Slashdot Mirror


Yellowstone Supervolcano Making Strange Rumblings

Frosty Piss writes "Supervolcanoes can sleep for centuries or millennia before producing incredibly massive eruptions that can drop ash across an entire continent. One of the largest supervolcanoes in the world lies beneath Yellowstone National Park. Significant activity continues beneath the surface. And the activity has been increasing lately, scientists have discovered. In addition, the nearby Teton Range of mountains is somehow getting shorter. The findings, reported this month in the Journal of Journal of Geophysical Research, suggest that a slow and gradual movement of a volcano over time can shape a landscape more than a violent eruption."

411 comments

  1. Fact for the day by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Teton" is french for booby.

    --
    It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    1. Re:Fact for the day by DrunkBastard · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hence why its always funny to think about the Grand Tetons (the mountains...)

    2. Re:Fact for the day by alienmole · · Score: 3, Funny

      I always thought that the Grand Tetons were a reference to Anna Nicole Smith...

    3. Re:Fact for the day by eclectro · · Score: 0

      "Teton" is french for booby.

      But then wouldn't they be the "Tittons"?

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    4. Re:Fact for the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, that would be the "Grand Whorebag" Range of Atlantis

    5. Re:Fact for the day by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 5, Funny

      And wouldn't you know it, they're sagging too!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    6. Re:Fact for the day by OmnipotentEntity · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, I always thought it was funny that there are 3 Grand Tetons. Whoever the Frenchman was that named that range had been watching too much Total Recall.

      --
      "Build a man a fire warm him for a day, set a man on fire and warm him for the rest of his life."
    7. Re:Fact for the day by jdray · · Score: 4, Funny
      Serendipitous comic strip for today...?

      http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20070314/lnq070 315.gif

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    8. Re:Fact for the day by BeBoxer · · Score: 1

      I'll be damned, you aren't even making that up...

      http://www.wordreference.com/fren/teton

    9. Re:Fact for the day by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 3, Funny

      Based on my research either your hypothesis is incorrect or French women do not have breasts the images of which are uploaded to Google Images.

      Since p -> (q V r), p being images of French breasts on Google Images, q being the accuracy of your statement and r being the French breasts themselves, we can conclude that the statement might be true or might be false.

      --
      All rites reversed 2010
    10. Re:Fact for the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Teton" is french for booby."

      And they're grand.

    11. Re:Fact for the day by ohzopants · · Score: 1

      In french it's pronounced "toton"

    12. Re:Fact for the day by rthille · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Build a man a fire warm him for a day, set a man on fire and warm him for the rest of his life."

      Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll devastate whole ecosystems...

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    13. Re:Fact for the day by c_forq · · Score: 1

      Most likely because you are missing the accent. There is an accent above the first e. Also, in my image search on google.fr without the accent there were quite a few nipple-involved pictures interspersed with vacation photos.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    14. Re:Fact for the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "Actually, I always thought it was funny that there are 3 Grand Tetons. Whoever the Frenchman was that named that range had been watching too much Total Recall."

      Yeah, either that or Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (see Miss Eccentrica Gallumbits).

    15. Re:Fact for the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I thought "boob" was English for Frenchman.

    16. Re:Fact for the day by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    17. Re:Fact for the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That, that's terrible... I'm sorry.

      Steve from Yellowstone

    18. Re:Fact for the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that happens as you get older

    19. Re:Fact for the day by shoor · · Score: 1

      I don't speak French, but a French guy told me once that it actually means 'nipple'. Another poster
      said there are 3 Tetons, and some people do have 3 nipples (did you ever see that James Bond flick,
      "The Man With the Golden Gun"?

      --
      In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
    20. Re:Fact for the day by haakondahl · · Score: 3, Funny

      I believe you are correct. Lack of the proper accent has caused many men to miss out on French boobies.

      --
      Don't trust anyone under thirty.
    21. Re:Fact for the day by fractoid · · Score: 1

      You, sir, made my day.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    22. Re:Fact for the day by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I thought it would have been Married with Children

      --
      What?
    23. Re:Fact for the day by Dekortage · · Score: 1

      "Hi, yes, do you have one of these in size Super-V?"

      --
      $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
    24. Re:Fact for the day by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Actually that means nipple (I'm french)

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    25. Re:Fact for the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's close enough for government work, most french women's shirtbumps are so tiny anyway. Now go eat some cheese and surrender.

  2. I'm scared by 0racle · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I mean it, I'm scared.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:I'm scared by Normal+Dan · · Score: 1
      Do not be scared. An eruption is not due for at least another several hundred years. This hotspot is just grumblinb a little. Even if it does erupt any time soon, it will be a nice change of pace.

      "The textbook model for a normal fault is not what's happening at the Teton fault," They have not been studing faults long enough to determin if this is normal or not. It very well could be both sides of the fault move both up AND down. In the long run, one will eventually overtake the other, but for now, it slowly ripples.
      --
      A unique way to learn a language: http://languageloom.com
    2. Re:I'm scared by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Informative

      "due" is a relative term, because that assumes that there is a definite periodicity, when we really can't infer that from just three prior events.

      A "change of pace", if it's not just a lava flow, has a chance to mean something that's massive enough to make Katrina look like someone's dog pooed in a park. It doesn't have to be, it isn't likely to be, but if it's like the previous major eruptions, then then much of the globe is in for a little trouble. The last major eruption in SE Asia basically caused there to be no summer in Europe, meaning major crop failures just about everywhere.

    3. Re:I'm scared by VJ42 · · Score: 1
      Apologies to the poster further down the thread, but it's actually overdue by quite some time:http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/1999/sup ervolcanoes.shtml

      Scientists have revealed that it has been on a regular eruption cycle of 600,000 years. The last eruption was 640,000 years ago... so the next is overdue.
      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    4. Re:I'm scared by Normal+Dan · · Score: 1

      The last major eruption in SE Asia basically caused there to be no summer in Europe, meaning major crop failures just about everywhere. Yes, that is what I mean by a change of pace. Granted, it might not be desirable, but right now, I could use a change of pace. Any change would be a good change... :/
      --
      A unique way to learn a language: http://languageloom.com
    5. Re:I'm scared by MindKata · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would like to tell you something to help calm your nerves, but I'm too busy digging out my shelter to stop just yet.

      --
      There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
    6. Re:I'm scared by flyingsquid · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Super catastrophes are pretty much by definition, super-rare. If they happened every other day, they would be normal, not super.

      Sure, if it goes off it will ruin a lot of people's days. But if it goes off every million years or so, well, what are the chances of being alive to witness it? Not terribly good. Our species may not even be around the next time this thing blows. Same goes with other super-catastrophes like large asteroid impacts. I'm all for long-term thinking, but there's a danger in thinking too long-term as well, that is, let's worry about next year's hurricane season, or that hundred-year flood, rather than what happens when the sun goes into red giant phase a billion years from now.

      Historically, it's the "normal" catastrophes that happen on the order of every few decades or centuries -like earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, plagues, famines, and non-super volcanoes- which have tended to kill hundreds of thousands or millions of people. Not to mention our incredible genius when it comes to killing each other. In terms of minimizing human casualties, odds are the most cost-effective solutions will be things like better building codes to withstand earthquakes, not letting people build in flood-prone areas, and perhaps most importantly, developing the ability to rapidly respond to disasters when they do happen.

    7. Re:I'm scared by Gulthek · · Score: 5, Informative

      Do not be scared. An eruption is not due for at least another several hundred years.


      Really? Know that for a fact do you? Yellowstone could blow up tomorrow, or it could blow up in 17,000 years. All we know is that it will blow up again someday. It's tricky to predict because all the standard warning signs that we usually notice when volcanoes are about to erupt are already happening in Yellowstone.


      This hotspot is just grumblinb a little. Even if it does erupt any time soon, it will be a nice change of pace.


      Yeah, it would be a change of pace. What, do you think ash melts away?

      Let's look at Bill Bryson's description:

      Yellowstone, it turns out, is a supervolcano. It sits on top of an enormous hot spot, a reservoir of molten rock that rises from at least 125 miles down in the Earth. The heat from the hot spot is what powers all of Yellowstone's vents, geysers, hot springs, and popping mud pots. Beneath the surface is a magma chamber that is about forty-five miles across--roughly the same dimensions as the park--and about eight miles thick at its thickest point. Imagine a pile of TNT about the size of Rhode Island and reaching eight miles into the sky, to about the height of the highest cirrus clouds, and you have some idea of what visitors to Yellowstone are shuffling around on top of. The pressure that such a pool of magma exerts on the crust above has lifted Yellowstone and about three hundred miles of surrounding territory about 1,700 feet higher than they would otherwise be. It if blew, the cataclysm is pretty well beyond imagining.

      "The ash fall from the last Yellowstone eruption covered all or parts of nineteen western states (plus parts of Canada and Mexico) nearly the whole of the United States west of the Mississippi. This, bear in mind, is the breadbasket of America, an area that produces roughly half the world's cereals...It took thousands of workers eight months to clear 1.8 billion tons of debris from the sixteen acres of the World Trade Center site in New York. Imagine what it would take to clear Kansas.
    8. Re:I'm scared by vought · · Score: 2, Funny

      but for now, it slowly ripples. With all the talk about Tetons, I read that as nipples.
    9. Re:I'm scared by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      >But if it goes off every million years or so, well, what are the chances of being alive to witness it?

      The chances that somebody will be alive to witness it are hopefully very good. The chances of YOU being alive to witness it, matter only to you.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    10. Re:I'm scared by eric76 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      All we know is that it will blow up again someday.

      How do we know that?

      Because it has erupted before?

      In fact, we have no idea whether or not it will erupt again. It may or it may not -- the only way to know is to wait for it to happen. All we can say is that going by past eruptions, it is likely to erupt again at some time in the future.

      Even if it does erupt again, it might not be a supervolcano the next time around.

    11. Re:I'm scared by blincoln · · Score: 1
      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    12. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Imagine what it would take to clear Kansas.

      Oh, I don't know. If it happens during tornado season, then they ought to vacuum up all the ash pretty quickly. The trailer parks will get cleaned first, of course...

      Gonna be a bummer for the Atlantic states when the winds then dump all that extra ash on them though.

    13. Re:I'm scared by eric76 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The last time I got a traffic citation was about 1990.

      The one before that was about 1985

      And before that about 1980.

      Does that mean that there is a cycle of 5 years between citations and that I'm overdue for another citation?

    14. Re:I'm scared by Kelbear · · Score: 2, Funny

      If the global economy survives, there will be some pretty awesome post-apocalyptic video games to play off of this. Tired of the WWII rehashes.

      Global catastrophe and end of life as know it aside, this could be positive for gaming!

    15. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "dew" is a relative humidity term

    16. Re:I'm scared by istartedi · · Score: 4, Funny

      "The ash fall from the last Yellowstone eruption covered all or parts of nineteen western states (plus parts of Canada and Mexico) nearly the whole of the United States west of the Mississippi. This, bear in mind, is the breadbasket of America, an area that produces roughly half the world's cereals...It took thousands of workers eight months to clear 1.8 billion tons of debris from the sixteen acres of the World Trade Center site in New York. Imagine what it would take to clear Kansas.

      Imagine what it would take to turn over all the soil in Kansas. Oh... wait... that happens at the start of every planting. So. If this happens during the winter, they might need to scrape off some ash, pile it by the side of the field, or take and put it in a big pile someplace (which is what happens to grain a lot of the time anyway). The real concern is that it will happen during the growing season and interfere with growth and harvest.

      You can't compare the clearing of a massive wreck of twisted metal and concrete full of remains to clearing a field. Obviously, interfering with growth and harvest is a major concern. If it's not raining, a strategy involving a blower attachment to a combine might still save the crop. Somebody should test that. If it rains though, your crop couuld end up encased in something with the consistancy of wet cement. Also, you've got to filter those engines really well. Somebody should test this, like FEMA... umm... ok, umm... yeah, we're fucked.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    17. Re:I'm scared by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Were gonna have to hide in the basement with a 2-year supply of stale junkfood and no friends stopping by. It's gonna be horrible!

      Oh wait, I already do that.

    18. Re:I'm scared by AJWM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The last major eruption in SE Asia basically caused there to be no summer in Europe

      Hey, we could use a little global cooling...

      --
      -- Alastair
    19. Re:I'm scared by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      re ash - well, at least it'll cool things down a bit from all the global warming.

      I miss the 80s paranoia chatter about Nuclear Winter. Carl Sagan was more interesting than Al Gore anyway. I wonder who would win in a fight?

    20. Re:I'm scared by Joe+U · · Score: 0, Troll

      It took thousands of workers eight months to clear 1.8 billion tons of debris from the sixteen acres of the World Trade Center site in New York.

      It's ok, if it erupts then Rudy Giuliani & Christie Whitman will declare the air is safe and we'll condemn some more people to a slow horrible death, just like the WTC.

    21. Re:I'm scared by Gospodin · · Score: 1

      The last major eruption in SE Asia basically caused there to be no summer in Europe, meaning major crop failures just about everywhere.

      Hey, on the plus side, that's no global warming for a year!

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    22. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Global Warming! It's going to kill us all!

    23. Re:I'm scared by Gospodin · · Score: 1

      In a cage match between a corpse and a robot, always bet on the 'bot.

      Unless you're inside Resident Evil, of course. Then you bet on the corpse.

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    24. Re:I'm scared by DragonWriter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If this happens during the winter, they might need to scrape off some ash, pile it by the side of the field, or take and put it in a big pile someplace
      We're not talking about a thin layer of ash, but something that is feet thick near (and when the outer limits are the whole western US, "near" can be pretty far) the eruption site.

      You can't compare the clearing of a massive wreck of twisted metal and concrete full of remains to clearing a field.
      You also can't you compare the clearing of volcanic debris from the entire Western United States to clearing a field.
    25. Re:I'm scared by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "A "change of pace", if it's not just a lava flow, has a chance to mean something that's massive enough to make Katrina look like someone's dog pooed in a park."

      And if Katrina's repair/recovery is any measure to go by...the 'poo' flung by the supervolcano will indeed lay around for numerous lifetimes.

      Geez...the areas that were hit by the flooding in NOLA by "K"...are still just as desolate as they were day one, only difference, the trash has been largely picked up out of the streets and a house here and there has been bulldozed, but, still is largely sitting abandoned and damaged as day one....whole neighborhoods.

