MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Will Yellowstone erupt any time soon?  (Read 18005 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 24, 2010, 18:56 »
0
This really disturbed me today, and I can't shake it off. I know it's coming, but I still hope it won't happen soon. If this happens it will kill most of the life on Earth. Some due to explosion, poisonous gases and ash, and most of it because of dust that will cover our planet for another 6 years after explosion, blocking sunlight and decreasing temperature for about 20 degrees C (68 F).
After seeing this webpage, I went over news about Yellowstone, and I discovered that it's surface rose a lot in last few years, and number of Earhquakes in Yellowstone in January this year was about 10 times bigger than before.
Take a look at the link:

http://www.earthmountainview.com/yellowstone/yellowstone.htm


Reef

  • astonmars.com
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2010, 19:24 »
0
I've seen the Discovery Documentary on this - yeah, it is kinda scary and there are plenty of other scary scenarios, like asteroid's hitting Earth - No point worrying about it because there's nothing you can do. However, I do keep a large quantity of tin food under the house plus I have a huge water tank :)

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2010, 19:26 »
0
This really disturbed me today, and I can't shake it off. I know it's coming, but I still hope it won't happen soon. If this happens it will kill most of the life on Earth. Some due to explosion, poisonous gases and ash, and most of it because of dust that will cover our planet for another 6 years after explosion, blocking sunlight and decreasing temperature for about 20 degrees C (68 F).
After seeing this webpage, I went over news about Yellowstone, and I discovered that it's surface rose a lot in last few years, and number of Earhquakes in Yellowstone in January this year was about 10 times bigger than before.
Take a look at the link:
http://www.earthmountainview.com/yellowstone/yellowstone.htm


The homepage looks an aweful lot like a cult.

« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2010, 19:58 »
0
There was an article at National Geographic Magazine about this a few months ago. I think they said this activity is normal, although indeed a big eruption is expected. But then also a big volcano in Iceland was expected to erupt after the smaller one, as it has been a pattern before.

These things are just so unpredictable...

« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2010, 22:53 »
0
This really disturbed me today, and I can't shake it off. I know it's coming, but I still hope it won't happen soon. If this happens it will kill most of the life on Earth. Some due to explosion, poisonous gases and ash, and most of it because of dust that will cover our planet for another 6 years after explosion, blocking sunlight and decreasing temperature for about 20 degrees C (68 F).
After seeing this webpage, I went over news about Yellowstone, and I discovered that it's surface rose a lot in last few years, and number of Earhquakes in Yellowstone in January this year was about 10 times bigger than before.
Take a look at the link:

http://www.earthmountainview.com/yellowstone/yellowstone.htm


If it explode or better definition is implode as I understand best way to you is to back to our homeland before that...
In some scenario expoding or imploding of this Yellowstone wery big and thin ulcer will be like wrapping socks but in earth scale.

« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2010, 23:38 »
0
I've seen the Discovery documentary as well.
When it comes to asteroids, we can fight back. There are ways to do it safely.
Yellowstone is different. It's a real danger and it will happen.
Our planet is very much alive and it's constantly changing.
It has the real potential to one day kill almost all life (even before the Sun does so).
The 1 million years long Siberian eruption wiped out more than 95 per cent of all life species. It is the largest mass extinction event known to man. It can happen again and there's not much we can do about it. 
This is why it is vitally important that we conquer the skies. To safeguard life, the Earth is not enough. It's too fragile.
And we will.
Given enough time, we will. I'm sure of it, and I'm so terribly upset I won't be around to see it.
I wonder how will humanity look like in the next 10 thousand years? 20 thousand years?
Where will we be?
How will we look like?
We will be beautiful, that's for sure, but will we be happy?
I hope so ...

« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2010, 00:14 »
0
don't worry about it, according to another bunch of nut cases the worls is going to end in a couple of years

« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2010, 01:15 »
0
Life goes in circles, nothing lives for ever. We'll all die one day, so will the planet. We just have to live with the truth and accept the fact.

« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2010, 01:35 »
0
   If they know about it they wont tell us anyways, because of masshysteria. Those who tries get killed. :-[  Good thing is in the movie, the sky cleared already after a few month...

« Reply #9 on: August 25, 2010, 01:58 »
0
It happens every 700,000 years or so, right? With something on that timescale it seems that getting worried that it might happen in the next 50 or 100 years, immediately after we've found out about it, shows a lack of statistical understanding. If you want to get frightened by something that really might affect your life, go and read up on global warming.

