How worried do we need to be about this volcano erupting?

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-10-12/yellowstone-supervolcano-could-blow-sooner-than-thought?context=amp

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/yellowstone-national-park-supervolcano-caldera/



Guess we're all fooked.  Nice knowing ya'll.

(10-13-2017, 12:54 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: How worried do we need to be about this volcano erupting?

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-10-12/yellowstone-supervolcano-could-blow-sooner-than-thought?context=amp

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/yellowstone-national-park-supervolcano-caldera/



Guess we're all fooked.  Nice knowing ya'll.

It is a real concern.  It has a period of ~600k years, and it's past 600k since the last eruption.  It will happen again.  There is no doubt.

Don't worry NASA is gonna cool it down with ICE lazers

How worried you should be is inverse to how good your shopping cart pushing skills are.

(10-16-2017, 10:23 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: How worried you should be is inverse to how good your shopping cart pushing skills are.

Well if it does blow...

No one will have any worries any more.

Cause we will all be dead...

Luckily, increased storms from global warming will result in all the ash blowing up into Canada.

Hah! Take that, Canadians!

(10-16-2017, 10:26 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: Well if it does blow...

No one will have any worries any more.

Cause we will all be dead...

It certainly won't kill all life.  It's been going off for millions of years and life continues.

While it won't necessarily mean the end of human life, I think it would mean the end of life as we know it.

Only those in the immediate vicinity would be killed instantly, and that isn't a densely populated area in any direction for hundreds of miles.

After the initial explosions, which will likely be felt around the world, it's the ash fall that is the long term concern.

Think decades of on and off Nuclear Winter without the initial death toll of Nuclear War to limit the consumption of resources.  The world will starve.  Anarchy.  Collapse of infrastructure, but a limited number of humans will survive (probably world leaders in well stocked nuclear bunkers and remote back wood naturalists who can live off the land) as the death toll mounts and the World settles into it's inevitability.  Instant Death would probably be preferable......

(10-17-2017, 07:41 AM)Stewy Wrote: It certainly won't kill all life.  It's been going off for millions of years and life continues.

While it won't necessarily mean the end of human life, I think it would mean the end of life as we know it.

Only those in the immediate vicinity would be killed instantly, and that isn't a densely populated area in any direction for hundreds of miles.

After the initial explosions, which will likely be felt around the world, it's the ash fall that is the long term concern.

Think decades of on and off Nuclear Winter without the initial death toll of Nuclear War to limit the consumption of resources.  The world will starve.  Anarchy.  Collapse of infrastructure, but a limited number of humans will survive (probably world leaders in well stocked nuclear bunkers and remote back wood naturalists who can live off the land) as the death toll mounts and the World settles into it's inevitability.  Instant Death would probably be preferable......

I can live with that!

(10-17-2017, 07:41 AM)Stewy Wrote: It certainly won't kill all life.  It's been going off for millions of years and life continues.

While it won't necessarily mean the end of human life, I think it would mean the end of life as we know it.

Only those in the immediate vicinity would be killed instantly, and that isn't a densely populated area in any direction for hundreds of miles.

After the initial explosions, which will likely be felt around the world, it's the ash fall that is the long term concern.

Think decades of on and off Nuclear Winter without the initial death toll of Nuclear War to limit the consumption of resources.  The world will starve.  Anarchy.  Collapse of infrastructure, but a limited number of humans will survive (probably world leaders in well stocked nuclear bunkers and remote back wood naturalists who can live off the land) as the death toll mounts and the World settles into it's inevitability.  Instant Death would probably be preferable......

So......you're telling me there's a chance.

Is it too late to sell this place back to the natives, and go back home?

For some reason, scientists don't think it will be a catastrophic eruption (despite the fact it has a catastrophic eruption about every 600k years).

But the stuff I've read says "catastrophic" would mostly be the western US (and parts of Canada).  Still talking millions dead, and the loss of major food supplies (basically killing all the crops in CA).  The US wastes plenty of food, but it's inconceivable to me we could lose west coast crops and still be able to feed the country.


Interestingly enough, scientists seem quite confident they will have plenty of warning of an eruption.  They are looking at the rise and fall of the caldera (in millimeters!).  Makes sense, but once again you're dealing with a good theory that hasn't really be tested.  But at least if it's a few days or weeks of warning you can save millions of lives.

(10-16-2017, 11:42 AM)Benton Wrote: Luckily, increased storms from global warming will result in all the ash blowing up into Canada.

Hah! Take that, Canadians!

FML and I thought we were all friends here.....

Safe to assume this super-volcano is Trump's fault? (did i do that right?)

(10-17-2017, 01:39 PM)bengal_fan_in_toronto Wrote: Safe to assume this super-volcano is Trump's fault?  (did i do that right?)

No, but we shouldn't rule out that tossing him in might be the sacrifice necessary to appease the volcano.  Or, even if it doesn't.