, and comes down as snow.  Things get pretty
cold after that happens, practically overnight from water the ice core
studies show. 
Bill:
If so, then a crater on Earth from that
> time would have had to squash half a hemisphere to be readily detectable
> today. 
Oh, come on Bill, you're just pulling my leg, aren't you?  I thought every
young scientist understood that the last time that happened was when a
Mars-sized planet ran into proto-Earth, creating the Moon from the
impactor's mantle and Earth's continental plates from the precipitated
plasma that was confined by Earth's deshielded core magnetic field.
Bill:
Even on Mars, there has been enough erosion to erase most of its
> craters. On the Moon, not only does it not have an atmosphere to shield
> it, but I would suspect that it has not the gravitational tidal forces
> that Earth has to partially pulverise structurally weak asteroids/comets
> before they hit.
So you were just kidding me before.  I'm glad you clarified things for me. 
I was beginning to think you were a bit confused.
Bill:
> 
> This is just my opinion, I'm not qualified to critisize. 
Don't be so modest, Bill.  Most modest people deserve to be so, and you're
a very clever fellow.
Bill:
I will,
> however, try to read some of the books you mentioned. Have a great day.
Thanks, Bill, I will have a good day today.  See ya, round.  You have a
good day, too.
Robert D. Brown, M.D.
Pelorus Research Laboratory
Note: Future posts will come under the title of "Theory of Land and Life"
and will be found on the Internet almost everywhere.
"The Keyboard is Mightier Than the Sword"
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Complexity Unstable (was Creation VS Evolution)
From: Glenn Anderson
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 18:35:32 -0700
Barry Vaughan wrote:
> 
> Tom Potter wrote:
> >
> > There seems to be five levels of sophistication
> > in living things and their systems.
> > These, listed in order of sophistication, are:
> >
> > 1. Accept
> > 2. Get
> > 3. Take
> > 4. Share
> > 5. Trade
> >
> > Trade is superior to the other forms as it
> > elevates both the lazy and the industrious.
> >
> > I suggest that "trade" has only occured two times.
> > There is also a monkey in Japan that trades.
> 
> It's getting more and more difficult to find distinguishing features
> that apply only to Humans.
What about Bonobos, they trade sexual favors for food, and for peace.
--Glenn
Return to Top
Subject: Weekly USGS Quake Report 9/5-11/96
From: michael@garlock.wr.usgs.gov (Andy Michael)
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 01:45:30 GMT
NOTE: 5 or more maps will follow this post.
If you don't want to read them all the subjects include
the phrase "USGS Quake Map" for your killing convenience.
DISCLAIMER -- THIS IS NOT AN EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION OR WARNING!
  The commentary provided with these map(s) is for INFORMATIONAL
USE ONLY, and SHOULD NOT be construed as an earthquake prediction,
warning, or advisory.  Responsibility for such warnings rests with
the Office of Emergency Services of the State of California.
PLEASE REMEMBER -- THESE ARE PRELIMINARY DATA
  Releasing these summaries on a timely basis requires that the
data, analysis, and interpretations presented are PRELIMINARY. Of
necessity they can only reflect the views of the seismologists who
prepared them, and DO NOT carry the endorsement of the U.S.G.S.
Thus while every effort is made to ensure that the information is
accurate, nothing contained in this report is to be construed as
and earthquake prediction, warning, advisory, or official policy
statement of any kind, of the U.S. Geological Survey, or the
U.S. Government.
FOR QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS REPORT
  Send e-mail to michael@andreas.wr.usgs.gov
  DO NOT SEND EMAIL TO weekly@garlock.wr.usgs.gov  It will not be read.
Seismicity Report for Northern California,
the Nation, and the World for the week of
September 5 - 11, 1996
 Stephen R. Walter
U.S. Geological Survey
345 Middlefield Rd.  MS-977, Menlo Park, CA  94025
San Francisco Bay Area
    During the seven-day period ending at midnight on September 11, 1996,
the U.S. Geological Survey office in Menlo Park recorded 27 earthquakes of
magnitude one (M1) and greater within the San Francisco Bay area shown in
Figure 1.  Five were as large as M2.  This total compares to 26
earthquakes during the previous seven-day period (August 29 - September
4), four of which were as large as M2.
   Two of the M2 events occurred on the central Calaveras about ten miles
north of Morgan Hill (#3/1).  Week to week, this has been one of the two
most active fault segments in the Bay Area, the other being the creeping
segment of the San Andreas southeast of Watsonville.  Slightly more
unusual were a trio of M1's at the north end of the Calaveras.  Two M1.2
events occurred just northwest of Dublin with a M1.6 abut two miles east
of San Ramon (#7/1).  Farther east a M2.0 occurred about fix miles
southwest of Brentwood (#1/1). 
    Also unusual was a M1.1 earthquake on the San Andreas just northeast
of Bolinas (#4/1).  This part of the fault is considered to be "locked",
producing minor earthquakes only rarely.  The most recent event in this
area was a M1.3 in much the same location in September, 1993.  