      Kinda sad really....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    26. Re:I'm scared by Couch+Commander · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yes

    27. Re:I'm scared by sexybomber · · Score: 1

      Plus, if you add water to the ash (rain or snow, doesn't matter), it turns into concrete. So, essentially, the entire western US gets turned into a parking lot.

    28. Re:I'm scared by rujholla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When Mt. St. Helens blew we had about 3 feet of ash over all our fields in Eastern WA. The problem was you couldn't really scrape it. It was too light and fluffy -- at least till the first rain fall then it was like concrete. In the end it was a combination of like he said scraping and plowing it under.

      The big problem was what it did to engines -- that stuff is super corrosive well ok more correct would be super abrasive -- you have to have special filters on all your air intakes and they have to be cleaned frequently.

      While not as easy as the GP makes it out to be -- farmers for the most part have the equipment to clear the fields and it can be done fairly quickly.

    29. Re:I'm scared by UnxMully · · Score: 1

      Well we could stop worrying about global warming for a while.

    30. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I miss the 80s paranoia chatter about Nuclear Winter.

      I miss the 70s paranoia chatter about global cooling and the coming Ice Age.

    31. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "Yellowstone could blow up tomorrow, or it could blow up in 17,000 years."

      Correct, and it could be another 160,000 years.

      Last huge eruptions:
      640,000 years ago
      1,300,000 years ago
      2,100,000 years ago

      Last 2 time gaps:
      660,000 years
      800,000 years

      I don't know where the "600,000 years" often-quoted average number came from, this is too small based on recent history.

      Anyone losing sleep over this is a lunatic.

      Much more possible is a smaller eruption. Of course, even a "small" Mt. St. Helens size event is pretty disruptive.

    32. Re:I'm scared by llamadillo · · Score: 0

      No, but I'd watch out for a bus next time you cross the street; you're due for a big one.

    33. Re:I'm scared by Eccles · · Score: 1

      There's something to that. Those who argue against human-influenced global warming often claim that the prediction was global cooling in the 70's. The truth is there was concern about a short term cooling trend, most likely triggered by global dimming, due to pollution particulates. (It was also noted at the time that CO2 might counteract it by acting as a greenhouse gas.) We improved our pollution controls, and the dimming abated -- and global warming has accelerated since. No smog is good, though, even if it does mean we have to reduce C02 to avoid global warming.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    34. Re:I'm scared by eric76 · · Score: 1

      I did have a traffic accident Tuesday afternoone.

      The other driver received a ticket for failure to control speed.

    35. Re:I'm scared by 644bd346996 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It would if this were only, say, January of 1996. But in reality, you now have quite a bit of evidence that there is not a regular periodicity to collecting traffic citations.

      However, in the case of the volcano, we are only 1/15th of a cycle late. It is too early to say that we have totally bucked the trend.

    36. Re:I'm scared by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      I thought 70s paranoia was about overpopulation and Charlton Heston screaming about Soylent Green being made of PEEEEOOPLEEEEEEEE at the top of his lungs.

    37. Re:I'm scared by Kismet · · Score: 1

      Really? Know that for a fact do you? Yellowstone could blow up tomorrow, or it could blow up in 17,000 years. All we know is that it will blow up again someday.

      No, we don't.

      At best we suspect that it may blow up again some day.

      Science never knows anything about the future because it can't empirically test the future. When speaking of the future, all science can do is make educated guesses.

    38. Re:I'm scared by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      you may want to ponder what sort of impact even half an inch of ash would have on the chemical composition of the topsoil.

      That being said, it's not happening any time soon.

    39. Re:I'm scared by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      But if it goes off every million years or so, well, what are the chances of being alive to witness it?

      Better than our chances of being alive to witness what happens after it.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    40. Re:I'm scared by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      This, bear in mind, is the breadbasket of America, an area that produces roughly half the world's cereals

      The article seems to imply that we should prevent (or at least fear) a Yellowstone eruption because of the implications for the world food supply. Instead, this should be used as an argument to end the US's oppressive food/foreign policy.

      This "half of the world" would produce their own cereals if the U.S. didn't shove its agrifood down their throats.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    41. Re:I'm scared by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Fertilizer. Some of the most fertile land in the world is precariously located in the shadow of a frightening volcano. Why do you think that is?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    42. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, essentially, the entire western US gets turned into a parking lot. So your saying not much will change.
    43. Re:I'm scared by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      The original work, "Make Room, Make Room", by Harry Harrison had no such plot element in it; it didn't need it. After all, it was written for intelligent readers.

      When you get your entertainment from Hollywood, you have to expect screaming morons and adulterated plots.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    44. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Clear the ash? I remember when Mt. St Helens blew. Every one was flipping about how it would devastate the crops, and that it was the end of the world!!! Then harvest time came, turns out volcanic ash is the best thing for plants since the advent of light. In fact, I have a friend with a house plant potted in ash from that eruption. It is one of the most healthy strong plants I have ever seen. I'm looking forward to that much ash.

      --
      We are the Borg...
    45. Re:I'm scared by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      Maybe... we shouldn't rebuild those neighborhoods. Or any destroyed by the flooding of Katrina.


      It was a terrible design decision to build the neighborhoods in New Orleans where they did. They were especially susceptible to flooding, and flood they did. Why should we rebuild there? So we can "make everything as it was" 5 years ago? Why repeat a horrible mistake from the past when we could instead learn from it?


      Put the Katrina money towards relocating and rebuilding elsewhere instead of clearing the old land and building there.

    46. Re:I'm scared by dcian · · Score: 1

      Homer: "There's not a single bear in sight--the 'Bear Patrol' is working like a charm". Lisa: "That's specious reasoning," Homer: "Thanks, honey," Lisa: "According to your logic, this rock keeps tigers away". Homer: "Hmmm. How does it work?" Lisa: "It doesn't." Homer: "How so?" Lisa: "It's just a rock, but I don't see a tiger, anywhere." Homer: "Lisa, I want to buy your rock."

    47. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget engines, people will have to breathe in that lovely ash for a long time.......or not too long, as they'll totally destroy their bodies after a shortwhile.

      Ash and breathing doesn't really mix too well....

    48. Re:I'm scared by xx01dk · · Score: 1

      Didn't the Discovery channel or Nova do a show where they modeled the hot spot under Yellowstone and where it's moving in relation to the earth's crust? I seem to recall that computer models showed that the hot spot was moving slowly under the part of the crust that supports the massive thickness of the Rockies and that all of the geothermal activity at the site would slowly "peter out" (my words)?

      Predicting a massive super volcanic explosion seems to be FUD... I sure hope, anyhow.

      --
      There is simply too much glass..
    49. Re:I'm scared by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 1

      ...farmers for the most part have the equipment to clear the fields and it can be done fairly quickly

      While I agree with you that farmers have the equipment available - bobcats and even bulldozers can be found on most farms in the midwest, and big trucks to haul crops to the local elevator are a must - I think you are way off with thinking it can be done fairly quickly. "Harvest" takes several weeks to perform, using equipment specially designed for the task - down to being designed for the specific crop. The mass of the plants in the field would be an order of magnitude less than a few feet of ash, and only a small portion of that is actually removed from the field. Take corn - only the kernels are taken from the field, which is a small portion of the ear which, in turn, is a small portion of the plant itself. So, the time needed to clear a field would be orders of magnitude greater than harvest - running it months or years.

      --
      Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
    50. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you've missed the citations for the last two periods. postponing cycles of nature such as this often results in tremendous backlashes in order to restore nature's balance. i wouldn't be surprised if you die in a car accident unless you go out and get a ticket now.

    51. Re:I'm scared by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      They can do pretty decent measurements of things like magma chamber sizes these days to get a pretty good idea on how big a volcano is going to be when it finally goes. Yellowstone is fucking huge, and most likely, will be a very big explosion when it does occur.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    52. Re:I'm scared by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      All we know is that it will blow up again someday.

      How do we know that?

      Because that's what volcanoes do. In the long term, they're very predictable.

      >Even if it does erupt again, it might not be a supervolcano the next time around. Magma bubbles under 40 mile diameter calderas don't erupt in any way other than as a "supervolcano". You can't pop a balloon "a little bit", 100,000 cubic miles of molten rock can't erupt "a little bit".
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    53. Re:I'm scared by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Not really. Cereal grains do really well in certain climate regions, which, surprise, surprise, are abundant in the US. That's the reason why the US grows half the grain, not some vast illuminati-wrought conspiracy designed to keep the man down.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    54. Re:I'm scared by wtansill · · Score: 1

      I miss the 80s paranoia chatter about Nuclear Winter. Carl Sagan was more interesting than Al Gore anyway. I wonder who would win in a fight?
      Well Sagan's been dead for a while now, so I think Gore might have the advantage there...
      --
      The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
    55. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least I have chicken

    56. Re:I'm scared by TempeTerra · · Score: 2, Informative

      Presumably you were trying for those funny mods you got, but since you haven't had any sensible replies yet I'll chip in - you know somebody is going to take it seriously.

      Volcanic eruptions are like earthquakes in that they are a release of built up pressure. Earthquakes happen at fault lines when two land masses have moved far enough relative to each other that the sides of the fault slip against each other to relieve the accumulated pressure. Volcanoes accumulate pressure from... uhh... magma upwellings or something... which is released when they erupt. Both are examples of a system in which there is a steady increase in potential energy which is catastropically released when enough energy is stored. If the rate of energy storage remains the same the eruptions/earthquakes will have a fairly regular period. Traffic violations aren't caused by any kind of build up of energy, so there's no reason to expect periodicity.

      --
      .evom ton seod gis eht
    57. Re:I'm scared by glitch23 · · Score: 0

      Really? Know that for a fact do you? Yellowstone could blow up tomorrow, or it could blow up in 17,000 years. All we know is that it will blow up again someday.

      Really? Know that for a fact do you? Yellowstone may never blow again. Just because it looks like it will doesn't mean it will.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    58. Re:I'm scared by Pikoro · · Score: 1

      Another good reason to start smoking now!

      Get your lungs and body used to breathing the stuff and you'll be ready to go when the big day comes :)

      --
      "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
    59. Re:I'm scared by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 1

      So you're saying I should buy stock in any vacuum cleaner factory I can find?

    60. Re:I'm scared by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      The problem is that it isn't only cooling, it is lost of solar energy what is much worse for agriculture (and basic human survivor) than global warming.

      Don't forget that we (in a sense) are powered.

    61. Re:I'm scared by ssssmashing · · Score: 0

      Read the 21st Chapter of Luke verses 5 through 36.

    62. Re:I'm scared by RebelWebmaster · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the far bigger problem be the ensuing nuclear winter? Clearing the land is moot if there's no sunlight for plants to grow with.

    63. Re:I'm scared by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Put the Katrina money towards relocating and rebuilding elsewhere instead of clearing the old land and building there."

      There is a reason why New Orleans is where it is....

      Economically at the very least, is the reason you have to rebuild the city. It is one of THE major ports for shipping in the US. All that midwest produce? It comes down the MS river, and leaves from our ports. You enjoy all that nice oil and gas required at this time for our economy? About 1/3 or more of it not only comes in through NOLA, but, is refined and processed through the infrastructure here and in close surrounding communities. Are you volunteering to build some refineries around your town? Do you remember that nice little energy price spike post-K....that is just a taste of what it would be if this town went away...

      A LARGE proportion of seafood for the whole US...comes from the NOLA and surrounding flooded areas...

      I'm conceding that NOLA will be smaller, but, along with major economical concerns for the US as a whole, it is a city that is much older than the US...and is responsible for a great deal of culture and heritage for the country, in particular the south.

      Many parts of FL have been wiped out by hurricanes....should we not rebuild those? SF has had some pretty devestating earthquakes, and is still prone to them...should we ignore and not rebuild those areas? What about the annual destruction with the CA wildfires? NY seems to be a big target for terrorism and blew up some big bldgs there...should we have just ignored that? Every part of the US pretty much is threatened with some kind of natural disasters, many on a regular basis...we are supposed to be United....and each state pitch in and help the others when in need.

      But, at the very least of arguments....economically, it would be in the best interest to keep New Orleans working...you cannot just 'move' a city...especially one that is strategic to a good % of the US economy.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    64. Re:I'm scared by QMO · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't understand.

      In the GP, rujholla explained the widely known experience of thousands of farmers in dealing with volcanic ash.

      You appear to be trying to use your imagined idea of what farmers are capable of to disprove the results of this empirical evidence.

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    65. Re:I'm scared by QMO · · Score: 1
      I've read a fair amound of stuff by Harry Harrison (probably 10 novels, or so) and liked it alright as far as light reading goes.

      I've looked for Make Room, Make Room because I've wanted to read it.

      Still, regarding:

      After all, it was written for intelligent readers.
      If this is true, it's very different from anything else I've read by him.
      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    66. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not talking about sweeping off the sidewalk here. In a really big eruption they're talking about ash clouds covering major parts of the west pretty much extinguishing almost all life in an area that could reach from Nevada to Canada and east to the Mississippi. Past eruptions of this type (look up the Toba Caldera) caused the human population to possibly sink to as low as 15,000 individuals (this was ~75,000 years ago - there obviously weren't anything like today's numbers to begin with) worldwide and caused a bottleneck in human evolution. The effects would be felt worldwide and it would certainly mean the end of our way of life. Of course, it may never happen.

    67. Re:I'm scared by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 1

      The empirical evidence that is presented in the GP is incorrect. Here's a reference for you with accurate information.

      Please note a few things...

      • It took several seasons to plow the ash under and it was impractical to truck out. Several seasons is not "fairly quickly".
      • They mention a farm size of 600 acres. In areas of the midwest it can be 10 - 50 times that size, meaning less people and equipment to clear the ash.
      • They mention that the ash was 3 inches deep - not 3 feet - in the hardest hit areas. Crops can grow through 3 inches of debris, but not 3 feet.

      Several of my relatives farm, and it took them a few days to dig out their home/machine shed/barn from a few feet of snow - using their tractors with giant snow blowers. Ash that would clog everything would be a nightmare. Now multiply that by 500 or 1000 and you get the effort to clear the fields. Actually it is worse, since you would have to truck the ash out since there is nowhere to blow it to that is "out of the way".

      --
      Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
    68. Re:I'm scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine what it would take to clear Kansas.

      Given the nutcase christianist fucks there, I would have to consider gigatonnes of ash burying Kansas to BE clearing Kansas.

