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.

 

Earthquake + Time Shift = Doesn't add up, Meteor Perhaps?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Now supposedly the tsunami was caused by an earthquake. Although after hearing that the earthquake was so large that it actually tilted the earths axis a slight bit actually throwing the Atomic ( ? ) clock off by a split second.


Scientists believe that a shift of mass toward the Earth's center during the quake caused the planet to spin 3 microseconds faster and to tilt about an inch on its axis.


Now how does that make sense? It would make more sense that a fairly large meteor slammed into the earth...I mean how could a earthquake possibly change earths axis (I know the wobble does over time, but an earthquake? come on....)

Maybe Wurmwood's little brother.


www.timesonline.co.uk...
www.cnn.com...

[Edit: Title]

[edit on 13-1-2005 by _BLiND_]




posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:06 PM
link   
It was an earthquake that caused the tsunami. If it was a meteor people woul;d have noticed. They make quite a show going through the atmosphere and one large enough to the damage that was caused.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:08 PM
link   
But I was watching a very reliable source, CNN
, and the shockwaves were orginating fairly close to Antartica. I couldn't really say, But I am doubting many people live there.

All I am saying is that it could be a possibility, how does an earthquake tilt the world, wasn't the original tilt theoretically caused by an impact itself?



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by I See You
It was an earthquake that caused the tsunami. If it was a meteor people woul;d have noticed. They make quite a show going through the atmosphere and one large enough to the damage that was caused.


Well I guess you missed the one that came through the end of December that was so close to earth that it went under satellite level, between earth and our satellites.

We know that the quake caused the tsunami but what caused the quake?

I am working on this in another thread. There are several different possible things that could of caused it besides it being a natural earthquake. Scientists say 21-22 out of 30 major quakes are caused by nuclear testing.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 13-1-2005 by Ycon]



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 01:30 AM
link   
Hey Blind, could you elaborate on that a bit more please. It sounds interesting. What else did it say about antartica?



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BLiND_
But I was watching a very reliable source, CNN
, and the shockwaves were orginating fairly close to Antartica. I couldn't really say, But I am doubting many people live there.

All I am saying is that it could be a possibility, how does an earthquake tilt the world, wasn't the original tilt theoretically caused by an impact itself?



If that was the case then why wasnt New Zealand, Tasmania, Southern end of South America, South Africa & Southern Australia all affected by the tsunami? CNN hey??!!! They're good, aren't they



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Have you ever watched a figure skater during the olympics? As they spin they push their arms out... as they pull their arms in their spin speeds up. The earth's day shortened because its 'arms' -- the mass at its crust -- changed its position.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 02:07 AM
link   
Further spreading of the Gospel of Untruth


as posted by Ycon
Scientists say 21-22 out of 30 major quakes are caused by nuclear testing.


Is this based off critical thinking?
Is this assertion and claim based of verification?
Care to provide just ONE scientist that makes this assertion and claim with any type credibility and data backing? Link?

Cause till then, Ycon, you have made a claim and assertion that amounts to an outright lie.

The continued manufacture of information to help back those untruths and uncollaborated theories of the Indonesian Earthquake and subsequent tsunami's.

Your doing nothing but continuing to spread the Gospel of Untruth!






seekerof



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 02:22 AM
link   
I was flipping through the channels and watched a 15-20 second clip / diagram (computer generated) on where the shockwaves were heading. They seemed to originate from antartica, I caught it maybe 4 seconds in, so the location is relativly close to antartica and were heading towards the north pole. I'll do alittle surfing the net to try and find the video clip.

Helps my theory...because of 1 word. "struck" - Meteor? ( I know, I know
)


December 24, 2004. SYDNEY, Australia -- An extremely powerful earthquake struck
the ocean floor between Australia and Antarctica early Friday, causing buildings


I have nothing else to do...


(maybe the planet got a little too cold? had to give a little shiver?
)

Arggg...I cannot find the little clip I watched, but it strikes me as odd how there is a Earthquake Center in antartica, Siesmic weapon testing?

Here are some sites about the quake: ( no clips or re-creations though
)
asia.news.designerz.com...
www.aeic.alaska.edu...
www.boston.com...

[Edit: Added Some Things]

[edit on 14-1-2005 by _BLiND_]



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Further spreading of the Gospel of Untruth


as posted by Ycon
Scientists say 21-22 out of 30 major quakes are caused by nuclear testing.


Is this based off critical thinking?
Is this assertion and claim based of verification?
Care to provide just ONE scientist that makes this assertion and claim with any type credibility and data backing? Link?

Cause till then, Ycon, you have made a claim and assertion that amounts to an outright lie.

The continued manufacture of information to help back those untruths and uncollaborated theories of the Indonesian Earthquake and subsequent tsunami's.

Your doing nothing but continuing to spread the Gospel of Untruth!


seekerof


seekerof I posted a reply on that in the other thread. Go read it. It's stated by scientists
Scientists say 21-22 out of 30 major quakes are caused by nuclear testing.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 03:09 AM
link   
Names, Ycon, names.
Your source is dubious, and as I have stated in your above link....lacks credibility and reliability.
No real scientific or geological data to back it assertions, none.
Name? Not just a mysterious so-claimed "geologist".
Anyone can make such claims, whether they are backed with reliable and credible scientific and/or geological data is another matter, huh?




seekerof



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 04:51 AM
link   

as posted by _BLiND_
Sorry EvilSpallacus

I was flipping through the channels and watched a 15-20 second clip / diagram (computer generated) on where the shockwaves were heading. They seemed to originate from antartica, I caught it maybe 4 seconds in, so the location is relativly close to antartica and were heading towards the north pole. I'll do alittle surfing the net to try and find the video clip.