   In the South Bay, a M2.1 occurred Sunday morning on the creeping San
Andreas 13 miles southeast of Hollister (#5/1), followed minutes later by
a M2.2 on the Ortigalita fault about 13 miles north of the Pinnacles
(#6/1).  
Northern & Central California
   The largest earthquake measured M4.6 and occurred last Friday afternoon
on the Mendocino fracture zone about 110 miles west of Cape Mendocino
(#3/2).  It was followed by a pair of M3 aftershocks.  Closer to shore a
trio of M2 events occurred  within the Gorda Plate, the oceanic plate that
underthrusts the Klamath Mountains of northwestern California and
southwestern Oregon (#5/2).   The sole M2 onshore event occurred at a
depth of nearly 25 km, indicating that it too occurred within the
underthrusting Gorda Plate (#2/2).  
   Activity in the Coast Ranges included several M2's at the Geysers
geothermal area (#7/2), a M2.1 east of the central Maacama fault (#6/2),
and a M2.1 at the north end of the Maacama about ten miles northwest of
Laytonville (#10/2). 
   Central California experienced one felt earthquake:  a M3.8 Saturday
afternoon on the creeping segment of the San Andreas about nine miles
north of Pinnacles National Monument (#8/2).  A pair of M2's occurred
along the Big Sur coast about 16 miles northwest of San Simeon (#4/2) and
one M2.3 occurred nine miles southeast of Coalinga.
   Activity along the eastern Sierra Nevada included a pair of M2's in the
Markleeville area (#1/2) and a M2.1 24 miles southwest of Portola (#9/2). 
Long Valley Caldera
     Two M2 events occurred along the southern rim of the caldera.  The
first, a M2.2 last Thursday evening, occurred beneath Mammoth Mountain in
much the same location as a M2.0 on July 26 of this year (#1/3).  The
following morning a M2.5 occurred along the southeast rim of the caldera
(#2/3).  The only activity south of the caldera was a M2.0 near the south
end of the Round Valley fault (#3/3).   
USA Seismicity (September 2 - 11)
   The National Earthquake Information Center recorded no notable
earthquakes in the lower 48 states, outside of the California area.  All
of these occurred along the California/Nevada border, the largest a pair
of M3.5 events in the Indian Wells Valley area north of China Lake (#4/4).
The Planet Earth  (September 2 - 11)
    Two moderate earthquakes produced significant damage in different
parts of the world.  Last Thursday a M6.0 temblor near the Adriatic Coast
injured several people in Ston, Croatia (#2/5).  A slightly larger M6.1
near the central Chilean coast damaged several nearby homes and was felt
in Santiago (#5/5).  Minor damage was reported from a M5.0 that shook the
Halle-Zscherben area of north-central Germany (#6/5).  The largest
earthquake on the planet was a M6.6 southeast of Taiwan but no damage was
reported from this offshore event (#3/5).  
   Other events of note include a M5.3 south of Honshu, Japan that
generated a small tsunami (26 cm) on the nearby island of Hachijo-jima
(#1/5) and a M6.1 in the Solomon Islands area (#4/5).   
Table 1. Northern & Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)
--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG
96 SEP  5  816 14.72 35 49.99 121 19.03  8.25 27 2 .05  .3  .6 SSM   2.0
96 SEP  5 1124 29.98 38 48.09 122 48.13  3.20 26   .04  .2  .4 GEY   2.0
96 SEP  5 1359 43.39 36 48.77 121 21.07  6.57 45   .07  .2  .3 HOL   1.9