    69. Re:I'm scared by Maelwryth · · Score: 1

      Bill Bryson? My god, how we have fallen.....

      P.S.- Give me a call when the ground level has changed, rapidly and consistently, and I will get worried.

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
    70. Re:I'm scared by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Oh wait, I already do that.

      But no Internet connection this time... still think you'll live?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    71. Re:I'm scared by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      you don't know much about plants, do you.

      Whether stuff grows well decades after an eruption (ignoring the decades part) that doesn't mean that the soil will be useful for what it was previously growing. Tomatoes require different things than grasses, which require different things than squash...

  3. Horizon by gerrysteele · · Score: 2, Funny
    There was a BBC horizon program about this several years ago. Apparently it is hundreds of years overdue for its regular eruption. Would wipe out America apparently.

    Better not happen before I find out what happens in Lost.

    1. Re:Horizon by jandrese · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Wipe out America" is a bit overstated. It would throw ash everywhere and cause food shortages, but it's not going to split the continent in half or anything.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    2. Re:Horizon by gerrysteele · · Score: 5, Informative
      Sadly that is not quite the case: It's a Supervolcano

      one of the most destructive and yet least-understood natural phenomena in the world - supervolcanoes. Only a handful exist in the world but when one erupts it will be unlike any volcano we have ever witnessed. The explosion will be heard around the world. The sky will darken, black rain will fall, and the Earth will be plunged into the equivalent of a nuclear winter.

      Scientists have revealed that it has been on a regular eruption cycle of 600,000 years. The last eruption was 640,000 years ago... so the next is overdue.

      BBC Science

      Anyway, have a nice nuclear winter, eithr way.

    3. Re:Horizon by rlp · · Score: 4, Funny

      > The sky will darken, black rain will fall, and the Earth will be plunged into the
      > equivalent of a nuclear winter.

      Fortunately we're compensating with global warming

      --
      [Insert pithy quote here]
    4. Re:Horizon by Stanistani · · Score: 1

      So what's FEMA's plan... hello? Anybody? Brownie? Oh, right.

      Looking at their site, they used advanced visualization tools to... help the BBC make a documentary. They also have plans to... evacuate locally, near lava flows.

      Hmm. I think I'll update my passport and buy some gold coins.

    5. Re:Horizon by DrunkBastard · · Score: 1

      Actually, if anything, it's quite understated. The amount of devastation caused by an eruption of a super volcano would be felt globally. Weather patterns and global climate would be shot to hell. You wouldn't see the sun for a long....very long....time. Add to that the sheer violence of the eruption would wipe out a could chunk of everything living in the mountain states. (Yes yes, good thing not many people live here...but as I live in Bozeman, MT, I'm a bit concerned...)

    6. Re:Horizon by Martin+Blank · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Maybe it will give us some more room to work on global warming...

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    7. Re:Horizon by Drakin020 · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't say it would wipe out America. It would cause extreem damage to the western states and the ash would cause a year long winter. It would be a major disaster but one that man could survive.

      The BBC did do something called the End of Days or something like that. Basically it showed the world experiencing 5 different disasters. Nice effects and worth checking out. Yellowstone was one of them.

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6596386933 819999876

      --
      The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    8. Re:Horizon by Grave · · Score: 1

      There is no real preparing for this. You can prepare for an asteroid, in that you can see it coming, calculate when it will hit, and figure out a way to intercept/divert it (presuming there is enough time).

      You can't stop a volcano. At least not with any known technology, and the consequences of altering a volcano could be worse than it going off in the first place.

      Preparing for a supervolcano eruption is like preparing for full-out nuclear war. There is no effective recovery plan that isn't a lot of local efforts. The world doesn't have the resources to clean up a disaster of that magnitude in a short amount of time. New Orleans still hasn't been fully cleaned up (let alone rebuilt), and it's been 19 months since Katrina.

    9. Re:Horizon by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supervolcano Nuclear winter and destruction of whole ecosystems would be catastrophic.

    10. Re:Horizon by jandrese · · Score: 1

      That's what I'm saying. There is no doubt that it will put a lot of debris in the air and cause enormous local devastation, but it's not going to blot the sun out for years or anything like that. The last eruption tossed ash over most of the western US and Canada, which would cause crop shortages (but the US overproduces food already, so this isn't completely dire), but people are talking about complete environmental destruction which is just hyperbole. It will be a bigger disaster than Katrina though, so I hope we have someone competent at FEMA when it finally does happen.

      Thankfully, the margin of error on the estimated time of the next eruption is measured in thousands of years, so the chances are pretty decent that we won't see this in our lifetime.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    11. Re:Horizon by ragabash13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uhmm.. Science actually revealed that has erupted about three times before. Once about 2.1 million years ago, once again around 1.2 million years ago, and most recently 640,000 years ago.

      Science requires more data then this to make accurate predictions. Media on the other hand have no problem reporting based on guesses and bad math. So no, there isn't a pattern yet and I am inclined to believe geology rather then the media.

      That there has been increased activity is interesting, but given that the Yellowstone Caldera has far more frequently has simple lava flows without erupting, I'm not going to break out the emergency pants yet.

    12. Re:Horizon by joebagodonuts · · Score: 1

      I understood that there have been 3 eruptions, the last 2 of which are roughly 600000 years apart. Not a very large dataset to make a prediction from.

      The "Supervolcanoes" show was sensationalized (alarmist?) in order to get people to watch it. Did it contain some facts? Sure. Were those facts chosen and presented in such a way to support one theory? In this case the "it's overdue to blow at any moment" theory? Sure seems that way. A quote from a summary of a made-for-TV show isn't necessarily scientific (or valid). Here's 2 more quotes from the same source (an ad for a TV show) and one I made up. See if you can spot which one is mine.

      "Scientists have very few answers, but they do know that the impact of a Yellowstone eruption is terrifying to comprehend. Huge areas of the USA would be destroyed, the US economy would probably collapse, and thousands might die."

      "And it would devastate the planet."

      "The sky is falling"

      Where's the peer review, the presentation of all the data before reaching a conclusion? The impartiality that we think of when we think science?

      --
      "Give a woman two glasses of wine and some pad thai, and they'll agree to just about anything." the Sports Guy
    13. Re:Horizon by coyote-san · · Score: 1

      The US would just be the start. Some huge fraction of the Canadian population lives within 100 miles of the US border so she would be in a world of hurt as well. Europe wouldn't get the same ash burden, but it would still get hit by plunging temperatures and acidic rain.

      I'm not sure what 'overdue' means. This isn't a stable system like the periodic ice ages over the last few million years. The earth's crust has been moving over that hot spot and some experts think that the crust is thicker than during the previous eruptions and it may be enough to cork it. Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong, but we can't simply look at three prior eruptions and make any predictions other than "we should keep an eye on this."

      Finally, addressing another followup, of course the -continent- will be unscathed. You can't say the same thing about the human population or the United States as a political entity. All political entities eventually die, often due to natural disasters or a weakened military due to them.

      --
      For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
    14. Re:Horizon by segfaultcoredump · · Score: 1

      Its "regular" eruption?

      Using wikipedia as the ultimate source of information, Yellowstone has seen eruptions 2.1 million years ago, 1.3 million years ago and 640,000 years ago.

      This gives you a total of 3 data points, spaced 800,000 and 660,000 years apart. Thus, the average times is 730,000 years. We are 640,000 years into it so we should still have 90,000 years.

      Of course, the with only 3 data points even that spacing is very speculative at best.

      To make matters more interesting, the size of the 3 eruption's has varied in size, with the largest being 10x larger than the smallest.

      http://www.solcomhouse.com/yellowstone.htm has some great details.

      Overall, I think i'll spend my time worrying about other things in life. If this thing does go, I probably wont care that much as I'll be totally covered in several feet of ash.

    15. Re:Horizon by joebagodonuts · · Score: 1

      Bravo! I missed your post originally or I would've making one of my own.

      Yellowstone Volcano Observatory FAQ

      --
      "Give a woman two glasses of wine and some pad thai, and they'll agree to just about anything." the Sports Guy
    16. Re:Horizon by Stanistani · · Score: 1

      Which is why my plan is to sew gold coins into my clothing, slip across the border into Mexico, and continue to head south. Ecuador should be about right.

    17. Re:Horizon by cmacb · · Score: 2, Funny

      Need more CO2, everybody start breathing faster now!

    18. Re:Horizon by Drakin020 · · Score: 0
      --
      The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    19. Re:Horizon by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Gambler's Fallacy for the win!

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    20. Re:Horizon by sheepcentral · · Score: 1

      Scientists have revealed that it has been on a regular eruption cycle of 600,000 years. The last eruption was 640,000 years ago... so the next is overdue. Just consider this for a moment, if it's overdue by 40 000 years ago, then what stopped it erupting when it was 20 000 years overdue? If anything this doesn't make it more likely to happen this century than the 400 others it's missed. That's a crap proof, don't use it again!

    21. Re:Horizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's BUSHitlers' fault. With all those campaign controbutions from EXXON, he's on the warpath to kill us all!

    22. Re:Horizon by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "New Orleans still hasn't been fully cleaned up (let alone rebuilt), and it's been 19 months since Katrina."

      Trust me...not much of ANYTHING has happened down here in NOLA since Katrina. Most of the area that was devastated and un-inhabitable.....is still devastated, and un-inhabitable.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    23. Re:Horizon by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

      "Apparently it is hundreds of years overdue for its regular eruption. Would wipe out America apparently."

      A) Hundreds of years overdue isn't really accurate. The same can be said for the "Killer Asteroid" that is going to hit the Earth someday.

      B) Wipe out America, and a few others, although after reading posts from some /.ers out there, they would probably be happy about that. (shooting for flamebait)

      Yes folks there are a lot of things out there that will alter Earth's life forms in many ways. Huge Earth quakes that could alter the Earth orbit causing massive environmental changes, the Sun heating up and someday _really_ heat up, then burn out, Texas Sized asteroids, and here we are worrying about Global Warming. When in reality, it is about our sense of control. All the above items are well beyond our control and we (generalization of human nature) don't like that, 'cause we's so smrt.

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    24. Re:Horizon by sexybomber · · Score: 1

      The sky will darken, black rain will fall, and the Earth will be plunged into the equivalent of a nuclear winter.
    25. Re:Horizon by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      There was a BBC horizon program about this several years ago. Apparently it is hundreds of years overdue for its regular eruption.


      The three known eruptions of Yellowstone Caldera are at 2.2 mya, 1.3 mya, and 640 kya. Given the two periods of 900 ky and 660 ky between those, that's an average of 780 ky between eruptions, with a standard deviation of about 170 ky. So, I don't think you can really say its "overdue" for anything.
    26. Re:Horizon by master_p · · Score: 1

      640,000 years ought to be enough for everyone.

    27. Re:Horizon by lazarusdishwasher · · Score: 1

      Preparing for a supervolcano eruption is like preparing for full-out nuclear war.
      But I thought Doctor Strangelove already had a plan for full-out nuclear war
    28. Re:Horizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is what happened on lost.

    29. Re:Horizon by xerxesVII · · Score: 1

      one of the most destructive and yet least-understood natural phenomena in the world - superbees. Only a handful exist in the world but when one stings it will be unlike any bee we have ever witnessed. The buzzing will be heard around the world. The sky will darken, black rain will fall, and the Earth will be plunged into a planetwide search for soothing ointment.

      Scientists have revealed that they are scared absolutely pantsless of bees. These are superbees... so they are literally crying.

      --
      "We shall grapple with the ineffable, and see if we may not eff it after all." - Douglas Adams
    30. Re:Horizon by Sanat · · Score: 1

      Nice Link... thanks

      I probably won't sleep too well tonight

      Yellowstone super volcano info located approximately 42 minutes into the video.

      --
      And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
    31. Re:Horizon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see your registered email address has a .EDU domain. Might that be a college or university?

      Please post an email address for someone who would be interested in seeing an example of your thinking and knowledge. I'd like to send them the parent posting. They should, at the least, get a good laugh. But, I'd imagine they'd be taking another look at you as a student.

    32. Re:Horizon by djlowe · · Score: 1

      "The three known eruptions of Yellowstone Caldera are at 2.2 mya, 1.3 mya, and 640 kya. Given the two periods of 900 ky and 660 ky between those, that's an average of 780 ky between eruptions, with a standard deviation of about 170 ky. So, I don't think you can really say its "overdue" for anything."

      Those are interesting facts, but I'm curious: Have you informed the Yellowstone Caldera? And, if so, what, if anything, was its response?

      The sarcastic point being, of course, that you're doing, in essence, the same thing as the poster to whom you object: Making assessments based upon incomplete and uncertain data, from unreliable sources. Only, you're dressing it up to make it look better.

      Worse, you assume not only that the data you cite in your reply is perfectly trustworthy (since you make no disclaimers to the contrary, nor even bother to provide sources to such, to allow others to ascertain such), but also, that it is complete (again, for the same reason), yet, you provide no proof that either is the case, beyond your stating this as bald fact.

      Then, you apply mathematical analysis to that, and post it as a refutation, with a conclusion... VERY nice!

      I'd rephrase your post for you, but, I'm too tired, and you should've known better in the first place.

      You should be ashamed.

      Regards,

      dj

      P.S. This should be posted with a subscriber bonus, since I BOUGHT 25000 pages, and have only used 4411, as of this posting... want to bet there's no magical "asterisk" on this post?

    33. Re:Horizon by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Those are interesting facts, but I'm curious: Have you informed the Yellowstone Caldera? And, if so, what, if anything, was its response?


      I'm sure you think that makes some kind of sense, even as sarcasm.

      The sarcastic point being, of course, that you're doing, in essence, the same thing as the poster to whom you object: Making assessments based upon incomplete and uncertain data, from unreliable sources.


      Er, no, I'm not. On two levels: first, that's not what I'm doing, but even more importantly, that's no what I was objecting to either.

      Worse, you assume not only that the data you cite in your reply is perfectly trustworthy (since you make no disclaimers to the contrary, nor even bother to provide sources to such, to allow others to ascertain such)


      Er, no, I assume no such thing. You might assume that because of the absence of disclaimers, but that's not a particularly rational assumption.

      but also, that it is complete (again, for the same reason)


      No, actually, saying the "X known instances of Y" is quite clear that there may be as-yet-undetected instances and that, therefore, the information is not complete. Your earlier assumption that you falsely ascribed to me was merely unwarranted, this one is directly contrary to what I stated.

      yet, you provide no proof that either is the case, beyond your stating this as bald fact.