ShadySue

« Reply #10 on: August 25, 2010, 02:22 »
0
This really disturbed me today, and I can't shake it off. I know it's coming, but I still hope it won't happen soon.
It will happen, no doubt. They were talking about it when I was over there in 2001 (or 2002?). Like has been said, it's not something I can do anything about, and I doubt if the scientists can either. I try not to lose sleep over it. (Not meant to be as flippant as that sounds)

« Reply #11 on: August 25, 2010, 05:00 »
0
PRO:
1 - a great cure for global warming
2 - fantastic sunsets by the ashes in the atmosphere
3 - 95% of all microstock photographers are killed - more room for you, more room for me
4 - great photo-op with a good tele - try video too
5 - no plane hijackings since no flights any more - use abandoned planes as props
6 - yellowstone park pictures become priceless on stock

CONTRA:
1 - 95% of all microstock buyers are killed - less sales for you, less sales for me
2 - more sensor dust when changing lenses
3 - "magma chamber explosion" over-abundant category on stock
4 - model girls with headset difficult to find

Don't worry, be happy  ;D

« Reply #12 on: August 25, 2010, 05:33 »
0
If you want to get frightened by something that really might affect your life, go and read up on global warming.

That's nothing. By far the most likely mass killer of human life is via a virus.

« Reply #13 on: August 25, 2010, 05:44 »
0
PRO:
1 - a great cure for global warming
2 - fantastic sunsets by the ashes in the atmosphere
3 - 95% of all microstock photographers are killed - more room for you, more room for me
4 - great photo-op with a good tele - try video too
5 - no plane hijackings since no flights any more - use abandoned planes as props
6 - yellowstone park pictures become priceless on stock

CONTRA:
1 - 95% of all microstock buyers are killed - less sales for you, less sales for me
2 - more sensor dust when changing lenses
3 - "magma chamber explosion" over-abundant category on stock
4 - model girls with headset difficult to find

Don't worry, be happy  ;D

Brilliant! ;D

« Reply #14 on: August 25, 2010, 05:51 »
0
Actually, I was watching on news that group of scientists were arrested because of publishing fake data about global warming. It appeared that a small group of scientists provided us with fake data over a period of 20 years till now. They wanted to exaggerate the global warming problem. It seems that Earth is not so overheated at all. Plus, it happened many times before in the Earth history. No one actually knows it it's gonna start to cool down in next 50 years. Volcanic ashes help this phenomenon too.
It also says that dust from volcanic eruptions puts much much more garbage in the atmosphere than man kind did in it's history.  

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #15 on: August 25, 2010, 06:14 »
0
.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 06:18 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #16 on: August 25, 2010, 09:07 »
0
If you want to get frightened by something that really might affect your life, go and read up on global warming.

That's nothing. By far the most likely mass killer of human life is via a virus.

Yup.

I don't know what news dreamframer watches, though.

« Reply #17 on: August 25, 2010, 09:32 »
0
I don't think Dreamframer worries about us.
I don't.
Yellowstone is not going to strike tomorrow, but this is not about tomorrow, or us.  
This is about humanity, this is about life in general. All life.

The Earth will die, (absolutely, yes) so will the Sun, (no doubts about it), and unfortunately so will the entire Universe.
Don't worry about it, death is only natural.
But so is our need to fight back.  
It's right there, written in our genes, to stand up and find a solution.
Given enough time, one million years from now on, we will.
And it will happen because of people like Dreamframer.
People who look up at the skies, wonder, worry and ask questions.
They will find a way.

« Reply #18 on: August 25, 2010, 09:38 »
0
Our local governmental geologist got into a jam a couple of years ago:
I live in an area prone to rockslides, and large masses of rocks sliding into water has caused several local tsunamis, but it has been a long time since the last one. (~100 years). So the local newspaper interviewed the local geologist; "Will there be a new major rockslide anytime soon?". And he answered truthfully: "Yes, I expect it to happen very soon" and listed a couple of localities that are high on the risk map. The next day the newspaper had to publish an update. For some reason, the hysteric masses got the impression that it would happen tomorrow, they didn't consider that "very soon" in geology means "within the next 50 000 years".

« Reply #19 on: August 25, 2010, 09:55 »
0
Hahaha Gaja,
let me tell you another one.
It's famous, so there's a chance you know it already.