96 SEP  5 1630 25.05 37 24.93 118 34.74 12.77 16   .09  .4  .9 RVL   1.4
96 SEP  5 1632 47.41 38 42.16 119 39.00  4.12 23 1 .09  .4 2.8 WAK   2.5
96 SEP  5 1634  4.13 38 42.18 119 39.04  3.61 25 1 .10  .4 3.1 WAK   2.6
96 SEP  5 1710 48.59 38 29.67 118 20.34  4.35 29   .07 1.3 4.0 NEV   2.3
96 SEP  5 1822 48.77 40 57.05 123 26.26 24.45 19   .10  .3 1.7 KLA   2.5
96 SEP  5 1838 42.32 37 38.72 118 54.39  5.88 20   .09  .3  .6 SMO   1.6
96 SEP  5 1845 21.82 37 37.93 119  2.67  3.87 14   .08  .3  .8 MAM   1.3
96 SEP  5 1925 24.14 35 53.58 120 25.88 10.85 22 3 .05  .3  .4 GOL   1.5
96 SEP  5 1956 49.95 36 32.28 121  6.52  2.33 14   .07  .3  .6 PIN   1.3
96 SEP  5 2103 16.35 38 43.18 119 38.68  0.25  9   .05 1.0 3.3 WAK   1.8
96 SEP  5 2121 54.72 38 49.97 122 52.41  1.06  8   .02  .6 1.5 GEY   1.0
96 SEP  5 2142 57.34 38 49.55 122 47.75  4.08 15   .04  .2  .7 GEY   1.6
96 SEP  5 2237 53.88 36 25.03 120 25.90 12.87 10   .08  .9 1.1 COA   1.6
96 SEP  6    2 44.37 37 50.76 121 43.46  0.02  8 1 .29 5.1 2.1 GRN # 2.2
96 SEP  6  100 47.35 37 15.96 121 38.52  5.72 16   .08  .3 1.1 SFL   1.2
96 SEP  6  127 38.65 36 36.20 121 12.54  6.74 13   .03  .3  .7 PIN   1.0
96 SEP  6  330  2.06 37 32.77 118 25.98  7.50 14   .04  .3  .7 CHV   1.7
96 SEP  6  515 56.12 36 14.07 120 47.79  8.18  7   .07  .9  .6 BIT   1.5
96 SEP  6  546 50.11 37 37.31 119  2.06  6.63 22   .07  .3  .4 MAM   2.2
96 SEP  6  558 42.76 36 14.58 120 16.63 12.31 17   .05  .3  .4 COA   1.4
96 SEP  6  804 48.57 37 28.08 118 50.71  6.71 29   .07  .4  .7 MOR   2.2
96 SEP  6  856 58.21 37 38.62 118 55.72 10.86 16   .06  .4  .9 SMO   1.4
96 SEP  6  904 26.40 37 42.78 121 56.73  8.37 13 1 .08  .3 1.0 DAN   1.2
96 SEP  6  937 26.89 37 27.84 118 50.51  6.48 10   .08 1.1 1.8 MOR   1.0
96 SEP  6 1009 34.47 36 27.66 121  1.80  4.86 20   .06  .3  .6 BIT   1.0
96 SEP  6 1128 16.06 37 36.06 118 48.78  6.60 32 3 .06  .2  .4 HCF   2.7
96 SEP  6 1136 13.36 37 35.98 118 48.69  6.81 21   .07  .3  .5 MOR   1.5
96 SEP  6 1139 31.51 37 36.43 118 47.91  6.83  7   .03  .5  .8 HCF   1.3
96 SEP  6 1148 41.14 37 36.42 118 48.69  5.67  7   .12  .6 1.1 HCF   1.3
96 SEP  6 1240 31.80 37 36.08 118 29.73 10.87 24   .08  .4  .7 CHV   1.6
96 SEP  6 1305 37.00 37 32.68 118 49.46 10.33 14   .07  .6 1.0 MOR   1.2
96 SEP  6 1328 34.19 37 38.43 118 57.55  8.32 19   .12  .4  .7 SMO   1.5
96 SEP  6 1417 56.34 37 35.80 118 48.81  7.22 22   .08  .3  .6 MOR   1.8
96 SEP  6 1437 26.22 36 40.38 121 17.65  4.13 33   .06  .2  .4 STN   1.8
96 SEP  6 1717  9.66 39 33.13 123 22.49  5.87 13   .14  .4 1.5 MAA   1.9
96 SEP  6 1904 45.87 38 55.74 122 51.14  2.90 11   .17  .5 3.0 MAA   1.9
96 SEP  6 1912 19.37 38 54.81 123 11.60  0.02 12   .12  .3 1.6 PAR## 1.8
96 SEP  6 2042 29.55 40 23.67 126 24.49  9.98 70 1 .33 2.5 7.5 PON   4.5
96 SEP  6 2048 23.75 35 49.55 121 21.45  3.67 43 2 .05  .3  .4 SSM#  2.7
96 SEP  6 2103 51.95 37 35.98 118 48.59  6.24  7   .05  .4  .7 MOR   1.5
96 SEP  6 2105 23.29 35 49.56 121 20.97  3.11 15 2 .06  .4  .6 SSM   1.8
96 SEP  6 2115 14.89 40 28.76 126 11.10  4.17 40 2 .30 4.2 4.3 PON   3.3
--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG
96 SEP  6 2119  2.04 35 49.27 121 21.05  3.13 18 2 .09  .4  .7 SSM   1.8
96 SEP  6 2146  0.97 37 37.99 118 56.07  6.80 12   .12  .5 1.0 SMO   1.4
96 SEP  7   52  2.95 38 48.30 122 45.64  0.04 15   .24  .5 1.5 GEY## 1.7
