[Geysers] Giant 8/27 1143-ish

[Paul Strasser]

We were called at 1155 and immediately got on the internet.  We saw nothing
on the webcam because of a strong wind pushing the column towards Round
Spring.  The people there weren't surprised that nothing was visible.  It
was not an especially tall eruption (for Giant).

 

FYI the fact we couldn't see it on the webcam isn't too surprising.  On the
9/12/87 eruption I was near the Inn and staring at an odd, very low steam
cloud down basin.  I really didn't verify 100% that it was Giant until I was
well past Castle.  Not all Giant steam clouds, especially in summer mid-day
with a breeze, are going to be high enough to peek over the ridge between
geyser hill and Sawmill.  Darn.

 

Normal function, big crowd on hand.

 

More details undoubtedly to follow

 

Paul S.

 

 

 

  _____  

From: geysers-bounces at wwc.edu [mailto:geysers-bounces at wwc.edu] On Behalf Of
Chase Ellison
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 7:02 PM
To: geyser observation reports
Subject: Re: [Geysers] Webcam stuff

 

Final post

 

>So what? Is it really your opinion that students of history and/or science

>(now or in the future) are so stupid as to not understand the limitations

>of webcam based reports?

 

>Let me also pose the following: Which is "better" data: a report from an

>on-site observer claiming to have seen something, claiming to have an

>accurate clock, and claiming to have correctly read and recorded that

>information; or a webcam based report supported by the inclusion of a

>date/time stamped webcam frame.

 

Let me remind you of what we are doing here. We are collecting scientific
data to be used for use in future studies. . In fact I think that is what is
posted for what G.O.S.A.'s purpose. Setting my watch to the atomic clock now
seems rather arbitrary if we now allow things to be noted that could be up
to 5 minutes off. Now if in the future someone is doing a study with some
method none of us have thought of (yes people do think outside the box) that
requires some sort of precise time and the data is incorrect in the logbook
they are using (yes people do log things in logbooks incorrectly) then it
could cause a problem. 

Secondly, we do not know what if any effects it has made on studies but I
would rather be closer to correct than not. I have a B.S. in Geology
(emphasis in hydrogeology) and I also have a B.A. in History and started on
a masters in hydrogeology. I can not tell you how many times logged
discussions like this came up in my studies most of the time I threw out all
of that data because it was not correct data. Also, in my geology studies, I
found that many times when data like off a web cam was recorded it was
incorrect. People who did have a structure in place to note that they were
electronic times did not post them correctly. This in turn made my data
incorrect which I can tell you annoyed me to no extent as I had sometimes
waisted up to 16 hours worth of work. Now, as much as too little data can be
annoying to much data can ALSO be a problem. When you know you have 5 data
points on one item for the same thing you are investigating you need to take
an educated guess on which is correct. 

And about the on-site observer vs. the web cam I would take the observer any
day since I already know that the data from the web cam is incorrect. If you
knew something was wrong why would you continue to do something? 

The guessing often causes more problems than not having a data point for
that one instance. Anyway, I am gonna take the one hour drive down to Old
Faithful from Canyon and go watch geysers. 

 

 

Chase Ellison

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </geyser-list/attachments/20060827/209563e0/attachment.html>