A few years back Stephen Hawking was invited to Japan. To talk about his theories, about the Universe in general. He was also strongly advised to avoid mentioning anything about the death of the Universe.
That's just in case it might upset the Japanese stock markets!
Hahahaha!

« Reply #20 on: August 25, 2010, 10:14 »
0
Another good one: An astronomer described the end of the solar system to a gathering somewhere. At the end of his talk a woman asked: "Did you say this happens in six million years or in six billion?"
He replied "Six billion".
She said "Oh, thank goodness!" and sat down with visible relief.
I guess she wasn't a born-again Christian!

« Reply #21 on: August 25, 2010, 10:17 »
0
Hahahaha Baldrick!
I almos spilled my tea here :)
It is sooo much better to hear 6 billion instead of 6 million :)
Hahahaah!

WarrenPrice

« Reply #22 on: August 25, 2010, 10:23 »
0
Another good one: An astronomer described the end of the solar system to a gathering somewhere. At the end of his talk a woman asked: "Did you say this happens in six million years or in six billion?"
He replied "Six billion".
She said "Oh, thank goodness!" and sat down with visible relief.
I guess she wasn't a born-again Christian!

LOL...that was funny.

« Reply #23 on: August 25, 2010, 10:29 »
0
Lol :D

« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2010, 10:55 »
0
Well as long as the politicians can keep us focused on this kind of nonsense they can do whatever they want.

fred

« Reply #25 on: August 25, 2010, 11:16 »
0
Well, the good thing about "this type of nonsense" is that geologists get more money for research.

« Reply #26 on: August 25, 2010, 11:33 »
0
Indeed Gaja :) 
True.

jbarber873

« Reply #27 on: August 26, 2010, 10:19 »
0
PRO:
1 - a great cure for global warming
2 - fantastic sunsets by the ashes in the atmosphere
3 - 95% of all microstock photographers are killed - more room for you, more room for me
4 - great photo-op with a good tele - try video too
5 - no plane hijackings since no flights any more - use abandoned planes as props
6 - yellowstone park pictures become priceless on stock

CONTRA:
1 - 95% of all microstock buyers are killed - less sales for you, less sales for me
2 - more sensor dust when changing lenses
3 - "magma chamber explosion" over-abundant category on stock
4 - model girls with headset difficult to find

Don't worry, be happy  ;D


This model girl with headset thing has really got me worried. I've been putting off shooting model girls with headsets because I've been working on model girls with stethoscopes ( i'm a doctor!). Do you think I should drop that for a while and get some headsets?

« Reply #28 on: August 26, 2010, 11:24 »
0
Who really knows when or if it will happen? 2 Peter, ch 3, ver 8 puts it in a nutshell. Whether you are a "believer" or not it has some sense about it.

« Reply #29 on: August 26, 2010, 11:57 »
0
PRO:
1 - a great cure for global warming
2 - fantastic sunsets by the ashes in the atmosphere
3 - 95% of all microstock photographers are killed - more room for you, more room for me
4 - great photo-op with a good tele - try video too
5 - no plane hijackings since no flights any more - use abandoned planes as props
6 - yellowstone park pictures become priceless on stock

CONTRA:
1 - 95% of all microstock buyers are killed - less sales for you, less sales for me
2 - more sensor dust when changing lenses
3 - "magma chamber explosion" over-abundant category on stock
4 - model girls with headset difficult to find
CONTRA:
...
5. 95% of all microstock buyers are killed - resulting in a lot fewer dls
6. I live about a hundred miles from Yellowstone

« Reply #30 on: August 26, 2010, 17:14 »
0
I was there last year.

Here is my blog with some photos about the trip:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Yellowstone-National-Park-Beautiful-and-otherworldy
 

« Reply #31 on: August 26, 2010, 17:24 »
0
This model girl with headset thing has really got me worried. I've been putting off shooting model girls with headsets because I've been working on model girls with stethoscopes ( i'm a doctor!). Do you think I should drop that for a while and get some headsets?
You can try unusual combinations like cigar-smoking senior ladies looking at stethoscopes with a headset on. I don't know what concept it would be, but it's certainly niche. :-p

« Reply #32 on: August 26, 2010, 17:32 »
0
6. I live about a hundred miles from Yellowstone
Well, keep your tripod ready all the time and your batteries charged! You're an illustrator? Oh well. Have a large plastic bag ready in the drawer to put your drawing pad in.  ;) Nero had Rome set afire to get inspiration for his poems. Maybe a flying magma chamber over your head will do the same.  8)

« Reply #33 on: August 26, 2010, 18:29 »
0
Well, the good thing about "this type of nonsense" is that geologists get more money for research.

