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.

 

Can earthquakes be a result of global warming?

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   
I was seeing a news piece about the earthquake in Pakistan when they said that the region affected was in the beginning of the Himalayas, and then I thought that in that region the earthquakes should be normal, because the Himalayas were formed by the compression of land that came from Africa against Asia.

Then I remembered another news item about the height of the Himalayas being less than it was supposed to be.

Then I realised that if the climate is getting wormer, the ice is melting from the mountains, the land that looses that weight of ice from top of it surely must rise some millimetres, at least, from its previous height.

In the Himalayas, that are the biggest mountain range in Earth, that loss of weight in a geologically unstable region surely must bring some earthquakes.

If that is true, then other regions where the mountains are loosing their eternal snows and regions were the ice is getting thinner must get some geological reactions too.

I do not know if there are reports of earthquakes in regions that are loosing its ice, and I do not even know if I am right in assuming that the weight of the ice is enough to geologically upset those places, but I would like to know if some of you can find something to prove that I am right or wrong.




posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Earthquakes are caused by ground lightning.

Orthodoxy has known this for a long time, why they cling to the sliding rock theory is a mystery.

Being electrical, anything that changes the electrical paths in the earth, or enhences th electrical activity will cause an earthquake.

bc
.



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by beforebc
Earthquakes are caused by ground lightning.


Ground lightning?

Could you explain this, I never heard anything about that.



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 09:47 AM
link   
To answer your question, "no."


Originally posted by ArMaP
I was seeing a news piece about the earthquake in Pakistan when they said that the region affected was in the beginning of the Himalayas, and then I thought that in that region the earthquakes should be normal, because the Himalayas were formed by the compression of land that came from Africa against Asia.


Erm... no. wrong geography. They come from the Indian subcontinent crashing against Asia.

Continents don't just slam into each other and stop -- they have momentum (just like when a car runs into the side of another car, they don't just abruptly stop. Their mass keeps them going in a new direction for awhile.) They are still moving together and haven't quit yet. This is one of the most active earthquake areas on the planet. It has been for a very long time.

We don't have a long record of the earthquakes because before modern communications, it was hard to get the news out. Whole villages destroyed, and the news would never get out.


Then I remembered another news item about the height of the Himalayas being less than it was supposed to be.


Better methods of measuring. You don't measure the Himalayas by standing on the top of something and dropping a plumb line off the top.


Then I realised that if the climate is getting wormer, the ice is melting from the mountains, the land that looses that weight of ice from top of it surely must rise some millimetres, at least, from its previous height.


It's a very slow rebound. Not enough to change that measurement.


In the Himalayas, that are the biggest mountain range in Earth, that loss of weight in a geologically unstable region surely must bring some earthquakes.

If that is true, then other regions where the mountains are loosing their eternal snows and regions were the ice is getting thinner must get some geological reactions too.


Not necessarily.


I do not know if there are reports of earthquakes in regions that are loosing its ice, and I do not even know if I am right in assuming that the weight of the ice is enough to geologically upset those places, but I would like to know if some of you can find something to prove that I am right or wrong.


No major earthquakes in Alaska (Pacific plate), which is losing a lot of ice. Ditto northern Russia and Siberia.

And no, earthquakes are not caused by ground lightning... otherwise we'd have earthquakes everywhere.



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 09:54 AM
link   
There have actually been a LOT of quakes (and big magnitude ones) in Alaska, and a lot in Russia/Siberia in the past 12 months, Byrd.

P.S. Need to qualify my "big" - over 5.0. Sorry.

[edit on 10-16-2005 by Valhall]



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd


Originally posted by ArMaP
I was seeing a news piece about the earthquake in Pakistan when they said that the region affected was in the beginning of the Himalayas, and then I thought that in that region the earthquakes should be normal, because the Himalayas were formed by the compression of land that came from Africa against Asia.


Erm... no. wrong geography. They come from the Indian subcontinent crashing against Asia.


No, not wrong geography, just bad English.

What I was trying to say was that the Indian subcontinent was once besides Africa, and the movement of the tectonic plates pushed it against the Eurasian plate.

