Talk:La Garita Caldera

Volcanoes High‑importance

	Volcanoes portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

CO: La Garita Mountains

TOPO! GPS Data Format Deg NAD27 ElevFeet
BENTSFORT ,38.09444,-102.75972,3789,BENTS NEW FORT MARKER :: ELEV 3789 FT
LAGARITAR,37.81250,-106.18750,7673,LA GARITA REGION :: ELEV 7673 FT
LAGARITAW ,37.95417,-106.85056,12748,LA GARITA WILDERNESS :: ELEV 12748 FT
LAGARITAC ,37.83778,-106.37278,9211,LITTLE LA GARITA CREEK :: ELEV 9211 FT

List of Colorado rivers

RJBurkhart 15:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Fish Canyon Tuff was not a VEI-9 eruption

Someone has stated that the Fish Canyon Tuff from La Garita Caldera was a VEI-9 eruption and that the volume was 18,000 cubic km. Both are inaccurate. Nowhere in the article [1] does it state that the FC Tuff had a high volume as this. In fact, it's still stated as 5,000 cubic km in that article. Because the erupted volume is under 10,000 cubic km, it is still a VEI-8 eruption [2]. If you read the article carefully (see first link in this paragraph), "Magnitude" is really a separate scale, and it is important to note that VEI and magnitude measure eruption sizes differently. VEI measures eruption sizes based on volume of magma erupted in cubic km and eruption column height. Magnitude, as used in the article by Mason et al, measures eruption size based on mass of magma erupted in kilograms. NorthernFire 06:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was me. Sorry, I misread the Mason et al article. Thanks for picking this up. I see most of related edits I made (to supervolcano, Volcanic Explosivity Index, and this article) have already been fixed, and I'm about to fix the few minor issues remaining. -- Avenue 08:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Siberian Traps is the largest known eruption on Earth.Lavalover 00:13, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has stated that a new system is needed. I agree because what have clearly been defined as the largest eruptions in the earth's history are being rejected by the VEI system.If a system that judged both kinds of eruptions existed then we could clearly see which are the largest eruptions and what eruption would rate as a VEI 9.Volcano man17:23 27 January 2007

Map

Surely there is a simple map or diagram of the caldera that could be included in the article? 128.165.87.144 21:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a location map and photo have been hiding over at Wheeler Geologic Area. I have added those to the article. --Seattle Skier (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second most energetic event?

Regarding the phrase "It is possibly only the second most energetic event to have ocurred on Earth besides the Chicxulub impact", what about the impact that formed the moon? Or the Sudbury Basin impact. Or the Vredefort crater impact? The phrase should be modified to read "It is probably the most energetic event to have ocurred on Earth since the Chicxulub impact." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vgy7ujm (talk • contribs) 03:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I second this comment; there have been impacts larger than the Chicxulub. The Vredefort and Sudbury impacts may be the only ones with known craters, but there must have been many more during the Late Heavy Bombardment. Cephal-odd (talk) 23:08, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that this is a short term release of energy. Keep in mind that basalt flood eruptions could release more energy as well. My take is that the Deccan traps and the Columbia River flood basalt eruptions would have released much more energy, perhaps even more than the Chicxulub impact, but that energy would have been released over a longer time. And I imagine that there's eveb more energy involved in the acceleration of a major continental plate. -- KarlHallowell (talk) 12:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The persons who wrote about the energy produced by the Chicxulub impact and the La Garita eruption should compare notes. Their math disagrees.

From the article on Chicxulub:

Chicxulub may have released 4×1023 joules of energy, equivalent to 100,000,000 megatons of TNT on impact. The Tsar Bomba, was 50 megatons. The Chicxulub impact was 2 million times more powerful. La Garita, at approximately 1021 joules, was less powerful.

(2 million times 50 = 100 million.)

From the article on La Garita:

The Tsar Bomba, had a yield of 50 megatons; La Garita was approximately 100,000 times more powerful. It is possibly the most energetic event on Earth since the Chicxulub impact, which was 50 times more powerful.

(La Garita would be 100,000 times 50 = 5 million.) 50 times more powerful would be 250 million.

But compare the number of joules given: 10 to the 21 joules and 4 * 10 to the 23 joules; Chicxulub was 400 times more powerful than La Garita, not 50.

I felt like pointing out the inconsistencies, though I realize there are many uncertainties in all this data. Thanks.

99.9.112.31 (talk) 01:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)NotWillDecker[reply]

megatons to Zettajoules

The article makes a comparison between the largest nuclear bomb ever detonated, and this eruption, but uses completely incompatible units for comparison. This should either be removed, or the units converted to something that makes sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.102.7.183 (talk • contribs)

I'm inclined to agree with you. It might be better to compare with other volcanic events. One possibility is Savino & Jones ("Supervolcano: The Catastrophic Event That Changed the Course of Human History" ISBN 1564149536), who include a table in their page 104. I'm not sure if the following link to Google Books will work [3]. Jakew (talk) 17:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crater Template

Someone may want to apply crater template {{Infobox crater | crater_name = {{SUBST:PAGENAME}} | image_crater = | alt_crater = | caption_crater = | image_bathymetry = | alt_bathymetry = | caption_bathymetry = | location = | coords = {{coord|89|59|59|N|179|59|59|W|region:ZZ_type:waterbody|display =inline,title}} | type = | basin_countries = | length = | width = | area = | depth = | max-depth = | volume = | rim = | elevation = | cities = | reference = }}

--YakbutterT (talk) 23:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scale of the volcanism

"The scale of La Garita volcanism was far beyond anything known in human history" I have two problems with this:

1) The Paraná and Etendeka traps had greater levels of volcanism than that at La Garita. See wiki article "List of largest volcanic eruptions"

2) The La Garita activity did not take place "in human history".

See Wiki article "the History of the World" - The history of the world or human history is the history of humanity from the earliest times to the present, in all places on Earth, beginning with the Paleolithic Era.

Theeurocrat (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok

Scott E. Bryan (2010). "The largest volcanic eruptions on Earth". Earth-Science Reviews. 102: 207. doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2010.07.001. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) is recent

La Garita Caldera article is older ;)

Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 17:22, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good amendment. Very nice article too, especially as it is freely accessible. Theeurocrat (talk) 12:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on La Garita Caldera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080528060013/http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/petroj/online/Volume_38/Issue_08/pdf/ega047_gml.pdf to http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/petroj/online/Volume_38/Issue_08/pdf/ega047_gml.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:53, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on La Garita Caldera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison to Tsar Bomba needs citations

The entire discussion about the size of the eruption vs the Tsar Bomba is un-cited, and probably incorrect given the whole claim. This needs to be fixed with proper citations or deleted. Bgovern (talk) 07:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]