Maybee in this case I can get some money for research "this type of nonsense", how global warming have influence on Stokas reviewers.
 ;D

« Reply #34 on: August 26, 2010, 19:24 »
0
Wasn't there a big die-off of photographers trying to capture the Mt. Saint Helens eruption?  At least one of them I remember ... National Geographic published the pictures he snapped out his car's back window of the enormous cloud of poisonous gas as he tried to outrun it.  Should have use a tripod to steady that "must have" shot!

« Reply #35 on: August 26, 2010, 19:42 »
0
I just returned yesterday from a month in the Tetons and Yellowstone. No signs of imminent disaster as far as I could tell....

A few photos here if anyone's interested.... http://www.flickr.com/photos/blaneyphoto/sets/72157624629212839/

« Reply #36 on: August 26, 2010, 19:46 »
0
A few photos here if anyone's interested.... http://www.flickr.com/photos/blaneyphoto/sets/72157624629212839/
Great stuff! Wat lens did you use for the wildlife shots?

« Reply #37 on: August 26, 2010, 19:53 »
0
A few photos here if anyone's interested.... http://www.flickr.com/photos/blaneyphoto/sets/72157624629212839/
Great stuff! Wat lens did you use for the wildlife shots?


I bought a Canon 7D and 100-400mm for this trip. Worked pretty well, but f/5.6 is SO limiting. I used the 5D mk II as well, and the 24-70mm was on that most of the time. Used both for both wildlife and landscape - sometimes the wildlife was right in my face and othertimes the 400mm made for great landscape shots.

« Reply #38 on: August 26, 2010, 20:15 »
0
Wasn't there a big die-off of photographers trying to capture the Mt. Saint Helens eruption?  At least one of them I remember ... National Geographic published the pictures he snapped out his car's back window of the enormous cloud of poisonous gas as he tried to outrun it.  Should have use a tripod to steady that "must have" shot!

Heh
I think that lets say that they "National Geographic" drop down down they criteria. They have "good" images because they are able to be in that "niche" and nothing else.
So crap happens like to photographers who was in first war lines which after they survive became "photo reviewers" or something else pompous title after that.
I dont know is it you words or from NG writers which no even heard from him this case "Should have use a tripod to steady that ........

Anyhow RIP for him/them............

« Reply #39 on: August 27, 2010, 01:24 »
0
Nero had Rome set afire to get inspiration for his poems.

Vile slander. He did nothing of the sort. It's just a lie put about by his enemies (though even they didn't claim it was for poetic inspiration, you've embroidered it FD .... you must be in the Flavian camp!)

« Reply #40 on: August 27, 2010, 06:23 »
0
I used the 5D mk II as well, and the 24-70mm was on that most of the time. Used both for both wildlife and landscape - sometimes the wildlife was right in my face and othertimes the 400mm made for great landscape shots.
Well the real reason I asked is that I have a 5DII with a 24-70 which is great (but heavy) for general work and landscapes, but a little bit short even for portraits. I couldn't imagine using a 24-70 for wildlife on a full frame, and I was thinking of a 70-200. The problem is they are around 1000 euro.

« Reply #41 on: August 27, 2010, 06:46 »
0
Vile slander. He did nothing of the sort. It's just a lie put about by his enemies (though even they didn't claim it was for poetic inspiration, you've embroidered it FD .... you must be in the Flavian camp!)
You must have read too much of Tacitus. Ok, ok, the Christians did it!  :P  "Nero Fiddled While Rome Burned"

« Reply #42 on: August 27, 2010, 10:42 »
0
I used the 5D mk II as well, and the 24-70mm was on that most of the time. Used both for both wildlife and landscape - sometimes the wildlife was right in my face and othertimes the 400mm made for great landscape shots.
Well the real reason I asked is that I have a 5DII with a 24-70 which is great (but heavy) for general work and landscapes, but a little bit short even for portraits. I couldn't imagine using a 24-70 for wildlife on a full frame, and I was thinking of a 70-200. The problem is they are around 1000 euro.