Once more my poor use of the English language rears its ugly head.





Then I remembered another news item about the height of the Himalayas being less than it was supposed to be.


Better methods of measuring. You don't measure the Himalayas by standing on the top of something and dropping a plumb line off the top.


Then I realised that if the climate is getting wormer, the ice is melting from the mountains, the land that looses that weight of ice from top of it surely must rise some millimetres, at least, from its previous height.


It's a very slow rebound. Not enough to change that measurement.


After my first post I realised that if those measurements had anything to do with the melting of the ice, the Himalayas should be higher than before.



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Earthquake is in-ground lightning

Based on National Earthquake Information Center, U.S. Geological Survey observations since 1900, they say that several million earthquakes occur in the world each year. Many go undetected [they say] because they hit remote areas or have very small magnitudes.

Source: www.infoplease.com...

Many originate as deep as 400 miles. And we know from our own experience that shock waves [as sliding rock might produce] propagate in all directions. Shock waves from sliding rock does not propagate as arrows and hit in small areas like earthquake does.

only lightning hits that hard. On hitting the surface earthquake-lightning expands the silicon rich soil piezolectrically and faults generate from there.

bc
.

Earthquake is in-ground lightning, and they do what lightning does .. they shoot like arrows from 400 miles away [following fissures] and they hit downtown at First and Main.



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by beforebc
Earthquake is in-ground lightning

Based on National Earthquake Information Center, U.S. Geological Survey observations since 1900, they say that several million earthquakes occur in the world each year. Many go undetected [they say] because they hit remote areas or have very small magnitudes.

Source: www.infoplease.com...

Many originate as deep as 400 miles. And we know from our own experience that shock waves [as sliding rock might produce] propagate in all directions. Shock waves from sliding rock does not propagate as arrows and hit in small areas like earthquake does.

only lightning hits that hard. On hitting the surface earthquake-lightning expands the silicon rich soil piezolectrically and faults generate from there.

bc
.

Earthquake is in-ground lightning, and they do what lightning does .. they shoot like arrows from 400 miles away [following fissures] and they hit downtown at First and Main.


I may not know much about eathquakes, but I know that lightnings occur as they do because they are the discharge of electricity from one place to another across a non conductive material, like air.

To something like that to occur inside the Earth, the Earth must be made of a non conductive material in almost everywere and a conductive material in the places where the "lightining" would strike, so the electricity could pass from one place to the other.

As the difference in electrical conductivity in the Earth is very little, any internal current would flow easily across the Earth and not in great discharges like lightning.



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Then I remembered another news item about the height of the Himalayas being less than it was supposed to be.

Then I realised that if the climate is getting wormer, the ice is melting from the mountains, the land that looses that weight of ice from top of it surely must rise some millimetres, at least, from its previous height.

In the Himalayas, that are the biggest mountain range in Earth, that loss of weight in a geologically unstable region surely must bring some earthquakes.



The news piece you are referencing was about Mt. Everest. It is not shrinking, the older measurement was not as accurate as the latest one. The mountain was remeasured and the height was less than previously calculated. The Himalaya range is still rising.

This is a similar story to the Mt. St. Helens eruption, where an environmental group asserted the eruption occurred because of logging. It seems the weight of the trees was holding all that magma in, and when you removed the trees the lighter weight allowed the eruption to occur. sheesh!



I read an article a few months ago where a geophysicist was speculating that global warming may actually reduce the occurrence and severity of earthquakes. Time will tell.



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Global Warming Causes Earthquakes
Polar ice melt due to global warming, changes the gravity field of earth and effects plate tetonics. The sea floor pressures are increasing in equitorial regions and they're decreasing in polar zones. Redistribution of water from isostatic rebound and increased storm preciptation (flooding) from global warming can also cause earthquakes.

SATELLITES REVEAL A MYSTERY OF LARGE CHANGE IN EARTH'S GRAVITY FIELD- August 01, 2002
Scientists believe movements of mass cause this recent change from the high latitudes to the equator. Such large changes may be caused by climate change, but could also be part of normal long-period climatic variation. "The three areas that can trigger large changes in the Earth's gravitational field are oceans, polar and glacial ice, and atmosphere," Cox said.