96 SEP  7  121  9.31 37 39.94 119 21.68 19.66 20 1 .13  .5 1.5 KAI   2.1
96 SEP  7  202 12.99 39 26.04 123  9.08  5.49 15   .05  .3 1.6 BAR   1.7
96 SEP  7  632 14.40 36 44.12 121 20.05  8.02 21 1 .05  .2  .5 PAI   1.2
96 SEP  7  641 34.73 37 17.68 121 40.40  3.66 54 2 .07  .1  .7 SFL   2.0
96 SEP  7  643 49.59 40 28.85 126  4.68  0.09 30 2 .30 7.5 4.0 PON # 3.0
96 SEP  7  727 48.66 37 37.07 118 53.16  4.03  9   .09  .6  .9 SHE   1.3
96 SEP  7  744 59.39 40 18.74 124 27.75  8.41  8 1 .13  .9 1.0 MEN   1.8
96 SEP  7  859 59.81 35 49.56 121 21.30  3.66 37 2 .06  .3  .4 SSM#  2.2
96 SEP  7  900 42.18 38 48.72 122 48.69  3.66 18 2 .05  .2  .5 GEY   1.6
96 SEP  7 1153 10.61 37 28.20 118 50.75  3.80 22   .07  .4  .8 MOR   1.2
96 SEP  7 1624 59.25 38 48.69 122 48.67  3.94 13   .03  .3  .5 GEY   1.6
96 SEP  7 1703 14.50 37 26.57 118 33.90  8.87 18 2 .08  .3  .9 RVL   1.2
96 SEP  7 1731  9.53 37 32.60 118 50.14  6.00 18 2 .09  .3  .6 MOR   1.3
96 SEP  7 1736 48.73 37 42.75 121 56.87  8.38  8 1 .08  .4 1.9 DAN   1.2
96 SEP  7 1750 40.64 35 49.33 121 21.40  3.49 25 3 .09  .3  .5 SSM#  1.8
96 SEP  7 1909 41.56 38 42.31 119 39.19  0.74 25 3 .15  .8 2.6 WAK   2.3
96 SEP  7 1939 47.68 38 25.81 122 38.45  8.52 13 1 .05  .3  .5 ROG   1.4
96 SEP  7 1941 52.20 39  7.95 122 38.58  1.55 11   .12  .410.9 BAR - 1.5
96 SEP  7 2032 52.59 37 33.05 118 49.33  1.20 13   .03  .2  .3 MOR   1.4
96 SEP  7 2319 17.32 36 38.19 121 14.96  7.94 69 2 .09  .2  .3 STN   3.7
96 SEP  8   46 42.51 36 26.60 120 37.36 13.37 28   .13  .3 1.0 CRV   1.7
96 SEP  8  137 43.55 37 32.68 118 50.34  6.24 13 2 .10  .4  .7 MOR   1.2
96 SEP  8  249 18.68 36 37.93 121 14.73  6.66 21 1 .06  .3  .6 STN    .9
96 SEP  8  428 12.65 36 34.23 120 32.17 11.73 34 2 .16  .3 1.3 CRV   1.9
96 SEP  8  505 30.95 37 55.56 122 40.40  7.12  8 1 .06 1.0 1.3 MAR   1.1
96 SEP  8  607 55.93 37 20.44 120 16.67 21.99 15 2 .34 1.0 1.1 JQN   2.0
96 SEP  8  656 21.92 37 21.17 121 43.07  7.42 30   .07  .2  .7 ALU   1.2
96 SEP  8  702 15.67 40 34.67 124 50.84 39.13 11 1 .23 4.5 2.9 EUR   2.6
96 SEP  8  914 34.81 37 32.51 118 50.08  6.09 23   .08  .3  .6 MOR   1.5
96 SEP  8 1027 59.05 38 47.37 122 45.29  2.13 19   .06  .2  .6 GEY   1.9
96 SEP  8 1049  0.15 36 37.93 121 14.83  6.66 11 1 .03  .4  .8 STN    .6
96 SEP  8 1124  2.82 39 25.42 123  6.96  3.66 27 3 .09  .2 1.7 BAR   2.0
96 SEP  8 1225 37.33 38 50.27 122 46.52  1.34 31   .12  .2  .6 GEY   2.4
96 SEP  8 1437 14.80 38 49.25 122 48.63  4.03 44   .05  .1  .3 GEY   2.7
96 SEP  8 1512 23.00 36 40.89 121 18.46  6.47 65 2 .07  .1  .3 STN   2.2
96 SEP  8 1710 51.07 37  4.05 121 29.70  8.62 36   .06  .2  .4 CYS   1.4
96 SEP  8 1810 10.70 37 31.71 118 47.45  6.04 12   .07  .4  .7 MOR   1.2
96 SEP  8 1907 43.16 36  5.66 120 12.78  7.53 32   .13  .2  .7 COA   2.3
96 SEP  8 2013 57.09 38 49.02 122 48.71  2.94 16   .09  .3  .6 GEY   1.8
96 SEP  8 2027 23.05 38 48.99 122 48.57  3.75  7   .02  .5  .7 GEY   1.2
96 SEP  8 2227 52.60 36 48.59 121 29.68 12.69  9   .05 1.4 1.3 SJB   1.1
--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG
96 SEP  9  127 44.38 36 45.88 121 29.13  8.62 30   .21  .5  .9 SJB   1.4
96 SEP  9  333 52.25 36 35.81 120 44.87  1.66 11   .07  .6 3.5 CRV   1.5
96 SEP  9  359 17.54 36 43.07 121 10.93  5.11 64 3 .21  .3  .9 PAI   2.3
96 SEP  9  429  3.74 36 43.09 121 10.69  1.77  8   .17 1.5 1.4 PAI   1.0