Well.... the L lenses only go up in weight from the 24-70. That's about the lightest one I own.  70-200 is a useful range, but really the longer the better.

« Reply #43 on: August 27, 2010, 17:25 »
0
Well.... the L lenses only go up in weight from the 24-70. That's about the lightest one I own.
The 24-105 is lighter and many people claim they don't see any difference. Ask Lisa: she has both.

« Reply #44 on: August 27, 2010, 17:32 »
0
Well.... the L lenses only go up in weight from the 24-70. That's about the lightest one I own.
The 24-105 is lighter and many people claim they don't see any difference. Ask Lisa: she has both.
It might be a bit lighter, but its an f/4.... too slow to be much use to me - I'll stick with the 24-70.

RacePhoto

« Reply #45 on: August 31, 2010, 02:23 »
0
Sorry to break up the camera talk and go back to Doom and Gloom and the end of the world is near.  ;D

The best known eruption of Krakatoa culminated in a series of massive explosions on August 2627, 1883, which was among the most violent volcanic events in modern and recorded history.

With a Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI) of 6,[3] the eruption was equivalent to 200 megatons of TNT (840 PJ)about 13,000 times the nuclear yield of the Little Boy bomb (13 to 16 kT) that devastated Hiroshima, Japan during World War II and four times the yield of the Tsar Bomba (50 MT), the largest nuclear device ever detonated.

The 1883 eruption ejected approximately 21 cubic kilometres (5.0 cu mi) of rock, ash, and pumice.[4]

The cataclysmic explosion was distinctly heard as far away as Perth in Western Australia, about 1,930 miles (3,110 km) away, and the island of Rodrigues near Mauritius, about 3,000 miles (5,000 km) away.[5]

Near Krakatau, according to official records, 165 villages and towns were destroyed and 132 seriously damaged, at least 36,417 (official toll) people died, and many thousands were injured by the eruption, mostly from the tsunamis that followed the explosion. The eruption destroyed two-thirds of the island of Krakatoa.


No I'm not concerned about Yellowstone.

Here's another one, that like Krakatoa should have caused some "nuclear Winter" effects.

The Tunguska Event, or Tunguska explosion, was a powerful explosion that occurred not far from the Podkamennaya (Lower Stony) Tunguska (Подкаменная Тунгуска) River in what is now Krasnoyarsk Krai (Красноярский Край) in Russia, at 00:13:35 Greenwich Mean Time [1] (around 07:14 local time)[2][3] on June 30, 1908 (June 17 in the Julian calendar, in use locally at the time).[3]

The explosion is believed to have been caused by the air burst of a large meteoroid or comet fragment at an altitude of 510 kilometres (3.16.2 mi) above the Earth's surface. Different studies have yielded varying estimates of the object's size, with general agreement that it was a few tens of metres across.[4]

The number of scholarly publications on the problem of the Tunguska explosion since 1908 may be estimated at about 1,000 (mainly in Russian). Many scientists have participated in Tunguska studies, the best-known of them being Leonid Kulik, Yevgeny Krinov, Kirill Florensky, Nikolay Vasiliev, and Wilhelm Fast. [5]

Although the meteoroid or comet burst in the air rather than hitting the surface, this event is still referred to as an impact. Estimates of the energy of the blast range from 5 to as high as 30 megatons of TNT (21130 PJ).[6][7], with 1015 megatons of TNT (4263 PJ) the most likely[7]roughly equal to the United States' Castle Bravo thermonuclear bomb tested on March 1, 1954, about 1,000 times as powerful as the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, and about one-third the power of the Tsar Bomba, the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated.[8] The explosion knocked over an estimated 80 million trees over 2,150 square kilometres (830 sq mi). It is estimated that the shock wave from the blast would have measured 5.0 on the Richter scale. An explosion of this magnitude is capable of destroying a large metropolitan area.[9] This possibility has helped to spark discussion of asteroid deflection strategies.

The Tunguska event is the largest impact event over land in Earth's recent history.[10] Impacts of similar size over remote ocean areas would have gone unnoticed[11] before the advent of global satellite monitoring in the 1960s and 1970s.


Yes the one in Russia was in a remote area, but the effects would have spread a long way in the atmosphere.

