Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Mid-Atlantic Ridge Active (6.8 quake)

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Anyone else keeping an eye on this?
Does anyone have past data on the last time this area was this active?

earthquake.usgs.gov...

~Jammer




posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jammerman
Anyone else keeping an eye on this?
Does anyone have past data on the last time this area was this active?



Thanks Jammer - not watching it but interested. FYI - the Asia quake was preceded by a 5 or 6 point quake on December 24, 2 days before... (more info on the tsunami-9/11 thread.)

Several members have insisted - in the face of some fairly pointed ridicule - that there is SOMETHING going on. ...Seems to me there is.



.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 05:28 PM
link   
There was also a quake in Palm Springs or near there yesterday, 4.3
magnitude.
You really do have to wonder if something isn't going on



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:43 PM
link   
That is rather interesting... I have to keep an eye out on that...thankz for posting that.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 09:18 PM
link   
There was another Mid Atlantic quakes, but smaller, on 12-29-2004.

www.iris.edu...

If you click on the aove link, you will notice areas with purple dots, froming purple lines and purple areas? Those are quakes from the last five years.
The WAS a huge quake, with a horrific tsunami last month, and that was unusual. But by and large, there are always quakes happening.
Most of us just weren't paying attention!



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
There was another Mid Atlantic quakes, but smaller, on 12-29-2004.

www.iris.edu...

If you click on the aove link, you will notice areas with purple dots, froming purple lines and purple areas? Those are quakes from the last five years.
The WAS a huge quake, with a horrific tsunami last month, and that was unusual. But by and large, there are always quakes happening.
Most of us just weren't paying attention!


Good link. Thank you.

It is true that there has always been quakes, and war and famine and that with the evolution of communication we are able to access so much more data much more quickly than in recent history. So, perhaps nothing is "happening", but it certainly "feels" like there is. David Wilcock has written a book called "The Divine Cosmos" which scientifically details the energetic changes taking place (not just on Earth) but in our entire solar system. You can read it online here:

ascension2000.com...

Here's a few of the trends taking place...


-         A 400-percent increase in the number of quakes on Earth (over 2.5 on the Richter scale) since 1973 (Mandeville 1998)


-         A ~500-percent increase in Earth’s volcanic activity between 1875 and 1993 (Mandeville 2000)


-         9 out of the 21 most severe earthquakes from 856-1999 AD occurred in the 20th century (Russian National Earthquake Information Center, 1999)


-         A 230-percent increase in the strength of the Sun’s magnetic field since 1901 (Lockwood, 1998)


-         A 300-percent increase in the amount of “severe” solar activity than what was formally predicted for the year 1997 alone (NASA 1998)


-         400-percent or higher increases in the speed that solar particle emissions are capable of traveling through the energy of interplanetary space (NASA 1997-2001)


-         Recent magnetic pole shifts of Uranus and Neptune, as Voyager 2 observed their magnetic axes being significantly offset from their rotational axes (Dmitriev 1997)


-         Visible brightness increases now being detected on Saturn (Dmitriev 1997)


-         200-percent increase in the intensity of Jupiter’s magnetic field from 1992-97 (Dmitriev 1997)


-         200-percent increase in the known density of Mars’ atmosphere encountered by the Mars Surveyor satellite in 1997 (NASA 1997)


-         Significant melting of Martian polar icecaps in just one year, clearly seen in satellite photography (NASA 2001)


-         Significant physical, chemical and optical changes on Venus, including a sharp decrease in sulfur-containing gases in its atmosphere and increasing brightness (Dmitriev 1997)


I guess we'll just have to go through time to find out for sure.

It's too bad that map doesn't show the magnitude of the older quakes as that would tell us if that 6.8 quake is significant with respect to size over time rather than just location.

Peace,

~Jammer


E_T

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Thanks Jammer - not watching it but interested. FYI - the Asia quake was preceded by a 5 or 6 point quake on December 24, 2 days before... (more info on the tsunami-9/11 thread.)
Previous bigger one before Sumatra's quake was 8.1 between NZ and Antarctis.

DEC 23 14:59:03.6 UTC


Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
There was another Mid Atlantic quakes, but smaller, on 12-29-2004.

www.iris.edu...

If you click on the aove link, you will notice areas with purple dots, froming purple lines and purple areas? Those are quakes from the last five years.
The WAS a huge quake, with a horrific tsunami last month, and that was unusual. But by and large, there are always quakes happening.
Most of us just weren't paying attention!

It wasn't unusual, on the contrary it has taken very long time to get new big one.
neic.usgs.gov...

And how much quake is reported in news doesn't tell s**t, that 8.1 between NZ and Antarctis was second biggest quake of the 2004 (and although had only ~1/22 of energy compared to Sumatra's it still released ~8x as much as third biggest) and I bet hardly anyone remembers that.



Originally posted by jammerman
It's too bad that map doesn't show the magnitude of the older quakes as that would tell us if that 6.8 quake is significant with respect to size over time rather than just location.

This was moderately big for this kind of plate boundary. (only subduction zones cause very strong quakes)
But amount of 6-6.9 magnitude quakes is something like ~130 annually... so if I would be you I would be more worried if annual amount of those would suddenly drop to something like once in a month.