96 SEP  9  518  1.22 38 49.43 122 47.61  3.91  8   .02  .4  .8 GEY   1.2
96 SEP  9  738 52.81 37 18.00 121 40.40  5.31 13 1 .10  .3 1.7 SFL   1.1
96 SEP  9  741 13.99 37 23.63 118 46.46 13.66 15   .07  .4 1.5 WCS   1.3
96 SEP  9  754  3.52 40 37.82 124 16.60 18.46 14 1 .06  .7  .5 EUR   1.8
96 SEP  9  817 20.02 38 49.03 122 50.98  2.40  9   .08  .4 1.1 GEY   1.3
96 SEP  9  831 30.33 37 31.66 118 49.65  7.21 18   .07  .4  .7 MOR   1.3
96 SEP  9  907 34.57 37 28.52 118 50.18  5.66 14   .07  .6  .9 MOR   1.0
96 SEP  9 1224 51.18 37 30.54 118 40.22 13.74 14   .08  .5 1.3 WCN   1.2
96 SEP  9 1307 45.79 35 49.38 121 21.16  2.91 27 3 .07  .4  .5 SSM#  1.8
96 SEP  9 1357 22.18 37 46.57 121 56.50  7.43 25 2 .06  .2  .7 DAN   1.5
96 SEP  9 1549 29.64 39 38.81 123 16.88  1.25 11   .15  .514.3 BAR - 1.8
96 SEP  9 1614 38.30 36 33.61 121 13.77  5.18 23 1 .06  .2  .6 PIN   1.4
96 SEP  9 1755 29.39 38 42.43 122 49.28  6.06 14   .09  .3  .8 GEY   1.3
96 SEP  9 1922 52.12 38 45.28 122 41.81  1.53  9   .05  .4  .7 NAP   1.2
96 SEP  9 1936 29.55 37 56.33 118  8.81  1.70 27   .11 1.0 9.1 NEV - 2.2
96 SEP  9 2006 16.49 39 28.41 123 18.64 10.15 13 3 .15  .4 1.8 MAA   1.6
96 SEP  9 2200 38.76 36 51.39 121 35.28  6.45 52 1 .13  .2  .4 SJB   1.9
96 SEP  9 2203 41.78 37 36.68 121 46.54  7.92 10   .06  .3  .6 SUN   1.1
96 SEP  9 2242 37.55 37 46.62 118 22.38  4.90 21   .19  .7 2.0 WHI   2.2
96 SEP 10  152 28.46 37 24.22 121 43.91  0.03 10   .10  .4 3.3 ALU## 1.2
96 SEP 10  157 36.55 37 22.96 121 44.29  7.18 53 3 .06  .1  .4 ALU   1.8
96 SEP 10  330 21.21 39 25.97 121 32.39 24.38 17 1 .08  .5 1.0 ORO   1.9
96 SEP 10  437 17.54 37 26.77 118 22.95 31.71 12   .40 3.4 5.7 CHV   1.6
96 SEP 10  500 51.26 35 31.13 118 12.50 13.35 13   .10  .4  .7 WWF   1.9
96 SEP 10  528 57.31 36 33.64 121 13.75  5.11 14   .05  .3  .9 PIN   1.4
96 SEP 10  717 39.04 40 21.72 124 26.25  5.70  9   .06 1.2  .8 MEN   2.2
96 SEP 10  805 57.34 40 49.81 123 20.55 30.94  7 1 .04  .6 2.4 KLA   2.1
96 SEP 10 1527 34.99 39 29.42 120 39.64 22.00 16 3 .13 1.2 2.8 WAK   2.3
96 SEP 10 1558 35.78 37 25.28 118 37.23 12.21 31 1 .09  .3  .8 RVL   2.2
96 SEP 10 2037 48.67 37 15.81 121 38.82  5.00 56 2 .07  .1  .5 SFL   2.0
96 SEP 10 2102 21.82 40 44.54 124 28.66 19.12 16 1 .06 1.1  .7 EUR   2.1
96 SEP 10 2113 52.69 36 26.19 121  0.83  5.74 20   .06  .3  .7 BIT   1.8
96 SEP 10 2126  6.30 38 49.45 122 47.51  3.91  8   .03  .4  .8 GEY   1.2
96 SEP 10 2140 31.55 37 32.46 121 52.42  5.76 56 2 .30  .3  .7 MIS   2.0
96 SEP 11   36 15.74 38 45.53 122 44.47  1.73 10   .07  .4  .9 GEY   1.7
96 SEP 11  327 15.47 38 48.86 122 47.87  3.30 12   .03  .3  .6 GEY   2.0
96 SEP 11  954 47.13 36 51.95 121 35.80  6.74 23   .09  .3  .6 SJB   1.6
96 SEP 11 1131 39.85 39 49.09 123 36.88  5.36 17 1 .08  .3  .8 MAA   2.0
96 SEP 11 1352 51.68 38 48.72 122 48.68  4.19  9   .02  .3  .8 GEY   1.4
96 SEP 11 1538 36.98 37 30.35 118 52.23  2.84 13   .07  .6 2.1 MOR   1.4
96 SEP 11 1742  4.44 37 38.46 118 52.60  7.18  7   .10  .7  .9 SMO   1.1
--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG
96 SEP 11 1751 35.07 37 32.21 118 50.99 10.01 20   .09  .4  .6 MOR   1.4
96 SEP 11 2044 41.01 36 47.12 121 16.20  7.97 12   .03  .4  .8 PAI   1.0
96 SEP 11 2217 35.45 36 22.39 121  1.27  0.01  9   .09  .3  .5 BIT## 1.9
96 SEP 11 2350 54.51 36 42.93 121 10.59  1.27 17   .19  .6 2.9 PAI # 1.5
TABLE 2.
