It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

There has been a Global Surge in EQ's since 2004 - Geological Society of America

page: 1
27
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+10 more 
posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Many on here have said this repeatedly, only to be mocked by those who claim to be in the know.

Well, now the geoscientists are saying it as well. The rate from 2004 to now doubled the rate from 1900 to 2004. Seems kind of significant.

Most of the article goes on to describe the implications for the Cascadia Region, the interesting part is right here:


The last ten years have been a remarkable time for great earthquakes. Since December 2004 there have been no less than 18 quakes of Mw8.0 or greater -- a rate of more than twice that seen from 1900 to mid-2004.


Global surge in EQ's since 2004




posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

It has still been relatively quiet since Japan 2011.

Also i would guess one of the reasons for the surge was the aftershocks from Japan 2011, as there were a few above 8.0.

Edit again : actually the aftershock above 8.0 is the 8.9, it's called an aftershock because there was a 7.3 as a foreshock...Weird i guess.

Anyway here a list of all above 8.0, and it does look like they are right.

USGS
edit on 22-10-2014 by Mianeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye
Its not too surprising they are seemingly downplaying this info.....after all the poo pooing that was done over those who made this same observation...(unofficially of course...)
Laymen are no dumber than the scientists...just less conditioned by their education......which in turn allows them the freedom to see whats happening ........



posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Good catch. Starred and flagged. Anyways, you see even though the amount of large earthquakes have increased, the activity that has increased the most are the smaller earthquakes. Most graphs given by people such as Phage only show large earthquakes from about 3 or 4 and up. They don't show the smaller earthquakes which would be the first sign that worldwide earthquake activity has been increasing. Then there are indirect observations which should also tell people, by logic, that indeed earthquake and volcanic activity has been increasing; and that is the fact that the exponential increase in the weakening of Earth's magnetic shield and the rapid movement of magnetic north are indirect signs that the Earth's core is experiencing dramatic changes which keep increasing.

There are times that I ask myself how is it possible for some people, which I won't name, that to this day continue to refute the overwhelming evidence which shows that indeed the Earth is experiencing an increase in both volcanic/magmatic, and seismic activity as well as other changes. We know that the changes in the Earth's core alongside changes in the sun influence and change Earth's magnetic field. So if we see the Earth's magnetic field going through strange and dramatic changes which are increasing in strength it should logically tell is that these are signs that the Earth's core, and/or the sun are also undergoing dramatic changes. But to some people it seems that such logic escapes them.






edit on 22-10-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: correct post.



posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 11:38 PM
link   
BTW, one of the excuses "some people" will give you is that only people's perception has changed because there is better technology that allows us to detect earthquakes in areas which were not populated before. These would be partially right, except for the indirect evidence that does shows us that indeed is not only that the perception of people has increased due to better technology. But the indirect evidence that we know has been occurring is a tell-tale sign that Earth as a whole is undergoing dramatic changes.
edit on 22-10-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: correct post.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:05 AM
link   
a reply to: stirling




Laymen are no dumber than the scientists...just less conditioned by their education......


or not worried about getting funding, by not holding to their respective disciplines views.
afraid of ridicule and being cut off.


edit on 23-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 04:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

It has still been relatively quiet since Japan 2011.



That's not really true.

The double 8+ Mag EQ's that occurred hours apart in Indonesia in 2012 were actually more geologically significant than the 2011 Japan quake; they were the largest slip-fault EQ's ever recorded, and some think they may have cracked the Indo-Australian Plate.

Also, this upsurge begins from the devastating 2004 quake, which is far enough in time to probably have had no effect on the 2011 Japan quake, that is to say they were independent quakes.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 04:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: stirling
a reply to: Mianeye
Its not too surprising they are seemingly downplaying this info.....after all the poo pooing that was done over those who made this same observation...(unofficially of course...)
Laymen are no dumber than the scientists...just less conditioned by their education......which in turn allows them the freedom to see whats happening ........


And with the internet, it is much easier to educate yourself about a topic than say 30 or even 20 years ago, and as one poster pointed out below, there is funding, positions etc.

There are many studies showing conformational bias is alive and well in the scientific community.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 04:47 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Some people may have legitimate diverging viewpoints, but you're right others may not use logic and try to emotionally engage you instead. These latter types usually are just being paid to do a job and I feel sorry for them, for the most part it is a waste of time to engage with them in any way.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 06:44 AM
link   
i blame humans for the increase in earthquakes as there are too many of us and we are too fat so the planet is buckling under the strain. I am sure new taxes to help make the rich richer will help reduce the pressure.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Good catch. Thanks.