BTW, energy release of Sumatra's quake was 32x32x2 times as much as this so from that perspective comparing this to it is like comparing one dynamite bar to 2000 lb HE bomb.


E_T

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:57 AM
link   
And then to alltime topten of BS.


Originally posted by soficrow
ascension2000.com...
Here's a few of the trends taking place...


-         A 400-percent increase in the number of quakes on Earth (over 2.5 on the Richter scale) since 1973 (Mandeville 1998)


-         A ~500-percent increase in Earth’s volcanic activity between 1875 and 1993 (Mandeville 2000)


-         9 out of the 21 most severe earthquakes from 856-1999 AD occurred in the 20th century (Russian National Earthquake Information Center, 1999)


-         A 230-percent increase in the strength of the Sun’s magnetic field since 1901 (Lockwood, 1998)


-         Recent magnetic pole shifts of Uranus and Neptune, as Voyager 2 observed their magnetic axes being significantly offset from their rotational axes (Dmitriev 1997)

-         200-percent increase in the intensity of Jupiter’s magnetic field from 1992-97 (Dmitriev 1997)


-         Significant melting of Martian polar icecaps in just one year, clearly seen in satellite photography (NASA 2001)
We will be seeing increase in this small quakes until we have added "couple zeroes" to end of the number of seismographs in the world.


A look at the number of volcanoes active per year, over the last few centuries, shows a dramatic increase, but one that is closely related to increases in the world's human population and communication. We believe that this represents an increased reporting of eruptions, rather than increased frequency of global volcanism: more observers, in wider geographic distribution, with better communication, and broader publication. The past 200 years (see plot below) show this generally increasing trend along with some major "peaks and valleys" which suggest global pulsations. A closer look at the two largest valleys, however, shows that they coincide with the two World Wars, when people (including editors) were preoccupied with other things. Many more eruptions were probably witnessed during those times, but reports do not survive in the scientific literature.

If these apparent drops in global volcanism are caused by decreased human attention to volcanoes, then it is reasonable to expect that increased attention after major, newsworthy eruptions should result in higher-than-average numbers of volcanoes being reported in the historical literature. The 1902 disasters at Mont Pelee, St. Vincent, and Santa Maria (see 1902 arrow) were highly newsworthy events. They represent a genuine pulse in Caribbean volcanism, but we believe that the higher numbers in following years (and following Krakatau in 1883) result from increased human interest in volcanism. People reported events that they might not otherwise have reported and editors were more likely to print those reports.

Additional strong evidence that the historical increase in global volcanism is more apparent than real comes from the lower plot below. Here only the larger eruptions (generating at least 0.1 km3 of tephra, the fragmental products of explosive eruptions) are plotted. The effects of these larger events are often regional, and therefore less likely to escape documentation even in remote areas. The frequency of these events has remained impressively constant for more than a century, and contrasts strongly with the apparent increase of smaller eruptions with time.

www.volcano.si.edu...
Seeing "big" amount of eruptions and quakes in this time of internet&fast communications doesn't mean they weren't there when communication was slow or lacked completely. Before telegraph there wasn't really effective way for sending news globally and human populations was very thin in places which are currently populated.


Saying that sun's magnetic field has increased after 1901 is complete bull#, that text itself tells that it's based on that stuff itself... before probes there wasn't any way to get data from sun's magnetic field.
Also it's strength/polarity varies in 11 year period, "after" that magnetic poles change places.


Also there couldn't have been any hard data from mangetic fields of Uranus and Neptune before Voyager 2... neither talking about after that, so saying there's shift of magnetic field going on there is BS.


And neither there could have been hard data about Jupiter's magnetosphere, Galileo probe arrived to Jupiter on December 7, 1995.


Wake up nuts! Mars has seasons which change look of it from sizes of polar caps to "annual" dust storm covering whole planet. It's just that instead of tilt of rotation axis seasons of Mars are caused by high eccentricity of its orbit.

Just to make few corrections...



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by E_T
And how much quake is reported in news doesn't tell s**t, that 8.1 between NZ and Antarctis was second biggest quake of the 2004 (and although had only ~1/22 of energy compared to Sumatra's it still released ~8x as much as third biggest) and I bet hardly anyone remembers that.


Well, that may be the one I remember the best, as it was the one that acquainted me with the USGS site and all the ATSers who follow earthquakes. When that one happened, I signed up for email notifications of 5.0s and higher. So, a few days later, the 12-26 eathquake hit, and my inbox had lots of quakes to report.

From what I've read, I know we were overdue for a big quake.
E_T, what do you think will be next? Just regular quakes, of another 8.0+ quake?



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by E_T
And then to alltime topten of BS.


Originally posted by soficrow
ascension2000.com...
Here's a few of the trends taking place...


E_T - the post you credit to me as being "alltime topten BS" was made by Jammer, Post Number: 1085339.

Given your obviously cavalier approach to the process of verification - I'm sure you'll understand why I am not inclined to take your "debunking" very seriously...





[edit on 13-1-2005 by soficrow]






top topics



 
0

log in

join