Data from National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC)
UTC TIME    LAT     LONG    DEP GS MAGS  SD STA  REGION AND COMMENTS
HRMNSEC                         MB  Msz     USED
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEP 02
000835.9  44.392N   7.343E  10G         0.5  13 NORTHERN ITALY. ML 3.0 (LDG).
002913.5*  1.079N 121.853E  33N 4.7     0.9  19 MINAHASSA PENINSULA, SULAWESI
005206.5* 39.617N 143.723E  33N 4.5     0.6  12 OFF EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN
015719.5* 36.014N  70.849E 107D 4.3     1.6  17 HINDU KUSH REGION, AFGHANISTAN
023550.5*  3.938S  69.449E  10G 4.4     1.1  23 CHAGOS ARCHIPELAGO REGION
025904.0? 11.62 N  43.67 E  10G 4.3     1.2  11 ETHIOPIA
030808.2*  8.422N 126.002E  33N 4.5     0.9  16 MINDANAO, PHILIPPINE ISLANDS
121015.3* 26.181N 128.770E  33N 4.2     1.5  16 RYUKYU ISLANDS
130627.2? 11.83 N  61.96 W 120G         0.4   6 WINDWARD ISLANDS. MD 3.2 (TRN).
222548.0* 36.704N  71.264E 150G 4.2     1.1   9 AFGHANISTAN-TAJIKISTAN BORD REG.
SEP 03
002900.6& 67.240N 144.950W  25G              29 NORTHERN ALASKA. . ML 3.6
003434.3*  7.148S 155.624E  33N 4.9     0.9  20 SOLOMON ISLANDS
050806.9* 37.517N   1.547W  10G         0.5   5 SPAIN. mbLg 3.1 (MDD).
092133.7*  7.912S 122.351E 250G 5.0     1.0  20 FLORES SEA
095726.8  40.212N 142.637E  33N 5.1     0.8 100 NEAR EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN
105849.6* 23.070S  68.739W 104D 4.3     1.2  27 NORTHERN CHILE
120445.6  14.319N 144.053E  33N 4.7     0.7  26 MARIANA ISLANDS
124729.2  33.759N 140.098E  93* 3.9     1.1  27 SOUTH OF HONSHU, JAPAN
160153.6*  7.218S 155.628E  33N 4.4     0.9  19 SOLOMON ISLANDS
161852.1*  7.252S 155.528E  33N 4.9     1.1  39 SOLOMON ISLANDS
163304.6*  7.241S 155.557E  33N 4.3     0.7  14 SOLOMON ISLANDS
191723.3* 18.513N 146.440E  33N 4.1     0.7  14 MARIANA ISLANDS
200400.0* 12.851S 168.986E 600G 4.5     1.0  76 SANTA CRUZ ISLANDS REGION
203911.0& 65.140N 148.590W  18G              31 NORTHERN ALASKA. . ML 4.2
213803.0* 54.336N 166.478W  33N 4.2     1.2  16 FOX ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS.
                                                ML 4.2 (AEIC).
231101.1* 40.200N  49.422E  33N 3.8     1.1  13 EASTERN CAUCASUS
SEP 04
013706.0? 20.55 N 121.51 E  33N 4.6     0.8   7 PHILIPPINE ISLANDS REGION
040128.0* 38.996N   9.353W  10G         0.8  10 PORTUGAL. MD 3.6 (MDD).
064551.4* 36.382N  70.785E 200* 4.5     1.1  22 HINDU KUSH REGION, AFGHANISTAN
101825.9  41.907N 126.783W  10G 4.5 4.9 1.2 129 OFF COAST OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
102325.9* 41.804N 126.845W  10G 3.7     1.1  17 OFF COAST OF NORTHERN
                                                CALIFORNIA. ML 3.6 (GS).
