Slashdot Mirror
Yellowstone Super-Eruption Threat Debunked
GennyCream writes "The Internet has been all a-buzz with tin-foil-hat geeks have been in a tizzy over supposed government coverups of a soon-to-come super eruption in Yellowstone (especially see The Shadow Confederacy, but also Rense.com, or BlackVault for entertaining examples). I found an article on ATSNN.com (the Above Top Secret News Network) that cut the paranoia with the proverbial knife and went straight to the source. Their interview with USGS Yellowstone scientists covers all the angles and should inspire the mad-hatters to find something else to fear (for now)."
Maybe I'm missing something, but what who has anything to gain by covering this up?? Where's the conspiracy? So Yellowstone might have a volcano in it. If you aren't sure, go look for yourself. It's still open. The reason nobody knows anything about it is that there's nothing to know about it. The article says that everything they moniter leads them to believe that nothing is wrong, and the reason they don't release any other information is because they don't moniter every possible aspect of the park. It's only a conspiracy when they're intentionally trying to keep information from you.
I think that it is because our mind-view of someone calling the government a major hoax is that of a prankster/crank. However, it seems perfectly legitimate to assume that SCO and MS behave the way they do because corporates have that view of devilish, scheming villains in our heads.
Or maybe, it is better put as, we've seen a lot of false alarms like these and ridiculing questions like these are our natural way to get better at evading those alarms. Nothing wrong, imho.
This sig is empty.
Yes, this is what makes the thing so magnetically attractive to the wing nut crowd. It's true. Yellowstone is a super caldera. It will very likely erupt again. . . someday.
Maybe when the asteroid hits it. Of which there is also certainly a chance.
Simple, factual uncertainty wigs some people out more than anything else.
"My God! We're all going to die!"
Well yeah, Sparky. Get used to it. But on the whole the greatest risk you face over the next several years is your drive to work. That ought to scare you silly. Roll over in bed. See your sweetie lying there? You're more likely to die at his/her hand than by a volcanic eruption. Even if you live in Hawaii. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Dig a hole. Crawl in. Die in the cave in because you were afraid of shoddy workmanship by contractors (paid off by the government, no doubt) and did a much worse job yourself.
Either that or just lighten up, ferchristsake. Here, have a nice glass of cognac and a cigar to relax.
Hey, why are you running away?
Oh. Yeah. The government has told you that will kill you, nearly on the spot.
Ain't it funny how people chose to chose what they want to believe about what the government tells them? I can't figure it out.
KFG
This is really true for all people though. If someone believes something strongly, anything you tell them, they will intrepret it as a confirmation of their beliefs.
No, you're not troll bait. :)
I've read all the articles and I've come to a couple of conclusions.
The threat of a massive eruption is hyped too much in the articles discussing the threat of such a thing. They fail to point out that there have been many smaller eruptions at Yellowstone. The fact is that there is a threat of a volcanic eruption at Yellowstone and a much much smaller threat of a massive eruption that was discussed.
Also, it's worth noting that the lack of funding prevents Yellowstone from having some monitoring equipment to monitor seismic and volcanic activity. Without all the information, it's hard to completely dismiss the questions asked about the possibility of volcanic eruptions at Yellowstone in the near future.
I admit that the threats in the article are exagerrated. On the other hand, I have no doubt the government and authorities tend to downplay such dangers, probably more than they ought to.
Despite the exaggerations, there are some interesting observations reported in the articles. There's a lot of hard science presented. If the views of the people asking questions are wrong, we ought to be able to dismiss their questions with science and with the facts alone, and without insults and ridiculing. Personally, I think we ought to encourage people to ask questions. Unfortunately, the ridiculing people often receive discourages questioning things. That's a bad thing, in my opinion.
The fact is we don't know when Yellowstone will erupt, it could be tomorrow, it could be in a million years.
In general, they aren't. Unless one of the following occurs:
We're perfectly willing to believe conspiracies between SCO and Microsoft but we accept the government at face value on things such as this and ridicule the doubters? Why is this?
See the above list.
but I'm genuinely curious why we take such negative attitudes toward questions such as whether the government doesn't yet want to inform the public over seismic concerns in the Yellowstone area.