      I don't know why I should provide proof of either of those claims that I did not make but which you unwarrantedly assumed (in the one case directly contrary to what I said) and falsely ascribed to me.

      Then, you apply mathematical analysis to that, and post it as a refutation, with a conclusion...


      No, I post it as a challenge ("I don't think..." is hardly a conclusion) and invitation to support the claim it responds to.

      I'd rephrase your post for you, but, I'm too tired, and you should've known better in the first place.


      That's okay. I don't need your help with my post, and I think you may have been too tired for even the more limited response you attempted. At least, if I were you, that's the excuse I'd stick with.
    34. Re:Horizon by djlowe · · Score: 1

      "I'm sure you think that makes some kind of sense, even as sarcasm."

      Actually, it was intended as a joke, mostly: You stated: "So, I don't think you can really say its "overdue" for anything." - that's a direct quote, BTW - since you appeared to be so certain, I just had to ask HOW you knew that, because the data that you provided was scanty, at best.

      But I figured, since you're apparently a scientist, you got it first hand, somehow. I just wanted to know :)

      Hence, the joke.

      The rest, of course, comes from that :)

      Still, if UID is an indication - you're far too young to be so dour. Relax!

      Best regards,

      dj

      P.S.

      If you're going to cite facts, you might just as well state the sources from which you have obtained them: It helps the rest of us, that aren't as smart and knowledgeable as you, don't you know :)

      As for the rest, well... I've been insulted by better here over the years, certainly... and with better reason, mostly.

  4. i have an idear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    sacrifice a virgin! yeah, theres plenty of those here reading slashdot im sure..

    -Dirtbag

    1. Re:i have an idear by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      The volcano would be insulted if you offered it any Slashdot virgin.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    2. Re:i have an idear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But a supervolcano would demand not only one virgin, but thousands and thousands... well, it's Slashdot, after all.

    3. Re:i have an idear by ArcherB · · Score: 2, Funny

      sacrifice a virgin! yeah, theres plenty of those here reading slashdot im sure..

      NOT IT!

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    4. Re:i have an idear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      won't work. Supposed to be a virgin girl.

    5. Re:i have an idear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      won't work. Supposed to be a virgin girl.

      There are girls at slashdot. They're all flat chested 400 pounders with big noses and huge zits, but they ARE here!

    6. Re:i have an idear by BadMrMojo · · Score: 1

      From your spelling of the word, 'idea,' it is clear that you hail from New England.

      You're worrying yourself unnecessarily. We're safe from the scalding touch of the angry fire god. We just need to worry about starvation, rather than immolation.

    7. Re:i have an idear by Darth_Burrito · · Score: 1

      I have a better idea. Let's just send Tom Hanks.

  5. Uh Oh by backbyter · · Score: 1

    I've read about the caldera previously. I wouldn't want to live close. I might live too close anyway (VA).

    1. Re:Uh Oh by markana · · Score: 1

      Don't worry - when it blows, the caldera will come to you...

    2. Re:Uh Oh by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've read about the caldera previously.

      So have I, and my prediction based on previous history it will just change it's name to a three letter acronym, fail to sue IBM and fizzle out leaving a smoking crater in Utah.

      Oh, we're talking about geology...

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    3. Re:Uh Oh by jd · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I wouldn't want to live too close to Caldera either.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  6. Told them not to do it. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Funny

    Last time I visited Yellowstone, I saw some people throwing half eaten burritos and other Mexican food loaded with refried beans into these blow holes, vents and what not. Told them it is dangerous, but no body would listen. People are senseless!

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Told them not to do it. by digitaldc · · Score: 1

      Was Yogi in that blowhole? Because he's always hungry.

      --
      He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    2. Re:Told them not to do it. by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      That rumbling was probably me. I had dehydrated eggs when I was backpacking in Yellowstone last Sep. Sorry

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  7. Well shit by PitaBred · · Score: 1

    Here I was all smug living in the west thinking I was pretty immune to most natural disasters that you people on the coasts and in tornado alley set yourselves up for...

  8. I'm hungry by Abcd1234 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I mean it, really hungry.

  9. So long.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... and thanks for all the fish!

  10. Volcano TCO by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1, Funny
    Remember folks... A volcano is an investment that lasts for generations. That's why you need easy to use software for your volcano so that your kids and unborn grandkids can use it. Microsoft Windows for Volcanos is so simple, sperm can use it.

    You need to get your Volcano software from a company that will be there to send you patches and keep your volcano humming along nicely. You can't trust those pesky Linux starups that last only until all the share options are cashed up.

    You also need to consider Total Cost of Ownership. That is, beyond the ticket price you need to consider the costs associated with keeping your volcano up to date over the centuries. Independent analysis shows that Microsoft Windows for Volcanos is the best software choice for your volcano.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Volcano TCO by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ahhh! But how easy to use is Microsoft Windows for Sperm?

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    2. Re:Volcano TCO by lostboy2 · · Score: 1

      You've attempted to blast 2,000 million tons of ash and sulfuric acid into the atmosphere. Cancel or Allow?

    3. Re:Volcano TCO by _tognus · · Score: 1

      No wonder it blows.

    4. Re:Volcano TCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if I can get Microsoft Windows 98 for Sperm... that would be the ultimate birth control - the tadpoles would BSOD looong before they got anywhere near where they're going!

  11. Yellowstone Alone by digitaldc · · Score: 3, Funny

    Judging by all the inflation, pressure and possible eruptions - scientists have concluded that Yellowstone really needs to get laid.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Yellowstone Alone by abb3w · · Score: 2, Funny

      Judging by all the inflation, pressure and possible eruptions - scientists have concluded that Yellowstone really needs to get laid.

      Ah! I always wondered where that "sacrifice a virgin" meme came from.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    2. Re:Yellowstone Alone by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      This is the cornerstone of virgin sacrifice theory. Someone quick, start praying to Komona-wana-laya!

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    3. Re:Yellowstone Alone by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Hey, they said we're overdue for an eruption. That volcano has -stamina-!

  12. Hehe by nnn0 · · Score: 0

    The Lord Giveth and The Lord Taketh Away.

  13. Yogi by imaginaryelf · · Score: 1

    It's time for Yogi Bear to move out!

    1. Re:Yogi by LouisZepher · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you're thinking of Jellystone Park...

    2. Re:Yogi by geekoid · · Score: 1
      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Yogi by imaginaryelf · · Score: 1

      And we all know that Jellystone is a takeoff on Yellowstone, no?

  14. That rumbling is actually... by purpleraison · · Score: 1

    That rumbling is actually the burrito I had for lunch!

    --
    I am open source, and Linux baby!
  15. Asteriod impact? No worries by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Why worry about getting blown to bits by an asteroid when your friendly neighborhood super-volcano can do the job using indigenous materials?

    Remember folks, when it comes to wiping out civilizations, think locally!

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Asteriod impact? No worries by poopdeville · · Score: 1

      Imagine this scenario: massive asteroid hits Earth along a fault line, perhaps somewhere in Asia. And sets of Yellowstone. Which uproots the nuclear waste facilities in Nevada. Which future people will worship due to it's invisible deadliness. Eventually, teratoma becomes a sign of reverence and power. Monsters will rule the world.

      Eh, it's better than Armaggedon.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    2. Re:Asteriod impact? No worries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So more need to outsource your planet destruction to off planet resources. We here at Yellowstone destruction agency can handle your world wide catastrophes with no outsourcing headaches.

    3. Re:Asteriod impact? No worries by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Remember folks, when it comes to wiping out civilizations, think locally!

      So basically Yellowstone is the real-life equivalent of Orodruin ?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  16. Discovery Channel : Supervolcano Docudrama by maxrate · · Score: 1

    Anyone see the discovery channel Supervolaco edu-doc-drama show last year, or two years ago. I thought it was really frightening what the yellowstone volcano could do to the planet. It's too bad we are basically powerless to do anything about this massive 'caldera' --- not the linux type.

    1. Re:Discovery Channel : Supervolcano Docudrama by vought · · Score: 1

      Anyone see the discovery channel Supervolaco edu-doc-drama show last year, or two years ago. I thought it was really frightening Well, the acting was frightening, anyway.
    2. Re:Discovery Channel : Supervolcano Docudrama by maxrate · · Score: 1

      I thought the same - but the point being illustrated was still freaky.

  17. This is all a bunch of hot air. by RileyLewis · · Score: 0, Funny

    These scientists are just spewing a bunch of hot air. I think they are pulling it out of their ashes.

  18. Tornado Alley and supervolcanos by swid27 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    FYI, tornadoes are probably the easiest natural disaster to avoid; all you have to do is pay at least slight attention to the weather and have access to a basement or interior room. I've lived in Tornado Alley my entire life, and it's been 15 years since the last time a tornado came close enough to where I live that taking cover was justified.

    On the other hand, even though it's very unlikely to happen in my lifetime, a Yellowstone eruption would almost certainly own much of North America. An eruption from that hot spot 10-12 million years ago killed wildlife halfway across the continent.

    1. Re:Tornado Alley and supervolcanos by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...a Yellowstone eruption would almost certainly own much of North America.

      On the bright side, SCO would have front row seats.
      Eat hot ash Darl!

    2. Re:Tornado Alley and supervolcanos by Surt · · Score: 1

      I think hurricanes have to qualify as easier to avoid. You typically have days to prepare yourself.
      Earthquakes aren't bad either, assuming you choose to live and work in earthquake safe buildings, your odds of getting caught out are pretty low (but of course you have basically no notice if you are caught out).

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    3. Re:Tornado Alley and supervolcanos by MeanderingMind · · Score: 1

      You typically have days to prepare yourself.


      Which is why everyone waits until the last minute to do so.

      For whatever reason, humanity seems hardwired to wait until the last minute. I was in Japan when Katrina hit, and I watched the news as it showed masses of people who waited until the 11th hour to leave clogging up highways. Had you traveled just 50 miles inland a day or two before the headstart on all the procrastinators would have been incredible.

      Somehow the danger doesn't register itself until it's immediate and tangible.
      --
      Thunderclone: ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE! ONE MAN ENTERS! TWO MEN LEAVE!
    4. Re:Tornado Alley and supervolcanos by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      The problem with hurricane's is actually that they are still very unpredictable. Sure days out you are warned that there is a X% chance of being hit by a Cat Y storm, but because the course and the strength of the storm's are so erratic it's not until the last minute that you truly know what the effect will be on your region.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    5. Re:Tornado Alley and supervolcanos by KeyboardMonkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's okay, they'll just change their name back to Caldera.

  19. Math question... by quaketripp · · Score: 1

    If the caldera was "formed by a super-eruption more than 600,000 years ago." and if "supervolcanoes can sleep for centuries or millennia" (FTFA) then how much time can we really have left?

    1. Re:Math question... by thorkyl · · Score: 1

      December 12th 2010 @ 1313 GMT

      --
      -- I am the NRA, enough said...
    2. Re:Math question... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      If the caldera was "formed by a super-eruption more than 600,000 years ago." and if "supervolcanoes can sleep for centuries or millennia" (FTFA) then how much time can we really have left?

      That's the problem. Geology shows it pukes on a fairly regular basis, and based on the past schedule, it's overdue. Maybe we should shift to Planet Savings Time whereby we don't change the calenders so that Volcno The Hun doesn't know its time to blow again.

    3. Re:Math question... by abb3w · · Score: 1

      how much time can we really have left?

      Can? The cycle's not that regular (even assuming it's real), so it could easily be another hundred millenia. It's probably more realistic to expect that the next pop is about twenty millenia off... give or take thirty.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    4. Re:Math question... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Geology shows it pukes on a fairly regular basis, and based on the past schedule, it's overdue.


      There are three clear past eruptions, AFAIK, which is hard to infer a regular basis from.

      The first two were about 900,000 years apart. The second and most recent were about 660,000 years apart. The most recent was about 640,000 years ago.

      It's not all that clearly regular, and if you assume there is a regular pattern underlying the eruptions with some variation around an average period (hard to infer from the known dates!), I don't see much cause to call it overdue. Anyone know where that idea comes from?

  20. How much warning? by MontyApollo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How much warning will it likely give before it does erupt? Years, months, or days?

    1. Re:How much warning? by naoursla · · Score: 1

      Centuries, maybe?

    2. Re:How much warning? by bcattwoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There will likely be warning signs years it advance, but we won't recognize them as such until afterwards.

    3. Re:How much warning? by Fordiman · · Score: 1

      Apparently, long enough for you to write that post.

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
    4. Re:How much warning? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      How much warning will it likely give before it does erupt? Years, months, or days?


      Since there wasn't anyone recording observations of the last supervolcano eruption, and we don't have information to reconstruct a reasonably detailed picture of what goes on, that's pretty much anyone's guess, though people have been saying for years that changes observed in Yellowstone might be leading signs of an impending eruption.

      If it does erupt, though, maybe we'll be able to save enough records to give our descendants a better clue next time, but that won't be much help to anyone around when it happens.
    5. Re:How much warning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to "Party Like It Is Super Volcano Eruption Day Eve"

    6. Re:How much warning? by pclminion · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There will likely be warning signs years it advance, but we won't recognize them as such until afterwards.

      Why would you think that? We only had two months warning with Mt. St. Helens, and that was plenty of time to assess risk and clear out the "red zone." There were 57 fatalities, but it's not like we didn't know it was coming.

      The problem with warning signs years in advance isn't that they won't be seen -- the problem is people becoming complacent as they wait years for a geological event to play out. If scientists go on and on for years about an imminent disaster, people start to think the scientists are full of crap. Then, of course, the worst happens.

    7. Re:How much warning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it does erupt, though, maybe we'll be able to save enough records to give our descendants a better clue next time, but that won't be much help to anyone around when it happens. I wouldn't mind leaving my Chuck Berry and Beatles albums for humanity to reseed civilization, but won't the vinyl melt?

    8. Re:How much warning? by alienmole · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yellowstone is a different type of volcano than Mt. St. Helens, though, and it may not give as much warning. We know there's a magma chamber there, and all it needs is the right kind of crack in the crust to expose the magma to atmospheric pressure, at which point the gas dissolved in the magma causes an explosion. I think the grandparent has a point, in that the events we're seeing now could in fact be a prelude to an upcoming eruption, but they could also just be normal activity. We may not know for sure which it is, ahead of time, because we've never observed a volcano like this erupting before.

      Of course, IANAVolcanologist, all I know is what I saw on the one BBC show about it.

    9. Re:How much warning? by doti · · Score: 1

      Yes, just like... these recent raise in tectonic activities is a warning already?

      --
      factor 966971: 966971
    10. Re:How much warning? by webheaded · · Score: 1

      Not to rain all over your parade of doom, but I doubt the erruption is going to kill us all...it's just going to send ash and shit all over the palce, not explode cities. :p Well...at least that's what I understand.

      --
      "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - BenF
    11. Re:How much warning? by jbengt · · Score: 1

      In the case of Yellowstone, though, the red zone might include most of the country, if not the world. Last time it erupted, it directly destroyed thousands of square miles of territory. It also covered large swaths of the West and MidWest with feet-thick layers of ash, not to mention what all that ash in the atmosphere would do to reverse global warming.

    12. Re:How much warning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      one must take wind patterns into consideration as well.

    13. Re:How much warning? by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Not to rain all over your parade of doom, but I doubt the erruption is going to kill us all...


      If I thought it was going to kill us all, I probably wouldn't have talked about our descendants. It's really hard to tell how bad it might be, though. The biggest supervolcano eruption known appears to have been a massive global catastrophe; the three previous Yellowstone eruptions have been from somewhat smaller (but still a major regional catastrophe with global effects) to much smaller (which would still be probably by far the most devastating natural disaster in US history). But my point wasn't that it would kill us all, but rather that until we've actually observed in some detail the lead up to an actual eruption, its quite possible we won't have a good idea what the signs of an eruption are (or, at least, what the signs are that say an eruption is imminent on a time scale on which some response is warranted.)

      That won't help anyone around at the time of the first observed eruption, but it may be helpful if enough data is recorded and preserved to help with the next eruption of a supervolcano. But supervolcano eruptions worldwide don't happen often (ISTR seeing an estimate of one somewhere in the world every 50,000 or so year), so its not going to be anyone alive for the first one that benefits directly from that information (unless a really improbable coincidence occurs), but their, likely very distant, descendants.
    14. Re:How much warning? by juhaz · · Score: 1

      Not to rain all over your parade of doom, but I doubt the erruption is going to kill us all...it's just going to send ash and shit all over the palce I don't know about you, but most of us have to eat. "Ash and shit all over the place" means no sun means volcanic winter means no plants means HUNGRY.

      not explode cities. :p Well...at least that's what I understand. Yeah, I realize it's not quite as exciting to die slowly out of starvation than go out in a grandiose exploding city event, but no worries, you can have that too! Though it's just mere ten thousand square kilometers or so, so make sure you live somewhere in America, the closer the better.
    15. Re:How much warning? by Raenex · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but most of us have to eat. Spam and Twinkies.
  21. Has someone alerted Michael Bay? by cloudkiller · · Score: 1

    Apparently the script for the newest Michael Bay movie has made its way onto /.

    Since the cat is already out of the bag, I can confirm that Oprah has signed on to play the Supervolcano and we are currently working out an agreement with Tom Cruise. Like all Holywood movies, we based everything on a ytmnd clip

    --
    [an error occurred while processing this sig]
    1. Re:Has someone alerted Michael Bay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > and we are currently working out an agreement with Tom Cruise

      He'll never agree to participate in a falsified depiction of the murder of 50 billion paralyzed people piled up around the Yellowstone Caldera when it erupts.

      It'd be a complete falsehood. A fabrication. A total lie.

      In reality, atomic bombs were dropped in the volcanoes and detonated by Lord Xenu himself. None of this pansy "wait for the supervolcano to erupt on its own" crap. It'll be depicted correctly, or Tom won't participate in its depiction at all.

    2. Re:Has someone alerted Michael Bay? by cloudkiller · · Score: 1

      Apparently Mr. Cruise's agent has also made her way onto /.

      As I said in our meeting this morning, we are working with the U.S. Senate to have history books re-written to accurately depict the order of events as stated by Mr. Cruise and Mr. Hubbard. As I also mentioned, because many of the Senators are interested in this seeing the truth appear in textbooks and on film, we have generously donated to their upcoming campaigns which all but assures this legislation will take precedence on the Senate floor.

      Shall we continue this conversation aboard your spacecraft this evening as originally planned?

      --
      [an error occurred while processing this sig]
    3. Re:Has someone alerted Michael Bay? by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Oprah has signed on to play the Supervolcano

      Now there's an eruption I don't want to see.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  22. How do they know it is increasing? by sphealey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Per the article, geoscientists only have detailed large-scale measurements for the last 17 years (which would roughtly correspond to the increasing availability of reasonably-priced GPS and comm units I should think). So how do they know that activity is increasing (or decreasing) on any kind of historical scale?

    sPh

    1. Re:How do they know it is increasing? by razablade · · Score: 1

      TFA makes it clear that they are not comparing the activity to any activity on a historical scale. They are using the known, 20 year scale.

      Data shows that the caldera floor sank 4.4 inches from 1987 until 1995. From 1995 until 2000, the northwest rim of the caldera rose about 3 inches, followed by another 1.4-inch rise until 2003. Then between 2000 and 2003, the caldera floor sank a little more than an inch.

      And then from 2004 to 2006 the central caldera floor rose faster than ever, springing up nearly 7 inches during the three-year span.

      "The rate is unprecedented, at least in terms of what scientists have been able to observe
      in Yellowstone," Smith said
      Emphasis mine.

      --
      The expression is "I could NOT care less." Think about it.
    2. Re:How do they know it is increasing? by sphealey · · Score: 1

      Which could be perfectly normal - maybe the thing "breathes" on a 7-year (average) cycle.

      sPh

    3. Re:How do they know it is increasing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Global Warming.

      duh.

    4. Re:How do they know it is increasing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a discovery channel special on it recently and if you look west you can actually see the huge impressions the hot spot has shifted under moving from west to east and the damage its down to those areas.

      Try looking at the area with world wind or maybe google maps you might can guess what its doing relative pretty well, i trust them at least. There was a discovery channel special on it recently.

  23. Well, THAT'LL fix global warming... by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If I didn't live a stone's throw away from Yellowstone (by which I mean how far Yellowstone is going to throw stones when it goes) I'd be kind of cheering it on in that way I watch hurricanes or tidal waves and think "whoah, that's amazing."
    If Yellowstone went, we might expect "some 2,000 million tons of sulphuric acid were ejected into the atmosphere to block out sunlight over much of the planet causing global temperatures to plummet by between 10C and 20C." from here.

    WMD's in Jackson's Hole: who would ever have thought? (Cue the Taco Bell jokes...)

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    1. Re:Well, THAT'LL fix global warming... by thestudio_bob · · Score: 1

      If Yellowstone went, we might expect "some 2,000 million tons of sulphuric acid were ejected into the atmosphere to block out sunlight over much of the planet causing global temperatures to plummet by between 10C and 20C.

      And I'm sure the rest of the world will blame our government somehow.

      --
      The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains /.
  24. balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe toss some concrete balls in it. A lot of 'em. In the volcano. just like Indone..... n/m

  25. This could be a bit... by symes · · Score: 1

    BIG! I'm no volcanologist but I do know that the ground above this volcano is seriously distended already, and has been for some time. And that this is no ordinary volcano. I suppose the big question is there anything anyone can do to stop it? Is there a patch or anything? Can we just lance the surface and let some of the lava out? But it will be really interesting to see how long they encourage tourists to visit the place!

    1. Re:This could be a bit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you were being silly, but you got me thinking. If time and money (and current technology) wasn't a problem, I don't see why you couldn't just "vent" it somehow.

      Like I say, this is completely fantastical, but I wonder how big a hole would you need (drilled down into it somehow) to effectively vent out enough lava without weakening the entire structure too much?

    2. Re:This could be a bit... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Can we just lance the surface and let some of the lava out?

      Thats a good question. With geothermal ennergy from Yellowstone the US could tell the Saudis to sell thir oil elsewhere.

    3. Re:This could be a bit... by CaptainCarrot · · Score: 1

      I've been thinking this same thing myself. Iceland is going to be energy self-sufficient in another 20 years or so from geothermal energy. Is Iceland more capable than the US? (Not a rhetorical question, unfortunately.) There's enough energy in Yellowstone to make any other source redundant. Yes, it means an unaesthetic energy plant in a National Park, but that seems a small price to pay for no longer spewing tons of carbon into the air every year.

      But to answer GP's question more completely: No. Yellowstone is not like a zit.

      --
      And the brethren went away edified.
  26. That's a bit alarmest by mosb1000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The last eruption was 640,000 years ago... so the next is overdue."

    That's kind of like saying "it hasn't rained in a couple weeks, so it'll probably rain today". There is a very small chance this thing will erupt in your lifetime. We should be prepared anyway, though.

    1. Re:That's a bit alarmest by poopdeville · · Score: 1

      No, it's kind of like saying that it erupts at a 600,000 year cycle, and that it's 40,000 years late this time.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    2. Re:That's a bit alarmest by peragrin · · Score: 1

      odd it did rain here today.

      though we didn't get the snow they promised.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    3. Re:That's a bit alarmest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You're leaving out the fact that it's erupted 3 times.
      2.1mya eruption - 800,000 years - 1.3mya eruption - 640,000 years - 640kya eruption - 640,000 years - now
      it isn't even "overdue", and even if it WAS, its still inaccurate.
      It could erupt next year. It could never erupt again. Its most likely it'll erupt in the next 400,000 years.
      Docudramas don't involve real science. don't base your slashdot posts on them, you'll be outflamed in an instant.

    4. Re:That's a bit alarmest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that mean it's pregnant?

    5. Re:That's a bit alarmest by Peter+La+Casse · · Score: 1

      We should be prepared anyway, though.

      I'm preparing by increasing my long-term energy storage. Via chocolate.

    6. Re:That's a bit alarmest by DragonWriter · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, it's kind of like saying that it erupts at a 600,000 year cycle, and that it's 40,000 years late this time.
      I've yet to hear an adequate explanation for how a 600,000 year cycle is inferred from the known eruptions at 2.2 mya, 1.3 mya, and 640 kya. You've got one 900,000 year interval, and one 660,000 year interval. Now, you could say its an average of 780,000 years, or you could say its getting shorter each time and, judging from the ratio, it should have erupted about 160,000 years ago, or a lot of other hasty, invalid, but at least consistent generalizations. But how you get "every 600,000 years", I don't know.
    7. Re:That's a bit alarmest by poopdeville · · Score: 1

      That's a fair point. Mine was that if we're late for this hypothetical 600,000 year cycle, we're late for a reason. That reason might cause an eruption tomorrow. Or never. Or anywhere in between. Saying that we're merely late is not alarmist.

      As someone else joked, if a girl misses her period, she's probably pregnant. We shouldn't expect her period to start tomorrow just because she's late.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
  27. ease the pressure by Chicken04GTO · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I wonder if it would be a good idea to discuss ways to relieve some of the pressure through drilling or mini nukes or something.

    1. Re:ease the pressure by Canthros · · Score: 1

      I've been wondering about that for a while. Seems like it would be far preferable to open up a couple of normal volcanos as pressure releases on the hot spot below, even assuming they'd go, day and night, for centuries. Don't know enough about it to guess whether or not that would just blow the whole thing wide open, though, like popping a balloon. That would be a sub-optimal result.

      --
      Canthros
    2. Re:ease the pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would be like putting a needle to a baloon - only start the process faster.

    3. Re:ease the pressure by onepoint · · Score: 1

      a sorry (myth) I recall as a kid:

      there was a farmer in Mexico that when ploughing his field, he hit an air vent, the air vent kept on spewing ash, and that ash over many months became a huge mountain.

      I don't really know if this is a fable or not, but I could only guess that if you punch a hole into this, you'll get one heck of a mountain.

      Onepoint

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    4. Re:ease the pressure by Chicken04GTO · · Score: 1

      not necessarily. pressure in the system will be increasing over time. worse case, if our attempt to relieve it causes it pop, it will still have less total energy then it does in 1000 years or whatever.

    5. Re:ease the pressure by dorix · · Score: 1
    6. Re:ease the pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But then we would need to find a breed of man who could overcome adversary, and continue drilling, even as asteroids^H^H^H^H^H^H^H lava fell all around them. The leader having a wild daughter would be a nice subplot too.

      Where would we find such men?

    7. Re:ease the pressure by onepoint · · Score: 1

      yep, that's the one. I always thought it was a myth. thanks for the correction.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    8. Re:ease the pressure by crabpeople · · Score: 1
      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    9. Re:ease the pressure by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      That would be a sub-optimal result.

      Not if you're an evil super-villian, in which case it's called "a plan".

      BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    10. Re:ease the pressure by Canthros · · Score: 1

      Let us assume, for the moment, that I'm not in the business of killing off one or more hemispheres' worth of people. Or, at least, that I have some ulterior motive for not wanting the super-volcano to go kerplooie, like not wanting to die or something equally mundane.

      Please rest assured that I have learned well from the examples of my forebears in the villainy biz and will not be revealing my plan until after I have shot the super-spy and properly disposed of his body by feeding it through a power mulcher and then into an incinerator.

      --
      Canthros
    11. Re:ease the pressure by wilec · · Score: 1

      That would be a sub-optimal result.

      That would be one hell of an understatement

      Wabi-Sabi


      Matthew
    12. Re:ease the pressure by wilec · · Score: 1

      Personally I would rather just wait around for the big one in a thousand years.
      Wabi-Sabi
      Matthew

  28. I live a few minutes North of Yellowstone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I'm split. Should I run around worrying that it might go off, or should I get the popcorn ready for one helluva show?

    1. Re:I live a few minutes North of Yellowstone... by abb3w · · Score: 1

      And I'm split. Should I run around worrying that it might go off, or should I get the popcorn ready for one helluva show?

      I wouldn't worry; you should expect to be within the area of total destruction, and dead instantly — much better than trying to survive the subsequent ice age. The caldera covers a large hunk of Wyoming.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    2. Re:I live a few minutes North of Yellowstone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YNP is ~4 hours from Billings, MT. I've wondered abut and been slightly concerned with living so close should something happen, but living in Arizona prior to this, I'd end up just as dead, but it would take a little longer, and I wouldn't have quite the view of my impending death as I do from here. The Rimrocks provide outstanding views of the region, so I suppose I'd just park up there and watch the four horsemen riding into town.

  29. Obviously anthropogenic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is obviously due to human activities. Probably the weight of all the SUV's people are driving there on vacation is compressing the magma resulting in increased volcanic activity. There's no way this is natural.

    1. Re:Obviously anthropogenic by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      Inconvenient Truth 2: A Fire Inside

    2. Re:Obviously anthropogenic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does this mean if Yellowstone blows we will be treated to:
      -10 years of denials that it is even happening
      -an additional 10 years of insisting that the effects are way overhyped and it's not really any worse than any of the normal volcanoes that errupted in the past.
      -another additional 10 years of insisting that nothing should be done about the effects because it is a natual occurance, communicated via hoots and grunts, followed by bashing the evil questioner with a club and sacraficing the carcas to the fire gods.

    3. Re:Obviously anthropogenic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point. I sure hope you're wrong and this won't take 10+ years, hopefully we can solve this without setting off all those crazy "deniers". We should pass legislation limiting Yellowstone National Park usage to skinny people driving Yugos, other people would have to buy "weight credits", perhaps they could be tacked on to the price of the admission.

  30. 50% by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 2, Funny

    what are the chances of being alive to witness it? There's a 50% chance that it will happen tomorrow. Either it does... or it doesn't.

    I love quantum theory.
    --
    the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    1. Re:50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      50%? WTF? It would be erupting every other day on, average.

    2. Re:50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a 50% chance that it will happen tomorrow. Either it does... or it doesn't. I love quantum theory.

      Too bad you don't understand it. Quantum theory does not suggest that all outcomes are equally likely.

    3. Re:50% by Jerf · · Score: 1

      I love quantum theory.
      There's a 50% chance you don't.

      Apparently.
    4. Re:50% by MontyApollo · · Score: 0, Redundant
      There's a 50% chance that it will happen tomorrow. Either it does... or it doesn't. I love quantum theory.

      I don't see how that is modded insightful. Just because there is two possibilities, erupting and non-erupting, it does not mean there is equal chance of either, assuming that erupting was even a quantum event. You could say that it was erupting right now, in some universe.

    5. Re:50% by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Funny

      Quantum theory surely says it does both, but it only collapses into one of them when someone notices one way or the other.

      Quantum theory is very wierd.

    6. Re:50% by Goaway · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not half as weird as the things people think it is.

    7. Re:50% by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      You could say that it was erupting right now, in some universe. I can just the the Christian Children's fund commercial now:

      "You can see it . . . but they're there. Millions of children not fortunate to exist within our universe. Children to whom a blue sky is the thing of the past. You see, here in Reality 54A-19T, Yellowstone is not the calm, scenic park that we all know and love. Instead it is raining down ash and debris, covered the hills where children like Sally here used to walk to school, uphill both ways. You can make a difference though. For just $75 Million per day, less than the cost of a fighter jet, you can make a difference. For your small donation we shall build an inter dimensional gateway, and Sally will receive food, education, and a snow blower with which to clear out the ash. Please; call now."
      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    8. Re:50% by c_forq · · Score: 3, Funny

      So if I observe the volcano, than the cat is dead? Or the cat may be dead, in some universe? Damn it, I don't think I will ever understand this quantum mechanics stuff - every time I look into it I fear I will genocide cats.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    9. Re:50% by VJ42 · · Score: 1

      Damn it, I don't think I will ever understand this quantum mechanics stuff - every time I look into it I fear I will genocide cats. Except, of course, in some other universe you do understand it, or something like that anyway. I think.
      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    10. Re:50% by VJ42 · · Score: 1

      On the basis that the truth is almost always stranger than fiction, I suggest that Quantum theory is wrong, and what really goes on is beyond the wildest imaginations of slashdotters.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    11. Re:50% by HomelessInLaJolla · · Score: 1

      Someone has noticed. Now what happens?

      --
      the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
    12. Re:50% by modecx · · Score: 1

      Don't we all know that very, very small chupacabras are the engines of the universe?

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  31. The volcano god is angry! by Eudial · · Score: 1, Funny

    The volcano god is angry! Quickly, we must sacrifice all virgins to appease it!

    --
    GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    1. Re:The volcano god is angry! by golgoj4 · · Score: 1

      And destroy /. readership? Who will lampoon MS then?

      --
      -those people who tell you not to take chances, they are all missing what lifes' all about-
    2. Re:The volcano god is angry! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The volcano god is angry! Quickly, we must sacrifice all virgins to appease it!

      Unicorns aren't mythical - virgins are.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:The volcano god is angry! by c_sd_m · · Score: 1

      But why would the volcano god want all the virgins if no one else does?

    4. Re:The volcano god is angry! by rthille · · Score: 1

      Unicorns aren't mythical - virgins are.

      Not on slashdot!

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    5. Re:The volcano god is angry! by rrkap · · Score: 1

      But why would the volcano god want all the virgins if no one else does?

      If you have to ask the question, you wouldn't understand the answer.

      --
      I like my beverages with warning labels!
    6. Re:The volcano god is angry! by jagdish · · Score: 1

      But then who will visit slashdot?

    7. Re:The volcano god is angry! by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "The volcano god is angry! Quickly, we must sacrifice all virgins to appease it!"

      Guess that means there'll never be a Slashdot TNG.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    8. Re:The volcano god is angry! by GravitySpec · · Score: 1

      ... you first

      -- funny how the challenge key for this post is "sincere"

  32. SUPERVOLCANO!!! by ssssmashing · · Score: 0

    Has Al Gore been alerted about this? He's our only hope!!!!!!

    1. Re:SUPERVOLCANO!!! by tomz16 · · Score: 1

      Has Al Gore been alerted about this? He's our only hope!!!!!! Stop joking around... this is so SERIAL!
  33. Why be scared? by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What can you do about it.
    Odds are very good that it will not happen in your life or you children's, or their children's. It may never happen.
    This is a great example of an unreasonable fear.
    You are far more likely to die in a car accident than from Yellowstone erupting as a super-volcano.
    If you want make an effort to live a long happy life the best things you can do are.
    Exercise at least 30 minutes a day.
    Eat a good diet.
    Don't smoke.
    Don't drink and drive.
    Don't drive late at night.

    Oh and put aside money for your retirment and stay out of debt. That is for the happy part a long and happy life.

    You should fear a sedentary life style and tobacco a lot more than volcanoes.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:Why be scared? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      But if it can be determined that the end is near, you can get your affairs in order.

      And you can run your testicles on empty.

    2. Re:Why be scared? by dvice_null · · Score: 1

      > What can you do about it.

      Move to Europe

    3. Re:Why be scared? by Prune · · Score: 3, Funny

      Move to Europe

      I lived in Europe from 1980 through 1993. In retrospect, I'd rather go with the supervolcano.

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    4. Re:Why be scared? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      >If you want make an effort to live a long happy life the best things you can do are.

      Take Resveratrol

    5. Re:Why be scared? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      That would probably just prolong the pain. It will most likely cause massive crop failures all over the planet.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Why be scared? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, the quick death of the volcano, or the long, slow death of the "nuclear winter" afterwards? Decisions, decisions..

    7. Re:Why be scared? by atomicstrawberry · · Score: 1

      Oh and put aside money for your retirment and stay out of debt.

      If Yellowstone is going to erupt, it might be worth making sure that money you're putting aside includes a bar or two of gold. Yellowstone would cripple the USA and cause the US Dollar to become completely devalued, which would cascade around a lot of other currencies as well and likely trigger a global depression.

    8. Re:Why be scared? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      That sound like a Cold War tour of duty. How was it?

    9. Re:Why be scared? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are far more likely to die in a car accident than from Yellowstone erupting as a super-volcano.

      I estimate about 1% chance of dying in a car accident, and maybe about 0.01% chance of dying due to a huge Yellowstone eruption (not per year, but over your entire life). This is averaged over everyone in the world.

      So yeah, the car accident is far more likely, and there are things you can actually do to try to avoid it. On the other hand, this kind of large eruption, if it really does happen quickly enough to be very deadly, is probably more likely to kill you than an asteroid striking the Earth, which is also something that people worry about.

      But then, I suppose these eruptions are not nearly as bad as a major impact. Hominids (in Africa) have survived these eruptions (at Yellowstone) before. If it happens sooner or later, the human species will probably survive. It won't be any fun if there are crop failures for decades and 99.9% of people die, but it's still better than something that wipes out all land animals larger than a gerbil.

    10. Re:Why be scared? by Jaseoldboss · · Score: 1

      It might trigger a global depression? How about this

      According to the Toba catastrophe theory, 70 to 75 thousand years ago, a super volcanic event at Lake Toba reduced the human population to 10,000 or even 1,000 breeding pairs...

      I'd call that a pretty bad depression. Two of the Yellowstone eruptions are listed as 8 on the VEI on Wikipedia along with Toba.

    11. Re:Why be scared? by amorsen · · Score: 1

      If Yellowstone is going to erupt, it might be worth making sure that money you're putting aside includes a bar or two of gold.

      What makes you believe that gold would be valuable in a global depression? Gold is a rather useless metal, with a few exceptions. We have lots more of it than we need. Like diamonds, it's something which has because people believe it has value.

      The truth is that it is really hard to find something durable which will actually keep some value in a depression. Weapons perhaps, if the depression is bad enough.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    12. Re:Why be scared? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ohh ooh! I want the the first one, oh wait no, no give me the one with choolate jimmies on top. Oh, "nuclear winter" shit man I thought you we talking about Doughnuts. In that case I'll go with the Geothermal powered bunker with fast food reserves and a harem of sex slaves.

    13. Re:Why be scared? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh and put aside money for your retirment and stay out of debt.

      Unless the govt & central banks are inflating the money supply. Which they are.

    14. Re:Why be scared? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      As they said in Gremlins.
      "We are putting all our money into shotguns and canned goods."

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    15. Re:Why be scared? by tbo · · Score: 1

      You are far more likely to die in a car accident than from Yellowstone erupting as a super-volcano.

      The median number of volcano deaths per year is probably very low. The expected mean, on the other hand, could be enormous. Supervolcano eruptions are rare but cataclysmic events. If they go off, say, every 10,000 years, and the next one is expected to kill 100 million people directly, that's an (expected) mean death toll of 10,000 per year. Oh, and that doesn't include a potential famine from the loss of farmland.

      You should fear a sedentary life style and tobacco a lot more than volcanoes.

      True, because you can control your lifestyle.

    16. Re:Why be scared? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      "True, because you can control your lifestyle."
      Exactly. Why fear what you can not change? Yes it could kill many people but if it is other people dieing and not yourself then take a small amount of your earnings and donate to the Christian Children's Fund or other charity of your choice. $50 a month can make a big difference and it is something you can do. Donate blood, volunteer for a work day at Homes for Humanity. Change what you can.
      Being scared of a Supervolcano eruption in Yellowstone is a waste of time and energy.

      So, have the strength to change the things you can. The peace to accept the things you can not. And the wisdom to know the difference.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    17. Re:Why be scared? by Prune · · Score: 1

      Well I didn't have much choice back then--I was born there.

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
  34. Al Gore by jeevesbond · · Score: 2, Funny

    Has Al Gore been alerted about this? He's our only hope!!!!!!
    Of course he knows, he invented the supervolcano!
    --
    I'm going to transform myself into a mighty hawk. Either that or I'll just go and work at Dixons, haven't decided yet.
    1. Re:Al Gore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You may not know this, but it is only an urban myth that Al Gore invented supervolcanos. Actually, he was the one who said "640K should be enough for anyone" (referring to the temperature of the lava.

    2. Re:Al Gore by master_p · · Score: 2, Funny

      Indeed. After all, it's a well established fact that volcanos form a series of interconnected tubes.

  35. Disgusting! by geekoid · · Score: 1

    We should change the name to "el Grande Teta!"

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Disgusting! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That should read: "la Gran Teta" or "la Teta Grande"

  36. Does someone know how to contact Bruce Willis? by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny
    Okay...we form a team. We'll need some reckless rebels who act crazy in their off-time but get the job done when the pressure's on. We'll train relentlessly. Then we go in there, and with the help of Tommy Lee Jones, or Bruce Willis, or Robert Duvall, or that chick who played a dude in that one crying movie; we'll blast that bastard all to Hell, against all odds!

    But I warn you, there will be casualties. Everyone but the romantic leading man and the vulnerable-but-tough woman will be in real mortal danger. But I know we can do it!

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Does someone know how to contact Bruce Willis? by schlyne · · Score: 1

      Bruce Willis? No, we need some guy with a terminal "brain cloud" to go and throw himself in for corporate sponsorship.

      --
      I love deadlines. I like the "whoosh" sound they make as they fly by. -- Douglas Adams
  37. holy crap! by ReidMaynard · · Score: 0

    holy crap!
    i don't own emergency pants!

    --
    -- www.globaltics.net

    Political discussion for a new world

    1. Re:holy crap! by TFloore · · Score: 2, Funny

      i don't own emergency pants!

      Just remember this rule when buying emergency pants:
      Emergency pants are always brown.

      You already know why. :)

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
  38. My favorite description of a supervolcano... by Floritard · · Score: 1
    comes from the BBC via summary from the Rotton library:

    The BBC recently estimated the force of a possible Yellowstone eruption in the following colorful terms: "It will explode again with the unimaginable force of a thousand Hiroshima bombs per second... And the eruption will last for days."
    I should have been an astronaut.
    1. Re:My favorite description of a supervolcano... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bad news to be sure, but given the total energy involved, days is a lot better than hours.

    2. Re:My favorite description of a supervolcano... by rapidweather · · Score: 1
      Now that's a lot of Volcano power.

      Yellowstone has a history of big eruptions, the first one had the power of 2500 Mt. St. Helen's and occured 2.1 million years ago, according to information in the link. 600 cubic miles of material thrown into the atmosphere.
      The New England (USA) "year without a summer" is detailed here.
      From that link:


      Global cooling often has been linked with major volcanic eruptions. The year 1816 often has been referred to as "the year without a summer". It was a time of significant weather-related disruptions in New England and in Western Europe with killing summer frosts in the United States and Canada. These strange phenomena were attributed to a major eruption of the Tambora volcano in 1815 in Indonesia. The volcano threw sulfur dioxide gas into the stratosphere, and the aerosol layer that formed led to brilliant sunsets seen around the world for several years.