102450.2* 41.811N 126.838W  10G 4.7     1.5  44 OFF COAST OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
103256.9  35.105N 117.538W   5G         1.4  29 CENTRAL CALIFORNIA. ML 3.1 (GS).
103807.4* 56.007S 146.987E  10G 5.2     1.1  34 WEST OF MACQUARIE ISLAND
104715.6  41.755N 126.993W  10G 3.9     1.1  48 OFF COAST OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
104938.9? 41.55 N 126.78 W  10G 3.3     1.5   9 OFF COAST OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
141158.1  20.746S 178.889W 600G 4.9     0.8  40 FIJI ISLANDS REGION
160735.0* 57.433N  23.592E  10G 4.4     1.1   6 BALTICS-BELARUS-NW RUSSIA REG.
171122.0  34.840N 139.697E  45  4.5     0.9  39 NEAR S. COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN.
        Felt (III JMA) at Tateyama and (II JMA) at Tokyo and Yokohama.
181601.5  31.500N 139.867E  33N 5.3 5.1 1.2  84 SOUTH OF HONSHU, JAPAN. Mw 5.7
        (GS), 5.7 (HRV). Local tsunami generated with maximum recorded wave
        heights (peak-to trough) of 26 cm on Hachijo-jima, 20 cm at Okada, O-
        shima and 16 cm on Miyake-jima. 
185534.5* 35.243N 140.233E 114*         0.7  13 NEAR EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN
190838.4*  4.790N  77.787W  33N 4.6     1.2   9 NEAR WEST COAST OF COLOMBIA
191859.3*  6.441S 130.447E  33N 4.9     0.9  19 BANDA SEA
195949.1  37.546N   1.436W  10G         0.7  12 SPAIN. mbLg 3.1 (MDD).
203952.5* 35.396N  46.303E  33N 3.5     1.2  17 IRAN-IRAQ BORDER REGION
224013.7   7.143S 155.672E  33N 4.8     0.9  57 SOLOMON ISLANDS
224843.6  34.973N 116.938W   5G         1.2  25 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. ML 3.3
231804.7* 37.118N   2.841E  10G 3.4     1.1  16 WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN SEA.
SEP 05
082048.8  36.726N 116.285W   5G         0.7  11 CALIFORNIA-NEVADA BORDER.
                                                ML 3.1 (GS).
125203.1  10.330S 161.155E  33N 5.1 4.4 0.7  46 SOLOMON ISLANDS
152640.5*  0.405N 120.483E  33N 5.1     1.4  14 MINAHASSA PENINSULA, SULAWESI
153626.9   0.352N 120.397E  33N 5.3 5.0 1.5  57 MINAHASSA PENINSULA, SULAWESI
162416.2  36.068N 117.752W  10G         0.9  45 CALIFORNIA-NEVADA BORDER. ML 3.5
172424.7  37.595N   1.534W   8  3.1     1.1  20 SPAIN. mbLg 3.4 (MDD).
204409.3  42.819N  17.970E  10G 5.6 6.0 1.3 204 ADRIATIC SEA. Mw 5.7 (GS), 6.0
        (HRV). Several people injured at Ston, Croatia. Felt in parts of Bosnia
        and Herzegovina, Croatia; also felt in Yugoslavia. 
212221.6% 35.949S  73.033W  20G         0.4  12 OFF COAST-CENTRAL CHILE. MD 4.6
214330.2  42.840N  18.088E  10G 4.7     1.4  71 NORTHWESTERN BALKAN REGION
234205.9  21.877N 121.430E  20G 6.3 6.6 1.1 136 TAIWAN REGION. Mw 6.6  Felt.
SEP 06
020455.0  21.722N 121.367E  20G 5.3     1.2  36 TAIWAN REGION
022029.6* 21.671N 121.422E  20G 5.0     1.4  14 TAIWAN REGION
025943.8  42.704N  17.899E  10G         0.7  15 ADRIATIC SEA. ML 3.3 (ROM).
033152.1  42.767N  17.970E  10G         0.7  20 ADRIATIC SEA. ML 4.1 (ROM).
034654.9  42.848N  17.721E  10G         1.0  26 ADRIATIC SEA. ML 3.7 (ROM).
080640.4* 50.816N 156.792E  33N 4.9     0.4  17 KURIL ISLANDS
091819.7*  0.573N 120.604E  33N 4.8     0.8  14 MINAHASSA PENINSULA, SULAWESI
111048.5* 42.690N  18.136E  10G 4.4     0.6   6 NORTHWESTERN BALKAN REGION
113434.8? 22.33 N 121.36 E  20G 5.4 4.9 1.0  33 TAIWAN REGION. Felt on Taiwan.
