Kevin Bisconti 2-11-09
Earth science current events
The article that I chose is about the super volcano that is in Yellowstone national park and how some believe that it is ready to blow within the next few years. This article goes into depth explaining what supper volcanoes are, they tell us that there is no exact definition for a super volcano but is used to describe volcanoes that have had rather large eruptions in the past. One way how to tell the difference between volcanoes and super volcanoes is that super volcanoes leave behind huge craters that are called caldera’s that can span to be 40 -50 miles wide. Also in a super volcano there is no mountain peak like in a normal volcano, normal volcanoes get their cone shape from magma flowing out and cooling eventually making a cone shaped peak. But with a super volcano magma is blocked from reaching the surface and eventually causes a massive explosion within the entire surface above the magma chamber. Also this article talks about Yellowstone in the past, and how 650,000 years ago it left a caldera 53 miles long and 28 miles wide and how the ash from the blast blanketed most of North America. And in 2003 a high-resolution sonar map found that at the bottom of lake yellow stone there was a bulge there that was 2000 feet long and 100 feet high and was being pushed up by volcanic forces, this caused great fear and many thought that by drilling holes to release pressure in the magma chamber they could prevent a huge explosion, but nothing was done.
The information in this article affects humanity in many ways especially our country. If the yellow stone volcano was to blow up with a force10,000 times greater than that of the explosion at Mt. saint Helens than it would not only affect the immediate area but the entire country may be the world. Huge clouds of volcanic ash would cover our country and cause huge problems; planes would be stopped due to fear of having the engines clog up with ash as well as the air being unsafe to breath. These are just some of the problems that would occur.
The one thing that I disliked about this article was that it did not go into much depth about signs that the volcano would blow up. Also one thing that the writer could have done would have been to discus what would happen to the environment if it were to blow up.
1. I liked how he showed the dangers of the super volcano.
ReplyDelete2. I liked how he showed the diffence between super volcanos and volcanos.
3. i liked how he showed and described what happens when the volcano erupts.
1. I didn't like that he didn't go that far into depth with this artical.
2. I also diddn't like how he didin't have any past proof to support these ideas of a super volcano.
1. One thing that helped me understand this artical was the theory that an eruption of a super vocano could destroy modern life as we know it.
1. This summary is full of information.
ReplyDelete2. It gives specifics about super volcanoes.
3. I like how he goes into detail comparing super volcanoes to volcanoes.
1. I did not like how he did not explain things more.
2. He also could have given more of an opinion on the article.
1. The explanation of super volcanoes and volcanoes helped me to learn more and understand this article better.
Austin Engros
ReplyDelete1. He gave an acurate summary of the artical, and wrote only about the imporatnt information that was actually supposed to be picked up by the reader.
2. I liked how he went into detail about how Super volcanos can be depicted easily. I felt that that was a major part of the artical.
3. I liked how he gave good suporting statisitcs about the facts that he was setting forth for us.
1. You could have given more details about amount of time since the volcano last had a serious explosion.
2. You you could have gone into a little bit more detail about the effects of the super volcanos destruction.
1. I found it interesting that just becasue the volcano had not had a devestating explosion in recent years; scientists fear that the next explosion will be very bad becasue of the build up over time. I would be interested in hearing an answer to that theory in greater deatil then just the one that was given in the artical.
1. I liked how he only expressed vital key information. However with that vital information, he went into depth to give accurate information about the topic.
ReplyDelete2. He gave good facts about Super Volcanoes and with they are so difficult to be depicted.
3. The solid information that he wrote about the super volcanoes; why they are hard to be identified, and why they differ from regular volcanoes was good because I felt it was an important part of the article.
1. He could have given more statistics about what happened to the land and what not after the huge explosion.
2. Also he could have gone into more detail about what scientists are thinking about the topic.
1. I found it interesting that just because the volcano had not erupted in recent years, scientists fear that the next explosion with therefore will be much more severe. I would be interested in finding a more in depth answer to this hypothesis, then just the short one that was provided in the article.
1. His summary is very informative, and mentions a lot of facts about the topic.
ReplyDelete2. Gives a good analysis of the differences between common volcanoes and super volcanoes.
3. I like how he described how this particular volcano affects our lives and our world.
1. He could have given a few more statistics and facts about common volcanoes instead of solely giving specifics on the super volcanoes.
2. He could have explained more of an opinion he had on this article.
1. The in depth comparison of the super volcano verses a common volcano was very interesting and taught me the differences between the two types.
1) I liked this article by Kevin because he summarized it very well. He did not include any 'stuffing' but got straight to the point.
ReplyDelete2) He taught me of how much of an influence these volcanoes really have on society.
3) I was very concerned about why holes were not drilled to release the pressure; it makes me want to research more.
-------------------
1) He did not tell us of what we can do to contribute to the research of volcanoes and super volcanoes.
2) He did not say much about future plans to deal with a huge explosion.
--------------------
1) The most important thing that I learned is the impact of a volcano eruption is very big and could affect the whole world.
1) I liked how he showed the differences between super volcanoes and regular volcanoes.
ReplyDelete2) He had good details throughout his paragraph.
3) He shows how the volcano could effect society by comparing it to Mt. Saint Helens.
1) He could have shown more statistics.
2) He also could have talked about professional opinions on the matter.
1) I was impressed by the fact that super volcanoes could potentially be very dangerous.
1. He mentioned a lot of information about this topic.
ReplyDelete2. He gave good facts about super volcanoes.
3. He described how the volcano can affect our lives.
1. He could've of shown more statistics.
2. He didn't go that far in depth with this article.
1. I learned a lot about the super volcanoes.