Upsurge in big earthquakes predicted for 2018 as Earth rotation slows

From NASA

The effective acceleration of gravity at the poles is 980.665 cm/sec/sec while at the equator it is 3.39 cm/sec/sec less due to the centrifugal force. If you weighed 100 pounds at the north pole on a spring scale, at the equator you would weigh 99.65 pounds, or 5.5 ounces less.

So, 5.5 ounces less vs No ounces at the current rate of spin.

If the centrifugal force is lessened over 5 or 6 years, which is minute, just how much an effect can it really have?

originally posted by: rickymouse
Rats, there is no adjustments on clocks anymore. I remember the old Ben clocks and a few others had that on them. I suppose we will all be dependent now on satellite input to keep our clocks from losing a second a month.

I suppose this will be used as a sales ploy to sell special new improved clocks and the government will spend a billion dollars upgrading it's systems to make sure their clocks are not a second a month off.

No where near 1 second per month if it did we have bigger problems then adjusting our clocks. Earths rotational velocity decreases by a couple of milliseconds in 100 years. What we are seeing is a trade off between earths rotation and its orbital velocity they are linked. If the earths rotation around the sun increases in velocity earths spin decreases. Literally the longer are day gets the shorter our year gets. Lets say something decreases our orbital velocity such as an alignment of planets the earths rotation increases to compensate. Energy has to go somewhere.

It's probably just Nibiru getting closer.

Right everyone??

Hello...Hello...

er....nevermind, i'll just go sit over here.

I could be wrong but this is my guess. I'm not a scientist but I think that as the world warms and there's more water the Earth has to slow down to compensate. Thoughts?

Global Tardation or Rotation Change ?

If the rotation is slowing down shouldn't there be less earthquakes...

It's the change in speed, more or less

Thats the beauty of the Rotation Change Scam, whether it speeds up or slows down you get more earthquakes...

I think that as the world warms and there's more water the Earth has to slow down to compensate. Thoughts?

awe, so Global Warming is causing Global Tardation.. I knew that was coming... Now you see why I wanted to name it before

originally posted by: ShadowChatter

there you have it:.. "official science"

Yeah, but what are we going to call it .... Global Tardation or Rotation Change

The "tardation" is on target, it just needs to be apllied to every Chicken Little theory the left has come up with to date.

It's actually the opisit the more liquid the easier it is for the earth to valance the spin. Land can't be moved as easily as water. Our moon would do a lot of damage if water wasn't on the planet and able to move.

a reply to: dragonridr

Our moon would do a lot of damage if water wasn't on the planet and able to move.

No. Tidal forces are not "distributed" according to the malleability of the matter. Without oceans, the tidal forces of the Sun and Moon would be the same as they are with the oceans. Their effects on solid matter would be no different than they are.

What we are seeing is a trade off between earths rotation and its orbital velocity they are linked. If the earths rotation around the sun increases in velocity earths spin decreases.

No, you have it backwards. An increase in orbital velocity would result in an increase in the rate of rotation. But the Earth is not tidally locked to the Sun so it doesn't matter anyway.

originally posted by: lostbook
I could be wrong but this is my guess. I'm not a scientist but I think that as the world warms and there's more water the Earth has to slow down to compensate. Thoughts?

If that's the case, the earth rotation should speed up because the glaciers aren't sticking up into the wind adding drag on the rotation.

a reply to: carewemust

The atmosphere rotates with the Earth. That's why there are not constant 1,000 mph winds at the equator.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dragonridr

Our moon would do a lot of damage if water wasn't on the planet and able to move.

No. Tidal forces are not "distributed" according to the malleability of the matter. Without oceans, the tidal forces of the Sun and Moon would be the same as they are with the oceans.

If earth mass is te same with no water the effect of tidal forces on the surface of the planet would be greater. Tides disperse this energy more effectively then say rock. Rock can only relieve stress through quakes energy has to go somewhere.

And no i didnt get it backwards at all the two are corelated and has nothing to do with being tidally locked with the sun odd conceptyouhave.

a reply to: dragonridr

Tides disperse this energy more effectively then say rock

You seem to be confusing forces and energy. Tidal forces affect all matter equally (according to the gravity gradient). Because water is able to be deformed more (because it is liquid), it does not mean that there is less force applied to solid material.

And no i didnt get it backwards at all the two are corelated and has nothing to do with being tidally locked with the sun odd conceptyouhave.

Yes, you did get it backwards but you claim a causal relationship between orbital velocity and planetary rotation. If this is not caused by tidal effects, what causes it?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dragonridr

Tides disperse this energy more effectively then say rock

You seem to be confusing forces and energy. Tidal forces affect all matter equally (according to the gravity gradient). Because water is able to be deformed more (because it is liquid), it does not mean that there is less force applied to solid material.

And no i didnt get it backwards at all the two are corelated and has nothing to do with being tidally locked with the sun odd conceptyouhave.

Yes, you did get it backwards but you claim a causal relationship between orbital velocity and planetary rotation. If this is not caused by tidal effects, what causes it?

Didnt say it ws what i said is its redistributed.

:link.springer.com...

a reply to: dragonridr

What you said was this:

Our moon would do a lot of damage if water wasn't on the planet and able to move.

What, in that article, implies this?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dragonridr

What you said was this:

Our moon would do a lot of damage if water wasn't on the planet and able to move.

What, in that article, implies this?

Read the paper its in there when it discusses the earths crust. This iswhy the op article was talking about earth quakes also leads to eruptions. Luckily water redistributes tidal forces.

a reply to: dragonridr

Luckily water redistributes tidal forces.

No, it doesn't. The only thing that "redistributes" tidal forces are the positions of the Sun and Moon relative to the Earth.

The article you linked says that changes in the distribution of water (and atmospheric) mass change Earth's angular momentum (and thus the length of its day).

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dragonridr

Luckily water redistributes tidal forces.

No, it doesn't. The only thing that "redistributes" tidal forces are the positions of the Sun and Moon relative to the Earth.

The article you linked says that changes in the distribution of water (and atmospheric) mass change Earth's angular momentum (and thus the length of its day).

Exactly its to help explain the Chandler wobble which is caused by the redistribution of mass on the oceans crust.

Fears of a massive earthquake rise after 134 mini-tremors rattle the San Andreas fault in just one week

Fresh fears have been raised that a huge earthquake is about to hit California after a swarm of recent tremors.
In the last week 134 earthquakes have hammered a three-mile stretch around Monterey County on the San Andreas fault.

Of those earthquakes, 17 were stronger than 2.5 magnitude and six of them were stronger than 3.0, with more tremors expected in the coming weeks, experts warn.

It follows fears raised last week that the 'Big One' is about to hit after a series of ten 'mini quakes' struck the same area.

The swarm included one 4.6-magnitude quake that was felt in San Francisco more than 90 miles (145 km) away.

Now they can sudenly predict earthquakes And ware? !!!
the tropical regions!

Sound to me like THEY!
will be using a earthquake wepond to
destabilize the tropical regions.