123941.2   7.251S 155.771E  33N 5.5 5.8 0.9  38 SOLOMON ISLANDS. Mw 5.9
152302.9*  0.403N 120.345E  33N 4.6     1.2  14 MINAHASSA PENINSULA, SULAWESI
170346.7   7.312S 155.849E  33N 5.6 6.1 1.2  43 SOLOMON ISLANDS. Mw 6.3 
204229.4  40.324N 126.251W  10G 4.9     1.2 113 OFF COAST OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
211507.7? 40.37 N 126.77 W  10G         0.7  29 OFF COAST-NORTHERN CALIFORNIA ML 3.9
230157.8* 31.619S  68.918W 100G 4.9     0.9  24 SAN JUAN PROVINCE, ARGENTINA
234847.8?  6.74 S 155.89 E  33N 5.2 5.2 1.0  17 SOLOMON ISLANDS
SEP 07
025530.2* 20.367S 174.362W  33N 4.9 4.9 0.5  27 TONGA ISLANDS
041755.0* 42.856N  17.990E  10G 4.6     1.1  15 ADRIATIC SEA
054533.4* 42.929N  17.973E  10G 4.5     1.0  20 ADRIATIC SEA
090603.9*  7.203S 155.761E  33N 5.3 5.6 1.4  20 SOLOMON ISLANDS
095559.0? 16.56 N  97.95 W  33N 4.4     0.8  17 OAXACA, MEXICO
103159.9? 32.76 S 177.83 W  33N 4.9 5.2 0.6   9 SOUTH OF KERMADEC ISLANDS
231916.8  36.627N 121.277W  10G         0.9  86 CENTRAL CALIFORNIA. ML 3.8 (GS).
                                                Felt at Salinas.
SEP 08
080813.1  15.594S  73.069W  97D 5.5     0.9  71 SOUTHERN PERU. Mw 5.7 
081244.2*  2.851N 127.250E  33N 5.6 5.2 1.3  29 NORTHERN MOLUCCA SEA
105602.5* 51.440N 176.019W  33N 4.2     0.9   7 ANDREANOF ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN IS.
110714.6  51.443N 176.188W  33N 5.0 4.4 1.0  50 ANDREANOF ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN IS.
113458.3* 19.399S 179.611W 676D 4.7     0.5  43 FIJI ISLANDS REGION
114251.1* 19.514S 179.681W 600G 4.8     0.4  46 FIJI ISLANDS REGION
224029.7  35.107N 117.538W   5G         1.0  31 CENTRAL CALIFORNIA. ML 3.0 (GS).
SEP 09
002038.8  31.947S  71.391W  39G 6.1 5.4 0.8  83 NEAR COAST OF CENTRAL CHILE. Mw
        6.0 (GS), 5.9 (HRV). Some damage to adobe houses in the epicentral area.
        Felt (V) at La Calera, La Ligua, Los Andes, Los Vilos, Papudo, Quillota,
        Quintero, Valparaiso, Vina del Mar and Zapallar; (IV) at San Antonio and
        Santiago; (III) at La Serena.
011419.6  42.876N  18.088E  10G         0.6  25 NORTHWESTERN BALKAN REGION. ML 3.9
043421.0* 30.708N 130.532E  33N 5.4 5.2 0.9  57 KYUSHU, JAPAN
153821.6* 12.527N  88.297W  52D 4.8     1.0  35 OFF COAST-CENTRAL AMERICA
155705.8  42.835N  18.002E  10G 4.7     0.8  22 NORTHWESTERN BALKAN REGION
SEP 11
002531.8  35.755N 117.585W   5G         1.0  58 CENTRAL CALIFORNIA. ML 3.6 (GS).
033636.6  51.311N  11.733E  10G 5.0     0.8  34 GERMANY. Slight damage in the
                                                Halle-Zscherben area.
Note:  Computer users can get faster access to the Weekly Seismicity      
 Reports in any of three ways:
       1. World-Wide-Web (WWW) access:    http://quake.wr.usgs.gov
       2. Anonymous FTP access:           quake.wr.usgs.gov 
                                          (in pub/www/QUAKES/WEEKREPS)
       3. Email Access:    (send email to michael@andreas.wr.usgs.gov)
Notes for Table 1:
       Origin time in the list is in GMT, in the text and on maps
       it is in local time.
       N RD: is the number of readings used to locate the event.
       N S: is the number of S waves in N RD.
       RMS SEC: is the root mean squared residual misfit for the
                location is seconds, the lower the better, over 0.3
                to 0.5 seconds is getting bad, but this is machine,
                not hand timed, data.
       ERH: is the estimated horizontal error in kilometers.
       ERZ: is the estimated vertical error in kilometers.
       N FM: is the number of readings used to compute the magnitude.
       REMKS: obtuse region codes that denote the velocity model
              used to locate the event.
       DUR MAG: is the magnitude as determined from the duration of
                the seismograms, not the amplitude.  Sort of like
                going to echo canyon and measuring how loud your
                yell is by counting echos.
       FIG: denotes the figure/event number in the maps posted separately.
Return to Top

Downloaded by WWW Programs
Byron Palmer