Worrying won't change anything either, so lets just get on with life and do what we do.  :)

« Reply #46 on: August 31, 2010, 03:19 »
0
The 1883 eruption ejected approximately 21 cubic kilometres (5.0 cu mi) of rock, ash, and pumice.[4]


Yellowstone ejected 240 cubic miles in last explosion, which is roughly 1000 times stronger than Krakatoa. The explosion was 875000 Megatons.
Now compare me this with firecrackers you described. :)
You got some interesting data here:


http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Megaton

« Reply #47 on: August 31, 2010, 05:30 »
0
It might be a bit lighter, but its an f/4.... too slow to be much use to me - I'll stick with the 24-70.
It's a bit short for portraits and I have to stick with it since I don't have money to burn.  ;) I was thinking of a Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 L USM instead, so I can do portraits and wildlife/surfers/urban. I'm still canvassing what to buy for a longer range. Have to check on the Canon EF 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 DO IS USM which seems very handy to carry around.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2010, 05:35 by FD-regular »

RacePhoto

« Reply #48 on: August 31, 2010, 17:04 »
0
The 1883 eruption ejected approximately 21 cubic kilometres (5.0 cu mi) of rock, ash, and pumice.[4]


Yellowstone ejected 240 cubic miles in last explosion, which is roughly 1000 times stronger than Krakatoa. The explosion was 875000 Megatons.
Now compare me this with firecrackers you described. :)
You got some interesting data here:


http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Megaton


Really, is that scientific data, hypothesis, or "run and hide Yellowstone is going to blow!".  :) yes 875000 Megatons would be big and millions of years ago, events like that were much more common.

"The Yellowstone region has produced three exceedingly large volcanic eruptions in the past 2.1 million years."

"If another large caldera-forming eruption were to occur at Yellowstone, its effects would be worldwide. Thick ash deposits would bury vast areas of the United States, and injection of huge volumes of volcanic gases into the atmosphere could drastically affect global climate. Fortunately, the Yellowstone volcanic system shows no signs that it is headed toward such an eruption. The probability of a large caldera-forming eruption within the next few thousand years is exceedingly low."

I don't think we need to worry about it and I don't think we could do anything to alter the large natural event if it was going to happen soon.

« Reply #49 on: August 31, 2010, 17:13 »
0
^^^ Yes, it's scientific data, since the ash from the Yellowstone is found all around the world. And yes, we can do something about it if we manage to run away on time with our families from the most endangered areas. :)

« Reply #50 on: September 01, 2010, 07:54 »
0
^^^ Yes, it's scientific data, since the ash from the Yellowstone is found all around the world. And yes, we can do something about it if we manage to run away on time with our families from the most endangered areas. :)
1) There are more supervolcanoes on earth than the one under Yellowstone.
2) One of the previous eruptions of those almost wiped out humanity. There were just a few hundreds (some say 2,000) specimens left. This genetic bottleneck has been shown by worldwide DNA research.

jbarber873

« Reply #51 on: September 01, 2010, 16:31 »
0
^^^ Yes, it's scientific data, since the ash from the Yellowstone is found all around the world. And yes, we can do something about it if we manage to run away on time with our families from the most endangered areas. :)
1) There are more supervolcanoes on earth than the one under Yellowstone.
2) One of the previous eruptions of those almost wiped out humanity. There were just a few hundreds (some say 2,000) specimens left. This genetic bottleneck has been shown by worldwide DNA research.

I hear Istockphoto is getting a spaceship ready to blast off on a moments notice. But only exclusives can get on board. Can you imagine a world only populated by Itsock exclusives and the Istock staff? Shudder!
(who says this thread can't be about stock?) :D

« Reply #52 on: September 01, 2010, 20:12 »
0
I hear Istockphoto is getting a spaceship ready to blast off on a moments notice. But only exclusives can get on board.
Never underestimate the Canadian Space Program, eh.

RacePhoto

« Reply #53 on: September 02, 2010, 00:04 »
0
^^^ Yes, it's scientific data, since the ash from the Yellowstone is found all around the world. And yes, we can do something about it if we manage to run away on time with our families from the most endangered areas. :)
1) There are more supervolcanoes on earth than the one under Yellowstone.
2) One of the previous eruptions of those almost wiped out humanity. There were just a few hundreds (some say 2,000) specimens left. This genetic bottleneck has been shown by worldwide DNA research.

Genetic Bottleneck, that sure explains a bunch of things.

