|
Ring Map>P-102 to 106 |
Fully Appreciated Don **** I guess the first thing to do is make sure that others would agree that the ring zone is parallel with the general directional trend of the Juan De Fuca/Cascadia subduction zone. I have looked closely at the theoretical P-103 from the USGS, and I see that the map (from Don) is highly indicative of the directionality and distance from the landmarks given. It is a good map. If that is agreed upon, then I must fix the lat-lons of a study area. In my mind a study area can be a large areal, with sub-regionality used to further constrain findings due to cross faulting and historical depth of seismicity. Comments Appreciated, and thanx again Don.
Follow Ups: ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - chris in suburbia 05:22:05 - 1/28/2006 (33225) (2) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - glen 16:58:19 - 1/29/2006 (33253) (0) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - Cathryn 14:50:11 - 1/29/2006 (33250) (2) ● Thanks Cathryn. n/t - Roger Hunter 18:59:59 - 1/29/2006 (33257) (0) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - glen 17:03:54 - 1/29/2006 (33254) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - Cathryn 18:05:09 - 1/29/2006 (33255) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - marc / berkeley 07:54:22 - 1/31/2006 (33271) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - Cathryn 14:18:11 - 1/31/2006 (33274) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - marc / berkeley 16:30:41 - 1/31/2006 (33301) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - glen 19:27:48 - 1/31/2006 (33302) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - marc / berkeley 07:57:48 - 2/1/2006 (33307) (1) ● Re: Ring Map>P-102 to 106 - glen 15:05:29 - 2/1/2006 (33311) (0) |
|