Mostly because nobody is able to see any reason for the government to keep it a secret. Thus there can't be a conspiracy. Who are they conspiring against? People in the yellowstone area? Why? That doesn't make sense...
If, as you say, there is "secret" research going on to find out if it's going to be dangerous there, then it's actually the opposite of a conspiracy. They are doing it in secret to prevent panic, loss of lives and property.
Mt. St. Helens gave only two month's warning before setting of an explosion equal to a 24 megaton nuclear bomb, roughly 1848 Hiroshimas. In the year preceding that explosion, there were 500,000 tourists on the mountain.
It doesn't really matter if all is well in the neighborhood today in terms of what could happen within a year. The reports amount to little more than a weather rock. A single earthquake could change everything. Catastrophic volcanic events happen fairly frequently, so all this constant reference to 50,000 year timeframes really starts to sound a bit coy.
Wait a second: You worry about terrorism?
Sir, you are absolutely insane.
More Americans die in 36 hours from heart disease than were killed by terrorism in the entire year of 2001 (source)
If you're going to worry, at least worry about something that you actually have any control over - stop smoking. Take care with your diet and make sure that you get enough exercise. Don't drink and drive. Wear your seatbelt and make sure that you maintain your car.
Worrying about terrorism isn't going to do anything, and your reaction to any "terror" event will be the same as if it wasn't terrorism: if there are shots, explosions or big fires - grab the nearest person who needs assistance - and run. Of course, if you've been worrying about your health rather than terrorism - you'll actually be able to run rather than waddle.
But it didn't seem like the thing to be focusing on. The Yellowstone situation, (or non-situation, depending on your news source), seems more like a symptom than a real focus of concern.
With Blue Bands showing up on Jupiter, (indicating massive upheavals of lower atmospheric gasses), and the crazy solar flare activity of late last summer. .
Like the tides, this stuff is gravity related. Something big is going on out there, and I've mentioned one of the theories as to what may be many (modded to dust) posts ago.
--Brown Dwarf Companion to the Sun passing nice and close out Pluto-way. Moving through the Kuiper Belt. Disrupting comets down into lower orbits. Cyclical comet disasters on Earth based on this. --We're seeing the final bits of the last cycle burning up and even hitting the earth even now. . . Soon to be renewed by a bunch of rocks from the rim!
Not something to get upset over, of course, but watch the skies! I wonder where the first big one is going to land. . ?
As the esoterics say, "The Human experiential cycle is mirrored by the Universe." --And Human experience is a pretty harsh ride at the moment. The world has gone nuts.
--I just read in a local paper that cops are now charging people for leaving their keys inside unlocked cars. In order to protect the insurance corporations! It may be subtle, but it's basically saying that it's against the law to trust my fellow humans. And the fact is that most people won't even blink an eyelash at his.
Yep. The world is nuts.
-FL
This is really true for all people though. If someone believes something strongly, anything you tell them, they will intrepret it as a confirmation of their beliefs.
So true. Just try talking to one of those religious nutbags, the ones that call themselves 'Christians'. Poster-children for self-delusion, they are.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
And here's what happened to one 747: "As the crew of KLM Flight 867 struggled to restart the plane's engines, "smoke" and a strong odor of sulfur filled the cockpit and cabin. For five long minutes the powerless 747 jetliner, bound for Anchorage, Alaska, with 231 terrified passengers aboard, fell in silence toward the rugged,
A 747 without engine power does not fall it glides... Nor would it do so in silence, airflow over the wings and fuselage produces noise, as does the RAT.
Human beings are simply lousy at managing long term threat. If we can't look it in the eye's we ignore it, until it bites us in the back side and leaves us bleeding with no butt... that or we end up rediculously phobic, unable to function, worrying about things that are astronomically unlikely and ignoring the sure threats that are around us daily.