Helps my theory...because of 1 word. "struck" - Meteor? ( I know, I know )


_BLiND_, it may well be a possible theory, but I also believe that some detection satellite or system (NORAD) would have detected such an incoming object and then the subsequent object's impact event? My reasoning is simply that for a meteor to have had such an effect on causing these earthquakes, that it would have had to be of a size (significant) that it would have made itself quite detectable.





seekerof

[edit on 14-1-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 05:09 AM
link   
There is significant evidence that this "quake" was caused by an "outside" event. There was, as YCON indicates in another thread, significant asteroid activity on Dec19th. Jakarta reported some sort of "strike" on that day. That accompanied with the "near" miss of a larger "roid" on the same day would indicate the presence of "advanced" splinters in front of a perhaps larger object. The location of the impact zone, so close to the equator provide for a rather "straight in" approach. Many think the NEA project would have detected such a thing, but reality is the object coming out of the direct sun would have been hard to detect. Just like the near miss. Many also think there would be visual evidence similar to the movie "deep impact" with "ejecta" falling back to earth. A direct water impact would create just a large "wave". The only way to know for sure would be a visual of the sea floor.

Admitting that NEA "missed" such an event would be very embarrassing to the scientific community. The fact is they just don't know.

The ole ice skater thing does not work here. The earths mass is much too large for an event that takes up less than 1 percent of its surface to directly change the speed of its "spin". The "math" just doesn't work.

Conclusion- it must have been an "outside" event.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Names, Ycon, names.
Your source is dubious, and as I have stated in your above link....lacks credibility and reliability.
No real scientific or geological data to back it assertions, none.
Name? Not just a mysterious so-claimed "geologist".
Anyone can make such claims, whether they are backed with reliable and credible scientific and/or geological data is another matter, huh?
seekerof


seekerof posted more info on quakes caused by nuclear tests, in the other thread. www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 14-1-2005 by Ycon]



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 05:46 AM
link   
Names, Ycon!!
Your link mentions no NAMES!
Got any?
Your repeated linking to that dern link provides no NAMES. Enlighten me.


DrHoracid:


Jakarta reported some sort of "strike" on that day. That accompanied with the "near" miss of a larger "roid" on the same day would indicate the presence of "advanced" splinters in front of a perhaps larger object. The location of the impact zone, so close to the equator provide for a rather "straight in" approach. Many think the NEA project would have detected such a thing, but reality is the object coming out of the direct sun would have been hard to detect.


Link to the Jakarta source and the other assertions and claims?




seekerof



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 05:51 AM
link   
www.bernama.com...

This story disappeared for obvious reasons after the quake.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 05:59 AM
link   
Seekerof,

What is up with you today? To much vinigar in your spinach? The Jakerta incident has been documented and there are a few threads about it here on ATS. Also, just because someone doesnt reveal thier name, it doesnt mean thier occupation is not what they say it is. I havent had a chance to read YCON's link yet, but I bet its more open minded than you. Try backing off with the agressiveness and ask for a link instead of demanding it. You might get a better response that way.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 06:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
www.bernama.com...

This story disappeared for obvious reasons after the quake.


Thank you very much, DrHoracid.
Saves me from listening to Kidfinger and chasing such stuff down through multiples of threads.

I asked a simple question, Kidfinger....a link. Not some drivel about other threads, all of which can be merged into ONE. But hey, despite "viniger" and spinach, I was thankfully provided a link.






seekerof



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 06:16 AM
link   
The is some seemingly unrelated data that is currently pointing to a "roid" or meteor strike. I am awaiting some calculations from a friend of mine relayed to the possible "size of" and "velocity of" a meteor/asteroid impact that could cause the 9.0 event. He is an astrophysist for NASA in Houston. He says the odds of the world actually seeing such an event before it smacks us in the face is very remote. He thinks NEA research is a joke.......
based on the shallow depth of this "quake" and the mass destruction it caused he also thinks it was an outside event.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

I asked a simple question, Kidfinger....a link. Not some drivel about other threads, all of which can be merged into ONE. But hey, despite "viniger" and spinach, I was thankfully provided a link.



You asked a simple question the same way a bank robber demands money form the teller
I went to YCON's other thread and low and behold, there were a MULTITUDE of links to choose from. Not only that, but he mentioned two names of Japanese(?) scientest who were investigating neuclear weaponry and its global effects. It sounds to me like you just enjoy the power of a moderator. I mean no offence by that, I am only saying what everyone here can observe.

Now, as to the astroid impact, the good Doc mentioned above that with the incidents happenning, it sounded like the initial imopacts were splinters from the big one. I think iIm inclined to agree with DrHoracid on this. But to throw this speculation a little further, what if the astroid that possibly hit and caused this devestation was not that big? What if the astroid/meteor in question just hit the right spot to cause this? A very weak spot in the tectonic plates and an impact from an astroid could cause a pending desaster to come to fruit in a magnified way.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join