Earth's Gravity Scar
A new ESA study predicts that the devastating Sumatran earthquake, which resulted in the tragic tsunami of 26 December 2004, will have left a 'scar' on Earth's gravity that could be detected by a sensitive new satellite, due for launch next year.

Global warming's surprising fallout
These pressures do push up high mountains where glaciers form - and the weight of the glaciers pushing down can stabilize the situation, if not eliminate the risk altogether. Remove that weight, and the likelihood of a quake goes up as the strain accumulates.

Pakistani quake toll estimated at 54,000
Torrential rains disrupted rescue operations in the Himalayan region of Kashmir on Sunday as Pakistani officials sharply raised their estimate of the death toll from last weekend’s mammoth earthquake to more than 54,000.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 03:12 PM
link   
So what causes these tectonic shifts to occur? The best guess would be heat, not only from the earth's core but possible cosmic rays (protons colliding in the earth's atmosphere with atoms releasing photons which pass by the nucleus of atoms creating positron-electron pairs which create either more photons or a violent collision of the two). Is it possible that an increase in the earth's surface temperature could cause an increase in the frequency and magnitude of quakes? I don't know for certain but I would guess so. You may want to take a college geophyics course and consult your professor.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Show me some data on your gamma ray bursts cause earthquakes analogy, would like to see them for research purposes.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Show me some data on your gamma ray bursts cause earthquakes analogy, would like to see them for research purposes.


It is not an analogy, just a hypothesis that the energy of cosmic ray particles may heat tectonic plates, helping to induce earthquakes (though I can't say on what level). Cosmic rays are known to impact earth's atmosphere and the surface, this is a form of energy.

But since you ask here are some links to cosmic rays with global warming and climate implications: www.sciencedaily.com...
www.tmgnow.com...

Certain cosmic ray particles are capable of penetrating into the earth's surface, though only a few feet as we know them to do. Whether this may lead to a significant temperature variation in tectonic plates (the main cause of tectonic shifts) remains to be seen.

This is just my hypothesis and if you want to run to your proffesor to use this as your doctoral, postdoc or sabattical thesis, be my guess, this is not what really interest me.

EDIT: I found these links after I posted my original statement. If you want to know, my original information came from reading a book called Geons, Blackholes and Quantum Foam by John A. Wheeler.

Knowing that the gamma ray (essentially photon as I remember if true) is a form of em radiation (again from what I remember if true), I thought they should be capable of escaping the earth's upper atmosphere (duh, we can see) and reaching the surface. Knowing from physics and chemistry classes that the gamma is the strongest of the three (alpha helium, beta electron) it is capable of passing through certain amounts of lead, which are not present at the earth's surface in abundant enought quantities to initially stop the photon upon contact.

So I figured they may be able to penetrate the earth's surface a bit. And after doing research I find that I can verify this with this websource stated in the 7th paragraph: www.physorg.com...

So, em radiation is leaking into the ground caused by, as Hans Bethe put it, the 'shower' affect (which I believe his theory is very debatable if I remember correctly, a few unexplained details, either he messed up or there are other particles and interactions we are unaware of). I am fairly certain that it is temperture variations which cause tectonic shifts, though I wouldn't know which kind are caused by which kind of variation or how much.

High energy extraterrestial particles strike the earth's atmosphere, penetrate towards the surface, penetrate the surface and become stationary a few feet below the surface causing a temperture variation. This may possibly cause temperture variations on a large enough scale from hours of exposure per day over billions of years to help in the tectonic shifts of earth.

I don't know the resting masses of protons or the quanta of photons and various other particles off the top of my head, so I can't go any further and I have school tomorrow. So wait till tomorrow if you want more.

[edit on 17-10-2005 by Frosty]

[edit on 17-10-2005 by Frosty]



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   
I really don’t have as much knowledge about earthquakes, as some of you who follow them constantly, obviously do. I do know the basics that I learned back in school about plate tectonics. I do have a question for your guys along these lines though. While I can understand the initial question about the loss of weight from ice allowing the plates to shift, I have a different scenario I am wondering about.