The folks in Japan thought they had quakes down flat, then Kyoto showed them they were rediculously under prepared. Even now, people are building home virtually "on" the San Andreas fault in southern California, because the short term economics outweighs the long term insanity of certain disaster. The biggest threats to people, of the hand of god type, are; * Surprise boulders or snowballs from space, * Super Volcanoes (the magma chamber under Mammoth Mountain California are a lot more scary than the Yellowstone caldera, at least at present.) * Super Tsunamis (a large slope failure on the big island in Hawaii could produce a wave over a thousand feet high on the American west coast.) * A tremendous amount of methane has been discovered on the Atlantic ocean floor. If the gas that is currently locked up were to be released all at once, a disaster killing millions of Europeans or Africans would be almost certain. * A super deadly bug, currently hidden in the deep tropics get contracted and spreads around the world making SARS, HIV, Chicken Flu, and Ebola look like a walk throug the park. We know there are terrible nasties in the jungle. It's only a matter of time before somebody catches something truly grievous. We know that the human population was at one time reduced to fewer than 1,500. Around the same time about 25,000 years ago, many of our closest hominid cousins went to their final rest. This coincides fairly well with a really big supervolcano eruption in Malasia (I believe), that may have made things very difficult for hominids for more than a decade. So we know this is a real threat. The problem is that largish tracts of history pass with no sign of serious disaster then BOOM! Something goes horribly wrong. Lot's of people get pushed off this mortal coil. Lot's of people pass down legends about the hard times and people forget. After a few years it's business as usual.
Our leaders need to take realistic precautions. They need to create sound technological contigencies for real but rare threats. The work on this super disasters should be proportinal to the likelihood of serious destruction divided by the real probability of the threat... i.e. spend more on helping folks lose weight and quit smoking, than making national plans to survive a super volcano.
Within reason protect people from their own stupidity, and short sightedness. At the same time, it is important to prioritize threats, and make sure that you're addressing the ones that will more often than not bite you in the butt. Once you've got those issuesmanaged, then you have time and resources to protect yourself against the vagueries of the universe. That and you spent more time having a life that worked, than worrying about what you cannot control.
Genda
I don't mind a little bit of doom and gloom now and then ... as long as its way off and unlikely. Can be entertaining and makes you forget about your current problems. But I've been reading up stuff lately on Hubbert's Peak, and I gotta say I'm praying its just a tinfoil job cos its scaring the crap out of me.
I came across the Hubbert's Peak a few years ago when I read a book review in American Scientist, but the implications didn't really sink in. Then recently I followed some google links. F*ck me. Just google for "Hubbert's Peak" or "peak oil". Basically, its based on analysis of the remaining cheap oil available to civilisation. Emphasis on cheap oil. Yeah yeah theres heaps of oil in the ground but if its 5 times more expensive then its no good cause the economies of the world will collapse. Here's the scary bit: according to predictions (by geologists) in the next few years (or by 2010) world production of oil will start to drop ... and never recover, and the price will just go up and up. End of civilisation ... yadda yadda. And no time to create alternatives. Funny thing is when you hear people like Dick Cheney saying the Club of Rome was correct, strange days.
Fortunately, on slashdot I can be sure that the majority wont believe this so I am looking forward to basking in some ignorance. I feel like I need it.
Dammit where's that tin foil hat ?
Bitter and proud of it.
Only problem is I'm not sure what the fake truth is.
Yeah, they're almost as bad as the ones who go around labeling Christians as nutbags. No matter what kind of evidence you point at them like, say, the writings of C.S. Lewis, or Aquinas or Augustine or Calvin, or Wesley or Luther or Origien or Tertullian, they just go on believing that all Christians are nutbags.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Visions, signs, ancient writings, are all popular sources of "evidence." Those insisting on the same standards of scientific evidence we would demand for, oh, frozen-yogurt inspectors are pilloried for their blind adherence to the belief system of science. Remember, nobody can prove love exists, so either you don't believe in love or you accept that the science of geology is useless, as compared to messages in crop circles, for predicting major geological events.
People really dig on doomsday, I've never figured out why, exactly. Facts will never prevent them from clinging to their favorite theory of how everything is going to go to hell real soon now.
What really ticks me off is that if an unexpected, civilization-ending cataclysm does happen (and it certainly could - we don't have anything like a comprehensive program for tracking NEOs, for example), one of these damn woo-woo groups will get the credit for knowing about it all along. It's a given, because there is always, always someone "saying this is the year!"
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries