Amidst the tragedy of hundreds killed, it’s had a devastating effect on Everest expeditions, as climbing season has started. Devastation in the base camp, and a lot people all right, but trapped at higher elevations. This is one hazard most hadn’t been considering when they decided to climb, though if they knew their history, they’d know that the region was due for something like this. A quake not far from this one in 1934 killed thousands.
[Update a while later]
“Since 1570, 85% of the world’s earthquake fatalities have occurred in the Alpine/Himalayan collision belt.”
[Update mid afternoon]
Here’s the latest from the WaPo.
[Update a while later]
Here’s a roundup from Buzzfeed, with several pictures from the shattered base camp.
I wonder what all those Buddhists think when they see their iconic temples destroyed like that?
[Late Sunday-morning update]
Video of the quake and avalanche at the base camp. [Warning: Bad words in multiple languages]
[Bumped]
I saw the sad news, and the loss of life is dramatic.
But my jaded political side wondered: “how much fracking do they have in Nepal?” And then I considered if you were to drawn a Venn Diagram of “people who believe fracking causes earthquakes” and “those who say a March blizzard is weather and not climate”; I suspect there would be a lot of overlap.
Do you imagine that that some people believe that fracking is the sole cause of earthquakes? I doubt such people exist. Do you imagine that fracking doesn’t ever cause earthquakes? There is good reason to think that you are wrong:
http://www.seismosoc.org/society/press_releases/BSSA_105-1_Skoumal_et_al_Press_Release.pdf
You really need to get a humor transplant, Bob.
I think bob is self-identifying his position in the middle of the diagram.
Rand, you are giving him too much credit. He isn’t kidding.
You are making yourself look like a fool.
Not the first time.
Well, ok, but could you spell it out for me? Fracking does cause earthquakes, I provided a link since this is controversial. The earthquake in Nepal certainly wasn’t caused by fracking, no one worth talking about believes that it was. Any given storm is indeed “weather” and not “climate”. Where is the joke? What was the point? I think Leland simply didn’t know that fracking causes very minor earthquakes, and I can’t figure out what he was saying about springtime storms.
If it’s controversial, doesn’t that imply that there is doubt?
You’re very good at presenting controversial opinions as settled science. Not successful, but very good.
McGehee,
I provided a link to the Seismological Society of America, not a buch of nutters.
What do you think about claims made by the United States Geological Survey? Are those guys a bunch of crackpots?
At the following link, the USGS states categorically that fracking causes small earthquakes:
http://www.usgs.gov/faq/categories/9833/3428
Also see the related USGS.gov links at the bottom of the page.
Is the science settled? Since there is no such thing as “settled science”, I don’t see how it could be.
To support bob’s argument, I simply provide this link.
The essence of Leland’s “joke” was that people who believe that fracking can cause earthquakes are laugh-worthy. Here is a link to research published this week — maybe it is right, maybe it is wrong, but is hardly laugh-worthy:
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/150421/ncomms7728/full/ncomms7728.html
You linked to Nature! LOL!
That’s your rebuttal? What, you’re going to be scornful of any research published in the world’s most cited scientific journal? Do you realize how much scientific research you are going have to scorn?
Rand, why exactly do you think I’m a fool? Is it because I’m arguing with one?
I think you’re a fool because you rarely actually discuss the topic of the post, but tend to distract to something else, or respond to a comment, which may or may not be trolling you.
So I thought about bob’s complaint and realized I could set up an experiment that shows bob causes earthquakes. Then I realized that even if the proof was simple, and he couldn’t refute it; he would then dismiss it as trivial noise. Then I realized that bob causing earthquakes is nothing compared to his attribution to increased CO2 in the environment which causes twice the harm by increasing global warming and causing earthquakes. I don’t need to even conduct an experiment, because bob can already link to proof that he does this. Then it hit me, we need to stop bob from damaging the Earth.
Bonus, stopping bob from damaging the Earth might also stop the mindset that keeps places like Tibet in constant poverty and naked exposure to earthquakes caused by tectonic forces that started long before life existed on Earth.
Bob emits CO2 at levels thousands of times higher than the 400 ppm those smart scientists are telling us is so dangerous. He should be banned.
I haven’t read much about the quake, but I understand that Nepal is about 80+% Hindu and only about 10% Buddhist.
Morning news is at least 10 climbers dead from subsequent avalanche on Everest.
Last night, Discovery Channel aired footage from I think last year’s avalanche, but then there was a fully functioning base camp to support.
Yes, avalanches on Everest are nothing new. What’s different this time is the cause, and the magnitude. I assume that the base camp was established in a location judged to be safe from avalanches, in normal conditions.
Rather than bad words in multiple languages, is seems that one word is now bad in multiple languages.
Well, I think it was a mix of German and English, though the Germans may have been using the F word as well.
“I wonder what all those Buddhists think when they see their iconic temples destroyed like that?”
Sad?
It has been a while since I have heard an earthquake. The sound is something else for sure.
earthquake-report.com is doing live updates. I like going there.