F&S&
&bump





edit on 23/10/14 by soficrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:29 PM
link   
As of Jan. 1, 2009 the USGS also stopped tracking quakes less than 4.5 on a worldwide scale but they put this in the fine print at the bottom of their graphs in hopes you'd miss it so that it would appear that there wasn't an obvious trend of increasing smaller earthquakes. As the small quakes continued to increase, the graphs would stay the same because they weren't showing the small quake increases. They flat out denied an increase in large quakes which it looks like the "smart ones" are finally accepting as reality. Quakes of all sizes are increasing, but the small ones are rapidly increasing at alarming rates.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rezlooper
As of Jan. 1, 2009 the USGS also stopped tracking quakes less than 4.5 on a worldwide scale but they put this in the fine print at the bottom of their graphs in hopes you'd miss it so that it would appear that there wasn't an obvious trend of increasing smaller earthquakes. As the small quakes continued to increase, the graphs would stay the same because they weren't showing the small quake increases. They flat out denied an increase in large quakes which it looks like the "smart ones" are finally accepting as reality. Quakes of all sizes are increasing, but the small ones are rapidly increasing at alarming rates.


Who is tracking the smaller ones? Why do you think the USGS did this?

Also, is there any truth to the rumor that the way they measured magnitude changed in the 70's, reduced the relative magnitude, so that for example a 7.5 Mag in the 60's would be recorded as a 6.5 Mag today?
edit on 23-10-2014 by PlanetXisHERE because: oops



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 05:08 PM
link   
Still no debunkers coming out to attack this?

There were many debunkers attacking when many of us over the past couple years said EQ's were on the rise, I can think of one notable debunker who many look to when forming their opinions - many times that poster said we were wrong and EQ's were not rising.

It just goes to show you one more time that you cannot trust people on here - don't trust me - do your own homework.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE


So nowhere does it say that the has been an overall increase in all magnitudes of earthquakes, only in 'great earthquakes', which, to my understanding doesn't necessarily lead on to there being an increase in earthquakes across the board. It's an important distinction to make....with regards to your assertions of funding etc, in my experience, I haven't seen that. In fact, some of the people I work with love earthquakes so much I swear they write papers about them while they're sleeping....but yeah, carry on dissing the scientists.

edit on 10-11-2014 by aorAki because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I'd say that's irrefutable. A large and frequent up tick
in big EQ's happens in 10 years time.
I like to look at the Sun as the most likely
contributor. Maybe I won't have to wait as long as I thought
to see that story on Science Daily.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 08:59 PM
link   
I wonder if it has anything to do with the interstellar cloud our solar system is whizzing through ?

Solar System Caught in an Interstellar Tempest

You can read the full article at the link above:

The solar system is travelling through much stormier skies than we thought, and might even be about to pop out of the huge gas cloud we have been gliding through for at least 45,000 years. That's the implication of a multi-decade survey of the interstellar wind buffeting the solar system, which has revealed an unexpected change in the wind's direction.



But then NASA's Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX), launched in 2009, revealed something odd: the wind has changed direction. IBEX has been directly sampling neutral helium atoms from the interstellar cloud as part of its mission to map the boundary between the solar system and the rest of the galaxy. Its readings show that, instead of Earth passing through the sun's helium tail in late November, the peak came about a week late, in early December. That indicates a change in wind direction of about 6 degrees in only 40 years.



The fact that the wind is shifting over the span of mere decades means that the interior of the cloud is either unusually turbulent, or that the solar system is a mere 1000 or so years away from punching its way out.



"While there had been hints that something was changing in the environment of the sun, when we finally put all the historical data together it became clear that one can make a strong scientific statement that this change has actually occurred," says Frisch. What the change means is still up for debate. We could be nearing the cloud's edge, or we could still be in the thick of it, pushing our way through an interstellar storm.




The scientific assumption is that these interstellar changes would have no effect here on Earth. But I question that assumption based on the understanding that our universal surroundings do indeed have an impact on our sun (as shown above with my bolded text)... Therefore, any changes to the sun would have some sort of an impact on the planets in our solar system.

Another words, if the energy balance of the sun changes, then so does the energy balance here on earth (both internal and external).

It's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.



... food for thought.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE


So nowhere does it say that the has been an overall increase in all magnitudes of earthquakes, only in 'great earthquakes', which, to my understanding doesn't necessarily lead on to there being an increase in earthquakes across the board. It's an important distinction to make....with regards to your assertions of funding etc, in my experience, I haven't seen that. In fact, some of the people I work with love earthquakes so much I swear they write papers about them while they're sleeping....but yeah, carry on dissing the scientists.


Actually, the debunkers on here never really argued that small quakes weren't on the rise. They said that large ones weren't rising, and yet, they are. They never argued against small quakes because it's so obvious they were on the rise, especially in areas of fracking such as Oklahoma. Hard to argue a rise there when there are literally thousands of quakes each year up from just a couple of hundred a few years ago. That's just one example.

I know I've said many times all quakes were on the rise and I was called out by the "so-called experts" as well. Planet X is right, where are they now?



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rezlooper

I know I've said many times all quakes were on the rise and I was called out by the "so-called experts" as well. Planet X is right, where are they now?



I'm here.

There is a difference between human-induced 'quakes and those which are naturally occurring. I'm not sold on there being an overall rise. It may be so, but as of yet, the jury is still out. Yes, 'great 'quakes' sure...perhaps it means we're in for a period of quiescence now?



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Wouldn't fracking or the increase of it since GWB and Cheney approved the Energy Policy Act of 2005 have something to do with this? Fracturing the Earth crust would seem like a terrible idea and hasn't it been proven to cause earthquakes and earthquake swarms?



new topics

top topics



 
27
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join