      I had thought that the material thrown into the atmosphere and spread around the world by the rotation of the earth simply reduced the available sunlight that could warm the ground, but that link says it was sulfur dioxide gas, not just particulates. I remember the Mt. St. Helens aircraft warning, so they would not sustain damage from solid material blasted airborne from the volcano.


      Didn't we have some effect from the material thrown into the atmosphere from Mt. St. Helens as far as overall global temperatures is concerned? That link refers to the "haze effect", resulting in very red sunsets.
      So we would have 2500 times the 600 cubic miles of material (If all the force of the volcano results in material in the atmosphere) if the Yellowstone Supervolcano has a major eruption.
      Would that not result in a lowering of temperatures worldwide, the Sun not able to warm the earth, and that meaning "a period without summers", perhaps years long, with no crops being able to be grown due to the cold?
      Famine, freezing to death, or what.
      Have to remember that these things are on a geological time scale, don't expect Yellowstone to appear on the evening news anytime soon. That said, there have been lots of big volcanos in the last century or so, plenty of them on film or television.
      But that is volcanos worldwide, not for one that has been "asleep" for so long.

    3. Re:My favorite description of a supervolcano... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 1

      Augh, why does everyone talk about Hiroshima when they need to compare something to a big explosion? As far as other nuclear bombs or natural super-disasters go, it honestly wasn't that big. Ivy Mike had 500 times the yield of Hiroshima. Tsar Bomba had 3000 times the yield. Then again, saying "twice the force of Ivy Mike per second" doesn't sound as impressive.

  39. Paricutin by BurntNickel · · Score: 1

    I beleive you are thinking of Paricutin

    --
    And the knowledge that they fear is a weapon to be used against them...
  40. Odds are you shouldn't worry in the US48 by abb3w · · Score: 2, Funny

    If the Yellowstone Supervolcano blows, the last forecast I heard was that it will be about 100 times as powerful as the Thera/Santorini explosion. The sound alone will probably kill everyone in the contenental US instantly. It's only the rest of the human race that has to suffer and die during the resulting ice age.

    Have a nice day. =)

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    1. Re:Odds are you shouldn't worry in the US48 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only the rest of the human race that has to suffer and die during the resulting ice age.

      I bet they'll be wishing for more global warming on that day...
    2. Re:Odds are you shouldn't worry in the US48 by Danathar · · Score: 1

      It's all good...I got me my NASCAR ear protectors to save my ass....and beer to help

  41. Awesome. by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If it blows, there's a good chance the park won't be so crowded that year. I could finally go!

    1. Re:Awesome. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the contrary, it will probably be crawling with people. Mostly wearing tin-foil suits with names like volcanologist, geologist, and of course, the Dept. of Homeland Security.

      Once it's done, I think yellow stone would be pretty damn interesting. Plus, it will get ride of tourists, park rangers, etc. No worry about forest fires, (forest, what forest?) bears, etc.

      And the bad closing joke, if a super-volcano knocks down a tree in Wyoming, can you hear it in Washington D.C.?

  42. Warning by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    You are trying to erupt, cancel or allow?

  43. Bush was right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when he claimed that God is not neutral.

  44. Full Journal article by Leto-II · · Score: 1

    The full journal article is available here.

    --
    Do not anger the worm.
  45. If this thing blows in my lifetime... by Mizled · · Score: 1

    If this thing blows in my lifetime I, for one, blame Canada.

    --
    Bite my shiny metal ass.
    1. Re:If this thing blows in my lifetime... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then I guess we'll have to shoot you before it blows...

  46. Build more geothermal power plants by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If the volcano is coming alive, perhaps, we can dump some of the heat off by simply doing a lot more geothermal power plants. So far, the ones that they have set up there are wet ones that waste the water there. But if they build it so that it recycles or simply is treated as a dry plant, then we can use it to create giga watts of energy AND escape the heat from below.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Build more geothermal power plants by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

      Sure rim the park with injection geothermal plants and the energy dependence problem is solved!

      Extracting heat from the region would be like siphoning off puss from a really large earth pimple. Let's get started now :)

    2. Re:Build more geothermal power plants by Capt_Troy · · Score: 1

      You'd run in to the problem of people not wanting you to build power plants in or around Yellowstone, even though it could prevent the death of those same people.

    3. Re:Build more geothermal power plants by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, it is not the heat that they are worried about. Most of the geothermal plants have been going for the cheap way, which is to simply use the heated water there and allow it to escape. The re-injection or even using ammonia in a closed loop system is a bit more expensive, but they will not use water. Once you start using the heat as long as it does not harm old faithful or other geyser, then things will be ok.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    4. Re:Build more geothermal power plants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. Something has to be done.

      If a processor is too hot, a heat sink is used, but we're looking at miles deep and miles in size. The simplest design is to just tap off some of the energy and eject it into space, or ship seawater and circulate it through.

      Another design involves building a monster mountain range on top. What keeps volcanic energy from rising? Perhaps the weight and density of stuff it has to get through.

    5. Re:Build more geothermal power plants by owlstead · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't you just get only the surface heat away? The molten rock would solidify and the buildup below would simply continue. Only the bang in the end would be worse. Or maybe it would just make no difference at all - the amounts of energy stored beneath the vulcano seems rather staggering. Just a some thoughts.

  47. The solution is obvious... by phekno · · Score: 0

    Has no one ever seen "The Core"? OK. Dumb question. But the solution lies in this movie. Take some really dumb "scientists" (Al Gore), put them in something resembling a suppository made from a new material called "unobtanium" and have them drop nukes in the core of the earth. Come on!

  48. /wrist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Yippy. Another doomsday scenario that cannot be controlled. What's the list to now?
    • Earth-killing meteors
    • Exploding stars' gamma radiation
    • Super-volcanoes
    • Bible prophecy realized
    • Climate change
    • Intergalactic highway
    /fear
    /panic
    /wrist
    1. Re:/wrist by Teancum · · Score: 1

      You forgot the impending collision between our galaxy and the Andromeda Galaxy. Give or take a billion years.

      I was going to mention the supernova explosion of Vega, but you got that covered in the "gamma radiation from stars" section.

  49. Allow! by MrTrick · · Score: 1

    Stupid popup boxes, always distracting me...

    *goes back to reading slashdot*

  50. It speaks by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Bwrrrrrrrrrppp! 'Scuse me, had humans for lunch again.

  51. I live here and don't feel nothin by dbdweeb · · Score: 1

    I live in Bozeman, MT just North of Yellowstone and I haven't felt anything... And whenever it erupts I hope that, because I live so close, I still won't feel a thing, if you get my drift.

    1. Re:I live here and don't feel nothin by justinlindh · · Score: 1

      Same here, and yup... I agree. Ought to be a quick and painless ordeal.

  52. GPS Accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I would be interested to learn exactly how they collected this data. From what I understand, GPS instruments are much less accurate on the vertical (altitude) than they are on the horizontal... the reason is simple geometry with the satellites. It takes days of data collection by top grade survey equipment on a tripod (along with a good churn through the NGS computers to correct for known atmospheric flux) to get millimeter accuracy for one latitude/longitude location.

    1. Re:GPS Accuracy by mikael · · Score: 1

      From the abstract, they had fifteen permanent stations. Presumably, they would be using differential GPS, which would increase the accuracy down to a metre. That would allow relative movements of each station to be detected.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    2. Re:GPS Accuracy by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Presumably, they would be using differential GPS, which would increase the accuracy down to a metre

      With a long timebase it should be far better than that. Easily centimetres, possibly millimetres of precision.

    3. Re:GPS Accuracy by wasted+time · · Score: 1

      I would be interested to learn exactly how they collected this data.

      Thee is a LOT more info found on the page linked below than in the page linked in the summary.

      http://www.mines.utah.edu/~rbsmith/RESEARCH/UUGPS. html

      --
      The Stone Age did not end because humans ran out of stones. - William McDonough
    4. Re:GPS Accuracy by Slashamatic · · Score: 1

      GPS accuracy is a function of how many satellites you can track for and how long at any one location. You solve for, say up to 12 visible satellites and then average out the position. If you stay long enough in one place then you will end up with a very accurate average position in 3D to mm level. Even a hiking model GPS can give better positions when the results are averaged. However the units for static/base station use tend to be built for better stability.

  53. Why you can't vent it by istartedi · · Score: 1

    The magma has gas in solution. Opening the magma chamber is like taking the top off a soda bottle. The gas comes out of solution, the molten rock mixed with gas comes flying out like crazy. This is what I've been told. It makes sense.

    OTOH, pumping water into the rocks might help stave off the eruption by cooling the magma chamber. It would also provide geothermal power. I'm not sure if we could pump enough water to make a difference, and if we drill into the rocks and hit the magma chamber... see the previous paragraph.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Why you can't vent it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slight flaw with pumping water into the area to cool the magma... Water tends to do nasty things (Like disintegrating metals) when it's both super-heated and pressurized - like pumping water into the surrounding rocks(no-where for the steam to go but back the direction it's being pumped).

      Not sure how much this would help.. Being that the magma is an upwelling from 125miles down. Seems more like pissing on a forest fire to try and contain it.Now if we could re-direct the Pacific into the caldera, that should cool it. The loss of western North America would be a price we'd just have to live with.

      On the other hand, maybe it's best to leave sleeping volcanoes lie.

  54. Horizon Video Link by jmarkantes · · Score: 1

    Horizon- End Day

    It's actually a pretty entertaining and somewhat enlightening video. A few end of the world scenarios- earthquake/tsunami, meteor, supervolcano, pandemic, and a supercollider creating a black hole and destroying the world. Yep, that last one if included.
    J

    1. Re:Horizon Video Link by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Enlightening? I'd be very hesitant to call anyone proposing that a supercollider will create an earth destroying black hole as enlightening.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  55. Gilligan! by Davenport+Spiff+jr · · Score: 1

    "In addition, the nearby Teton Range of mountains is somehow getting shorter." I thought that was just gilligan moving his fish trap further out in the lagoon to catch more fish. Oh, I feel so old...

  56. ok but ... by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

    Aren't the sacrificial virgins supposed to be female? I'm pretty sure most /. virgins are male or some semblance thereof.

    --
    My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    1. Re:ok but ... by multiplexo · · Score: 1

      Yes, the sacrificial virgins have to be female, and attractive, otherwise you could just round them up at any science fiction or comics convention.

      --
      cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
  57. Re:Oh NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and someone else figure out how to blame Bush for this one. It had better hurry up and blow up before he leaves office or it'll be harder to blame it on him.


    What gave you that impression? Conservatives have no problem blaming Clinton for everything that goes wrong today.

  58. 2036 by AJWM · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just wait. The Yellowstone supervolcano and the New Madrid fault are both overdue. Comes 2036, asteroid Apophis hits the Earth, triggering the New Madrid fault which in turn pushes Yellowstone over the edge.

    On the upside, we won't have to worry about the 2038 unix/linux clock rollover.

    --
    -- Alastair
    1. Re:2036 by Arancaytar · · Score: 2, Funny

      The hilarious part is that when another civilization discovers our remains they're going to wonder how the hell we were able to predict the apocalypse to within two years. After all, why else would we reckon our time in such a way that the calendar ends exactly then?

    2. Re:2036 by juhaz · · Score: 1

      The hilarious part is that when another civilization discovers our remains they're going to wonder how the hell we were able to predict the apocalypse to within two years. After all, why else would we reckon our time in such a way that the calendar ends exactly then? Well, they would just discover all the other few hundred thousand apocalypse predictions with their assorted calendar endings and conclude we were loons, and that you've got to guess it right eventually.
  59. Need another pic-a-nic basket, Boo-Boo boy by slyborg · · Score: 1

    Normally, won't feed a troll, but this one *admitted* it ;-)

  60. Apparently These Guys Made an Album About It... by lcfactor · · Score: 1

    And it's suprisingly pretty good. http://www.myspace.com/musicforendtimes

  61. Well if it does blow soon... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    You are all welcome at my place, 38 S 144 E

  62. don't worry by jaimz22 · · Score: 0

    if it takes out microsoft there is hope

    1. Re:don't worry by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      if it takes out microsoft there is hope

      Come on, we all know what happens when you throw a Sith into a volcano. That's just asking for trouble.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    2. Re:don't worry by largesnike · · Score: 1

      Noooooooo!!!

      --
      "Laugh while you can a-monkey boy!" - Dr Emilio Lizardo
  63. That's a stupid idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is obviously a job for Superman.

  64. lancing the surface is out of the question by sexybomber · · Score: 1

    because then you would get a very large geyser that shoots WHITE HOT LAVA into the stratosphere. Which is probably better than having the whole thing blow and destroy North America, but still not nice.

  65. ignore my last post. by sexybomber · · Score: 1

    The sky will darken, black rain will fall, and the Earth will be plunged into the equivalent of a nuclear winter.


    At what point in all of that do we get the plagues of locusts and the rivers turning to blood?
  66. the tourists help! We need more by CFD339 · · Score: 2, Funny

    We need as many of them as possible to stand on park itself, providing extra weight to keep the ground down. We need the equivalent of about 20 metric-Oprahs per acre over the long term. This will cause the magma bubble to recede, and bulge somewhere else. The Bush administration is doing research (on cable tv) to see if that bulge will happen in Iran.

    --
    The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
  67. every 600000 years by Traa · · Score: 1

    last I read the Yellowstone Super Volcano becomes active every 600000 years or so. Sure it has been about 650000 years since that happened last so we are in for a good one soon...but relative to human time scale this is not likely to be tomorrow...or next month...or anytime in the next several millennia for that matter.

    *cough* sensationalist media *cough*

  68. Moments before the big eruption... by LibertarianWackJob · · Score: 1

    Moments before the big eruption, billions of gallons of water come rushing south from the melting arctic glaciers and cool the volcano.

    Global warming saves the day!!!

    Thanks Al

    --
    What? ®
    1. Re:Moments before the big eruption... by aeschenkarnos · · Score: 1
      come rushing south from the melting arctic glaciers

      Over what?

    2. Re:Moments before the big eruption... by LibertarianWackJob · · Score: 1

      Ummm. I don't know... Canada?

      I'm just taking an (apparently failed) attempt at some humor. Come on. Try to picture the imagery.

