dailymail.co.uk
Imminent Non-Explosive Eruption Predicted for Well-Monitored Axial Seamount
Axial Seamount, a 3,600-foot underwater volcano off Oregon, is predicted to erupt by the end of 2025 due to swelling, increased seismic activity (mirroring pre-eruption levels from 1998, 2011, and 2015), and a recent increase in seafloor inflation rate from 1 cm/year to 25 cm/year; however, scientists are unconcerned because it is a well-monitored shield volcano with non-explosive eruptions.
- How does the monitoring of Axial Seamount compare to other volcanoes, and what unique insights does this provide?
- The volcano's inflation, mirroring pre-eruption levels seen in past eruptions (1998, 2011, 2015), coupled with a recent surge in earthquake activity, strongly indicates an imminent eruption. This prediction is based on continuous monitoring via a cutting-edge fiber-optic cable system providing real-time data, making Axial Seamount the world's best-monitored submarine volcano.
- What are the key indicators suggesting an imminent eruption of Axial Seamount, and what is the predicted timeframe?
- Axial Seamount, a submarine volcano 300 miles off the Oregon coast, is predicted to erupt before the end of 2025 due to significant swelling and increased seismic activity. Scientists are not concerned, as it's a well-monitored shield volcano with a history of non-explosive eruptions, posing no threat to the public.
- What are the broader implications of accurately predicting Axial Seamount's eruption for global volcanic hazard assessment and preparedness?
- This eruption forecast offers a unique opportunity to refine volcanic prediction models. The extensive, real-time data collected from Axial Seamount, unavailable for most volcanoes, allows scientists to test and improve forecasting techniques applicable to other volcanoes globally, both on land and underwater. This could significantly enhance global preparedness for future volcanic events.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing heavily emphasizes the scientists' calm and reassuring tone, repeatedly highlighting their lack of concern. The headline and introduction could be perceived as downplaying the significance of the impending eruption. The article's structure prioritizes quotes emphasizing the lack of threat over potential impacts.
Language Bias
The article uses language like "fascinating," "excitement," and repeatedly emphasizes the lack of hazard. While these words accurately reflect the scientists' sentiments, they could be perceived as downplaying the significance of the impending geological event. More neutral terms could be used to describe the event without minimizing its potential impact.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the scientists' reassuring statements and downplays potential consequences, even though it acknowledges that flowing lava can cause substantial destruction. While the lack of immediate danger is emphasized, the long-term geological impacts of repeated eruptions are not discussed. The article also doesn't explore the potential effects on marine life in the immediate vicinity of the eruption.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the situation as either 'fascinating and doesn't really pose a hazard' or a catastrophic event. The nuanced reality of the volcano's impact on the surrounding environment and marine life is not considered.