Here I thought we were all descendants from multiple mutant generations of Australopithecus afarensis from Ethiopia and Kenya!

Meanwhile if it's not for the next few thousand years, I'm not going to get excited.  ;D

« Reply #54 on: September 02, 2010, 09:57 »
0
Here I thought we were all descendants from multiple mutant generations of Australopithecus afarensis from Ethiopia and Kenya!
Caucasians seem to be leftovers from a few that survived the last ice age in caves in Anatolia and Spain. This genetic bottleneck explains the high genetic similarity between most humans nowadays since in those periods, not the classical Darwinian natural selection but genetic drift was the name of the game.

There have been several migration waves from East-Africa along the highway of the Nile along the Middle East and the Southern Asian shores, up till Australia. All these settlements except the ones of the last wave died out. One of the early waves remained in Australia (but their breadcrumbs going there were wiped out) as the aboriginals which are genetically quite different from current Asians.

Also don't forget the non-HSS (Homo Sapiens Sapiens) strains like the Neanderthals that coexisted with HSS in Europe till just 30,000 years ago. They were probably a leftover from a very early migration. HSS only migrated (the Out of Africa theory) to Europe/Asia a mere 150K years ago.
Western Africans also are genetically more different from the rest as they have been trapped under the Sahara and by the dense rain forest in Central Africa. Their only serious migration was the slave trade to the Americas.

The Asian eye folding may just be an amplification of a random mutation by genetic drift in a very small population. That drift stopped now since they are with 2.5 billion.
The skin albedo (melanin enrichment) is not really genetic but is steered by modulators of genes that can adapt 1000x more quickly than genes. It has been said any population migrating south will have a black skin within 15,000 years only (see the Tamils), and a white skin migrating north as skin albedo is a trade-off between death by skin cancer and death by lack of Vitamin D.

Boom diada boom diada, it's a wonderful world.  ;)
(back to work)

RacePhoto

« Reply #55 on: September 07, 2010, 19:55 »
0
On topic - NO!

On the hijack, sure and keep in mind that cultures like those of Indonesia were sea based and they were disappointed when they found that the ocean was not endless. Spreading by sea is another later development. Walking across a land bridge, then the ice ages dividing the populations again.

Neanderthals always come to mind when I think of brute strength vs intelligence and adaptation.  :D But the answer is probably more in the line of tools which still divide cultures now.


Here I thought we were all descendants from multiple mutant generations of Australopithecus afarensis from Ethiopia and Kenya!
Caucasians seem to be leftovers from a few that survived the last ice age in caves in Anatolia and Spain. This genetic bottleneck explains the high genetic similarity between most humans nowadays since in those periods, not the classical Darwinian natural selection but genetic drift was the name of the game.

There have been several migration waves from East-Africa along the highway of the Nile along the Middle East and the Southern Asian shores, up till Australia. All these settlements except the ones of the last wave died out. One of the early waves remained in Australia (but their breadcrumbs going there were wiped out) as the aboriginals which are genetically quite different from current Asians.

Also don't forget the non-HSS (Homo Sapiens Sapiens) strains like the Neanderthals that coexisted with HSS in Europe till just 30,000 years ago. They were probably a leftover from a very early migration. HSS only migrated (the Out of Africa theory) to Europe/Asia a mere 150K years ago.
Western Africans also are genetically more different from the rest as they have been trapped under the Sahara and by the dense rain forest in Central Africa. Their only serious migration was the slave trade to the Americas.

The Asian eye folding may just be an amplification of a random mutation by genetic drift in a very small population. That drift stopped now since they are with 2.5 billion.
The skin albedo (melanin enrichment) is not really genetic but is steered by modulators of genes that can adapt 1000x more quickly than genes. It has been said any population migrating south will have a black skin within 15,000 years only (see the Tamils), and a white skin migrating north as skin albedo is a trade-off between death by skin cancer and death by lack of Vitamin D.

Boom diada boom diada, it's a wonderful world.  ;)
(back to work)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
3523 Views
Last post November 27, 2006, 16:36
by madelaide
7 Replies
2875 Views
Last post February 03, 2007, 05:15
by takestock
22 Replies
10463 Views
Last post March 05, 2007, 17:20
by madelaide
32 Replies
7401 Views
Last post May 25, 2007, 15:05
by PenelopeB
15 Replies
3756 Views
Last post August 29, 2010, 07:04
by luissantos84

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results