      --
      What? ®
  69. The bulge under the lake by dbdweeb · · Score: 1

    Without sophisticated equipment simple observation indicates recent geologic change. The Southern fingers of Lake Yellowstone are flooding their banks and drowning trees as the entire Southern flank is tilting down while the bulge in the center of the lake is pushing upward. I have a favorite off trail place down there where I take a cup and a tea bag. Really cool... Er uh, HOT.

  70. Old Faithful by lgordon · · Score: 1

    When Old Faithful stops faithfully erupting every 65-92 minutes on average, the I'll be scared...

    1. Re:Old Faithful by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Old faithful is much less periodic than it was 25 years ago.

  71. More pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What you need is more pressure. Put the Rockies on top of it to keep the bugger down!

    Wasn't there something about the lava being particularly explosive on account of having a lot of gas mixed in. And, I don't think a nuke is a good thing to be setting off there. Kind of like shaking your coke bottle before you open it.

  72. Had to say it... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

    640,000 years ought to be enough for everybody.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    1. Re:Had to say it... by Ashtead · · Score: 1

      Besides the old joke (which is Delta Score +0.07 Funny anymore), there is another, more interesting matter here. The number of bytes was really 655360, not 640000, that is a difference of 15360. And this leads me to wonder about the accuracy of these "640000" years. What is the uncertainty? Is it 15360 years, is it 50 years, is it 75000 years? Even an error of 0.1% makes for 640 years or some 20 generations of people... All that seems to be coming out of this is that Something Big Will Happen sooner or later, but no-one knows when this will be. Could be tomorrow, could be in the year 40960, could be whenever, throw a coin 20 times and have heads be 1 and tails be 0, make a 20-bit integer out of that, and there is as good a guess as anything else for when the supervolcano will blow.

      I for one is not going to lose sleep over this.

      --
      SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
  73. Choose your poison by merikari · · Score: 1
    --
    My other SIG is a Sauer.
  74. Sacrifices to the Volcano Goddess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, but isn't the volcano goddess Pele female? I think she'd probably have more fun with male virgins.

    1. Re:Sacrifices to the Volcano Goddess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe, but Slashdot reading male virgins? Fun? Think again.

  75. Don't you mean goddess? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pele is the volcano goddess, get it right. Sheesh. Since she often appears as a beautiful young woman, there should be lots of /. readers volunteering to be virgin sacrifices. That's probably the only way the most /. readers will ever get lucky. Of course, they're in trouble if Pele prefers quality over quantity.

  76. I'm drunk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean it, really dronk.

  77. The Devil You Know by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    The Yellowstone Caldera is in Wyoming. That's the state that also produced Dick Cheney and sent him to Congress.

    Just more evidence that Cheney is the devil.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  78. Just think how many red states it'll take out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and smile.

  79. If it blows, can we blame it on Al-Qaeda? by crismoj · · Score: 1

    Maybe this is where they hid the weapons of mass destruction

  80. Loss of USA is cheap if it solves global warming.. by Joce640k · · Score: 0, Troll

    If it solves global warming then the loss of the USA is a cheap price to pay.

    --
    No sig today...
  81. Do you think it was an accident by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 1

    that they have that name?

  82. You forgot the Canary Islands falling into the sea by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    A 300foot wave heading for America at 500mph? Life could be interesting...

    http://archives.cnn.com/2001/TECH/science/08/29/ti dal.wave/index.html

    --
    No sig today...
  83. Re:That's a bit alarm[i]st by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

    Because it's a cycle, duh!

    - RG>

    --
    Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  84. Nuke detonated at Yellowstone by Danathar · · Score: 1

    If you had a Nuke and you either 1) detonated it above ground or 2) dug hole and buried it.

    Would it/Could it cause the caldera to explode?

    1. Re:Nuke detonated at Yellowstone by Teancum · · Score: 1

      Come on and be real. It wouldn't even make a dent.

      Even the largest nuke that has ever been developed wouldn't even compare to the raw energy that an ordinary volcano like Mt. St. Helens with what was even a modest eruption in 1980.

      An above ground nuclear detonation would do absolutely nothing, other than general environmental damage and knocking down trees. It wouldn't affect the geology at all.

      Underground, it would create a minor jolt, but it wouldn't trigger any kind of eruption.

      Keep in mind that the eruption from Yellowstone, if it really did blow, would obliterate all of Yellowstone National Park, and send measureable quantities of ash all of the way to New York City. All of the nukes in the world, combined, at the height of the Cold War, can't do this much damage.

    2. Re:Nuke detonated at Yellowstone by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1
      Even the largest blasting cap developed wouldn't compare to the energy of a ton of dynamite. This is "setting off" an explosion, not a comparable event.


      -b.

    3. Re:Nuke detonated at Yellowstone by Teancum · · Score: 1

      Hardly a good analogy either. A blasting cap is specifically designed to trigger an explosion on a decidedly unstable chemical substance.

      Here you are talking about trying to use a nuke on what amounts to be solid rock that is chemically inert. OK, if you had prefect knowledge of the geology you might be able to identify fault lines and be able to figure out where a precise explosion might dislodge some rock to get a cascading earthquake to happen that might under the most ideal circumstances get an eruption.

      But there are so many if here that even the energy to trigger the earthquake in the first place is several orders of magnitude greater than nuclear bombs. I think you significantly underestimate just how much energy is needed to initiate such geological actions. A nuke is merely something that happens to be a man-made device that can deliver some fairly substantial quantities of energy, but it still isn't going to be enough.

      At perhaps the right time when the geological forces are very much balanced, perhaps you might trigger an eruption a few days or weeks early, but that hardly matters anyway. For something like this hot spot in Yellowstone, it is going to blow regardless of any significant actions you are going to try. And nukes are going to simply complicate the ash fall even more due to the introduction of radioactive components.

      This is a flawed analogy completely, although it should be noted that ordinary blasting caps are part of the process used to trigger a nuclear explosion. How else do you think the fission products get put together to initiate the chain reaction? Otherwise this is just a (unfortunately typical) Hollywood concept that would only be done in a movie.

    4. Re:Nuke detonated at Yellowstone by Danathar · · Score: 1

      Ok...What if I had a nuclear submarine and hit the same spot above the caldera with a barrage of nukes. I'm looking to "set off" the caldera (if I was evil).

    5. Re:Nuke detonated at Yellowstone by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      I wouldnt outright deny the possibility.
      While a nuke is really only a small sting to the earths crust, that region is kinda irritated...
      A penetration strike at the right spot _could_ weaken the crust enough to start a local outbreak, which _might_ cause a chain reaction.

      Otoh, you could get as much "fuck usa up" if you just put one of those nukes into the center of each metropolis.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    6. Re:Nuke detonated at Yellowstone by Invidious · · Score: 1

      "This is a flawed analogy completely, although it should be noted that ordinary blasting caps are part of the process used to trigger a nuclear explosion. How else do you think the fission products get put together to initiate the chain reaction?"

      Well, one, this isn't a completely flawed analogy. In this case, a highly physically unstable geological area is being affected kinetically by smaller shock. "All" you need to do is to get one good crack down to the magma, and foom. (Also, blasting caps work kinetically on the molecules of an unstable substance -- the high-velocity blast wave propagating through the high explosive causes the sudden deflagration of the substance -- it gets knocked apart, essentially -- and, well, foom.)

      So, yeah, it's feasable to use a nuke to set off Yellowstone. It'd have to be a -large- nuke, and it would be best if the charge were shaped downwards, somehow, but it's certainly in the realm of possibility.

      The fallout from the nuke would be immediately dissipated over a wide area by the supercanes generated by the caldera going off, and would likely by masked by the natural radioactivity of the ash. The radiological consequences are, in any case, much less worrying than the kinetic and thermal results of YS going off.

  85. Tagging Beta: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ohshit!

  86. Abnormal fault? by amightywind · · Score: 1

    moves in the opposite direction compared to what's been previously thought.

    Good God! A casual look at the Snake River Valley in Jackson Hole shows that there are many terraces - former valley floors that have risen due toregional uplift. Almost any popular picture of the Grand Teton with the Snake River in the foreground shows them. Nothing new here folks. Geomorphologists have observed them forever. The main fault that controls the Teton topography is still a reverse fault. It is certainly not offsetting in the wrong direction! The Yellowstone region is underlain by a well described hotspot which adds a dynamic element to the topography.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
  87. Discovery Channel Virtual Supervolcano by Kram_Gunderson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Discovery Channel's website has a pretty neat and informative Flash presentation on the Yellowstone hotspot.

    --
    If you're dumb, surround yourself with smart people. If you're smart, surround yourself with smart people who disagree
  88. Active volcanoes change all the time by jonfr · · Score: 1

    It is normal for volcanoes to move in this way. But this tells how the magma is actually moving in the magma chamber beneath the surface. But there also appears to be some magma buildup in the magma chamber, that can be seen by the fact that the crust is rising upwards over a long period, but the movement up is 4mm a year. That is not a lot, but over a long period of time, it adds up. It doesn't mean that the volcano is going to erupt today, tomorrow or even this year since the magma might just build up for short period of time until it starts to drop. It is quite impossible to tell in the long term when a volcano is going to erupt. The long terms signs can tell when a volcano is ready to erupt, but the only real sign that I know of about when volcano is ready to erupt is the appearance of harmonic tremors, along with more intense earthquake activate and surface change due to the magma being higher up in the crust, heating up the groundwater, creating new hot springs , mud pits etc.

    It is save to say that I don't expect the Yellowstone volcano to erupt in my live time.

  89. OMG... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we're all gonna die!

    (Those of us living in the US, anyway. The rest of us will just have to stock up on pop corn and fight for a good spot in front of the TV...)

  90. Excuse me? by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

    You'll also need at least Samuel L. Jackson and Chuck Norris.

    1. Re:Excuse me? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I thought about that. But if we included Chuck Norris, it would eliminate all the challenge.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  91. Someone has to say it.... by groslyunderpaid · · Score: 1

    I hate to be the Religious one in the crowd, but the Bible does make reference to a man who had a vision that in the last days there would fall "hail, mingled with fire", "sun/sky dark as ash". Pretty good description for someone unfamiliar with a super volcano....

    1. Re:Someone has to say it.... by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not Volcanoes have been around even before the 20th Century, they would have been well known in biblical times ( Vesuvius in AD79 for example ) and people may well have noted the destructive power of the ash and fire spewing from them.

    2. Re:Someone has to say it.... by Ward+Griffiths · · Score: 1

      Several events described in the bible (both as "history" and "prophecy") resemble effects that would have been seen at the eastern end of the Mediterranean during and following the Thera explosion a millennium and a half or so B.C.

      --
      "the timid die just like the daring; and if you don't take the plunge then you'll just take the fall"-- Michael Longcor
  92. ...and "10.5" is on SciFi This Saturday night... by solitas · · Score: 1

    Coincidence? One may wonder...

    --
    "It's time to take life by the cans." ~ Bender ("Bendin' in the Wind", ep. 3-13)
  93. Here's the plan... by wtansill · · Score: 1

    We find a way to induce global cooling. A glacier a mile or so thick sitting atop Yellowstone ought to be enough to contain the blast, don't you think?

    --
    The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
    1. Re:Here's the plan... by confused+one · · Score: 1

      I know you're joking; but, just to be clear... No.

  94. You forgot one by ChromeAeonium · · Score: 1

    Don't forget to add bug-eyed world leaders with nukes. to that list. I'd much rather die by way of giant volcano, meteor, or Vogon construction project than because some a handful of rich crybabies can't leave each other alone.

  95. Not to mention that ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It'll probably be the end of USA as we know it.

    1. Re:Not to mention that ... by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      You're aiming a little low. It won't be the end of the USA, it'll be the end of civilization. Not humanity: some people will survive. But, imagine worldwide darkness for two years, while it's raining sulfuric acid. Two years' agricultural failure and the resultant unrest will probably do for any government (outside of North Korea, which seems to have figured out how to deal with that.) The weather would probably be okay five to eight years out, but it's unclear how many people would be there to enjoy it.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  96. Not quite by aepervius · · Score: 1

    "Sein" is the french for breast, teton is more or less the breast point.
    OTOH in this case it might be a reference to an indian tribe : http://www.bartleby.com/61/98/T0129800.html

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  97. Back to the Future by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

    Quit your bickering, you fools. I have already taken my delorean with flux capacitor into the future and let me assure you that McDonalds is not going to let a volcano blow up in McYellowstone McPark.

    --
    music lover since 1969
  98. Aha! by jandersen · · Score: 1

    Perhaps now is the time where I should buy my mother in law that trip to see Old Faithful...

  99. Kinda Old News... by TheGreatOrangePeel · · Score: 1

    I grew up a few hours away from Yellowstone (Bozeman, MT). I've since moved, but on my last visit which would have been somtime around the sumer 1998, it was obvious that activity was picking up. Several geysers with historically low activity have been going off more frequently.

  100. Don't be stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...the outflow from Chuck Norris's toilet flows directly under Yellowstone - which is why we're in this mess in the first place.

  101. tragedy of the commons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    he'll devastate whole ecosystems...

    aka tragedy of the commons. ie if no one owns whats being used then everyone has an incentive to take as much as possible without any care for the long term. For example farming vs hunting, we have no shortage of cows but lots of animals are hunted to extintion on common land.

  102. Offtopic by QMO · · Score: 1

    That sounds like an address in Utah.

    Where else are there addresses as simple as the cartesian coordinate system?
    (Maybe other Mormon-settled western places?)

    --
    Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
  103. One volcano -vs- one smoke... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which one has a higher probability of ruining your whole day?

    1. Re:One volcano -vs- one smoke... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      The smoke. Since you have a much higher chance that you will take another and another until you die a pain death from Lung Cancer.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  104. what if.. by rubberbandball · · Score: 1

    ok, and what if the wind was blowing east that day, out to sea? why has no one thought to consider that? yes it would have to be a somewhat strong wind, but if a large amount (or as small as 5%)of the ash blew into the ocean, the long term effects would be a wee bit worse than "oh noes our land is bad! now how can we ford the river!?"

    --
    oh marmalade.
  105. Breaking news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    have you ever wonder if this thing broke lose? practically will be some thing decent to see on tv. Now it might be classified like act of terrorist act but no one to blame. :) ........ Say it was mother nature contribution to global warming and half of usa under ash. But if happen it will happen and no word or lie will change that. But have the pop corn ready same like happen to the atlantians of the menos civilization on Grete. Sit and see the fireworks go and more if it is on a 4th july.