NationStates Jolt Archive

So, about a year and a half ago, there was a lot of talks about Yellowstone and how it's a Volcano just ready to pop it's top off and cover 1/4th of the United States in ashes and darkness. Apparently it's a Super Volcano. Now yes the majority of this talk came from the Coast to Coast AM crowd, but it sometimes came from other sources. However, now it seems like the talk about Yellowstone's volcano erupting has died down, is it because it didn't erupted when they thought it would or that the activity at Yellowstone calmed down, what's the reason for this hysteria about Yellowstone just stopping?

what's the reason for this hysteria about Yellowstone just stopping?

It got boring.

Was most likely centered around the fact that the discovery channel I believe had a big special on it. Then come to find out the ground is rising in the area. People didn't research it enough to realize there is a cycle of growth and decline of the lava reservoir underneath Yellowstone.

as i understand it yellowstone valley is a huge volcanic caldera that has exploded in the past and will explode again some time in the future.

there is no way to know when in the future that will be. as it seem not to be imminent, the nutcases went on to something else.

Last year in my science class we watched this movie about Yellowstone erupting, it was pretty cool. And while I'm not sure "Supervolcano" is entirely accurate, it definitely made one think. According to the experts in the movie, it would take just 4 days for the ash to just barely come to my area in eastern NC (everyone in my class was like "gaaaah! we're screwed!")

However, it's probably the Discovery Channel just showing off its token new way the world will end. That's probably why the hysteria died down- people realized that "hey, there's not a very good chance of Yellowstone blowing, and compared to all the other crap out there we're lucky to still even be alive."

The hype officially ended with the horrible BBC movie "Supervolcano". The movie was so bad, even coast to coast listeners moved on to a different topic.

So, about a year and a half ago, there was a lot of talks about Yellowstone and how it's a Volcano just ready to pop it's top off and cover 1/4th of the United States in ashes and darkness. Apparently it's a Super Volcano. Now yes the majority of this talk came from the Coast to Coast AM crowd, but it sometimes came from other sources. However, now it seems like the talk about Yellowstone's volcano erupting has died down, is it because it didn't erupted when they thought it would or that the activity at Yellowstone calmed down, what's the reason for this hysteria about Yellowstone just stopping?

Three times a week, a new study is released linking some very common food or activity to heart disease and cancer. Just as commonly, scientists discover new things that could annihilate us all.

Live life to the fullest already. It's going to kill you sooner or later no matter what happens, anyway. :cool:

Last year in my science class we watched this movie about Yellowstone erupting, it was pretty cool. And while I'm not sure "Supervolcano" is entirely accurate, it definitely made one think. According to the experts in the movie, it would take just 4 days for the ash to just barely come to my area in eastern NC (everyone in my class was like "gaaaah! we're screwed!")
Your class isn't even remotely screwed in the event of this occurrence. Now me, I am most definitely screwed, being within the radius of complete annihilation of all life.

However, it's probably the Discovery Channel just showing off its token new way the world will end. That's probably why the hysteria died down- people realized that "hey, there's not a very good chance of Yellowstone blowing, and compared to all the other crap out there we're lucky to still even be alive."

That and people have a short attention span, so the media always works to come up with a new distraction. Like now, for instance, how they're constantly trying to show a close race between candidates and how they started out picking candidates from the beginning. Basically the media has controlled this entire election. They started showing only those candidates they wanted to show(whomever would look the best in a race) and then manipulated the facts they give out to keep the race close, influencing it by making people think it's closer than it really is, thus they do things that make it closer. In other words, it's manufactured and it's a real sham.

Three times a week, a new study is released linking some very common food or activity to heart disease and cancer. Just as commonly, scientists discover new things that could annihilate us all.

Live life to the fullest already. It's going to kill you sooner or later no matter what happens, anyway. :cool:

QFT

Three times a week, a new study is released linking some very common food or activity to heart disease and cancer. Just as commonly, scientists discover new things that could annihilate us all.

Live life to the fullest already. It's going to kill you sooner or later no matter what happens, anyway. :cool:

Nutrition is actually a field rife with bias, corporate interest, and loads of quack crap. That's why it tends to have lots of new things discovered all the time as one corporation or another dukes it out to try to prove the other's products are harmful while the real science gets lost in all of the mumbo-jumbo.

However, one should not mistake this for being true of all fields of science. Quite the opposite in fact...apart from health and a few aspects of other fields--specifically archaeology and climatology--science is extremely reliable, or at least as reliable as possible, which in this day and age is pretty damned good.

My guess is that it's due to the unpredictability of this planet. If it looks like there's a chance that a volcano's going to go, it's probably got just as much chance of dying down.

I'm probably wrong though, I don't really know that much about volcanic eruptions, cyclones, earthquakes etc. Because this state doesn't get them.

People got bored when it became plainly obvious that it wasn't building up enough pressure to actually erupt at any time in the near future. Well, awhile after it became plainly obvious, since the hype postdated that.

Nutrition is actually a field rife with bias, corporate interest, and loads of quack crap. That's why it tends to have lots of new things discovered all the time as one corporation or another dukes it out to try to prove the other's products are harmful while the real science gets lost in all of the mumbo-jumbo.

However, one should not mistake this for being true of all fields of science. Quite the opposite in fact...apart from health and a few aspects of other fields--specifically archaeology and climatology--science is extremely reliable, or at least as reliable as possible, which in this day and age is pretty damned good.

Oh, I know some things in science are common sense - don't load up beer, eat your veggies, don't eat too much, don't drink and drive, and such - but the list of things that are linked to negative effects are just ridiculous today.

Even climatology isn't 100 percent accurate. Thirty years ago they were railing their heads off about global cooling. Now it's global warming. And in both cases they backed up their arguments with factual evidence that over the past couple of decades there had indeed been a cooling or warming trend. By now I don't even give two shits about the argument. I drive a small, fuel-efficient car because three dollars a gallon is a pain in the ass (it still is), and that's the end of my environmental stuff. Oh, and sometimes I recycle, too. I'm just rambling so yeah...

I didn't say it was one hundred percent accurate. I said it was as reliable as possible, which doesn't mean the same thing.

Furthermore, your attitude is exactly my point. You're taking something that was never a real consideration by most climatologists--global cooling--and blowing it completely out of proportion, comparing it with something that has many hundreds upon thousands of times more evidence, examination, understanding, ect ect due to the sheer amount of misinformation and corporate bias in a completely different field. People constantly assume all science is like that and it's a very poor assumption to make.

I didn't say it was one hundred percent accurate. I said it was as reliable as possible, which doesn't mean the same thing.

Furthermore, your attitude is exactly my point. You're taking something that was never a real consideration by most climatologists--global cooling--and blowing it completely out of proportion, comparing it with something that has many hundreds upon thousands of times more evidence, examination, understanding, ect ect due to the sheer amount of misinformation and corporate bias in a completely different field. People constantly assume all science is like that and it's a very poor assumption to make.

Eh, now that I read your post again, I'd mis-read it the first time. No harm, no foul, eh.

It will have blow up in the future, the last supervolcano went off in Indonesia. Yellowstone is the last active supervolcano, it's not just going keep quiet forever. I would not want to be in USA when it decides to go.