We have all seen that NASA has a satellite in orbit that has now confirmed that the earths energy levels are out of whack, and there is heat above what it should be per square yard, so what effect does that have on the expanding and contracting of various plates on the earth (of course depending on what each plate is primarily composed of). So let’s say we have a plate that is at the edge of a continent and it is much hotter then normal, it’s going to expand in size as it heats, is it not? Then we have the plate that is the continental shelf that is under the water and is not heating as fast or as much it will remain at its normal size. Would the result be that the expanding continental plate is going to rub on the stationary shelf plate and create friction? Or let say we have two plates, primarily granite, both expanding, then you are going to get definite friction at the point they meet, correct?

This would also seem to help correlate why tectonic activity increases when we have increases in solar storms, as this would cause an instant increase over the surface of entire plates at one time, would it not?

Or do you all think that the expansions and contraction of these plates overall (if this even occurs) is not of a significant amount to cause extra stress on the fault lines?

Sort of what we referred to as Chip Creep back in my electronics days... The difference in the expansion and contraction between two different metals can cause a microchip to slowly walk its way right out of the socket that holds it, breaking any solder holding it in place as it does.

[edit on 10/18/2005 by defcon5]
Sorry frosty, I think you might be saying the same thing, not 100% sure, but I started typing this then had to deal with an emergency at work and came back after you posted and finished my post without refreshing. Again, I am not sure if we are saying the exact same thing or not as we both seem to be saying that heat is a factor, but is it the expansion/contraction that is causing the stress, or what. Your post seems kind of vague on what causes the actual earthquakes.

[edit on 10/18/2005 by defcon5]



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 01:37 AM
link   
My theory on the cause of EarthQuakes...

1. The Earth's Electro-Magnetic Field -
This field is used to stabilize the earth and keep out the Sun's Radiation.
If there is a weakness in the Electro-Magnetic Field then the radiation will get through and permiate through the earth to the core, creating a core instability, which will cause the movement of Tectonic Plates.

2. The Moon, the planets, Comets, and Ateroids ...
will all have an impact on the Magnetic Field and controlled gravity of the Earth. The Moon is responsible for pulling our oceans and creating our tides... wouldn't the moon and other planets also have the ability to pull or tug on large floating bodies of earth that we call tectonic plates.

3. HAARP and other Tesla Technology including Scalar Rays
These technologies where designed to create Earth Quakes, to be used strategicly against our enemies, without fear of reprecussion. Natural Disasters happen...lol!

Just my 2 cents...



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 02:23 AM
link   
From what I've read there are actualy many things that cause quakes from high tides to the moon.

I read somewhere that if there is a high tide and full moon at the same time the chances of a quake is quite high.

But I'm sure the Earth changes we're going through is having an effect, global warming, magnetic changes etc...

Everything effects the Planet eventually.

But really I just think it's all the governments fault (just kidding, or maybe not?)

[edit on 18/10/2005 by ANOK]



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 02:32 AM
link   
Great stuff guys!

The "link" you're missing here is "complexity theory" I think - explains how many diffrent things work together (and out of proportion) in a complex system - and I just posted some info and links about it on my PODCAST: Quakes trigger Quakes. The info on complexity theory is one podcast and also one 2 posts..


regenbacher - great links - thanks. ...Here's one for you - I'm looking for info indicating that there's a positive feedback loop between internal (earth sourced) electromagnetic waves and external (solar sourced) magnetic radiation.

Interesting study using satellite data:

"Wide area around the future epicenter reaches a metastable state, and the system turns to be very sensitive to small external actions. The concept of SOC does not contradict to the concept of dilatation. However it assumes that significantly greater region is involved during the last stages of the earthquake preparation as the dilatation theory implies....during the last stages of earthquake formation, fractures emit electromagnetic waves with increasing frequency able to penetrate into the ionosphere and magnetosphere, ..."
CHANGES IN GEOLOGICAL FAULTS ASSOCIATED WITH EARTHQUAKES


.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow


The "link" you're missing here is "complexity theory" I think - explains how many diffrent things work together (and out of proportion) in a complex system -


.


another one of the 'many different things' which can cause earthquakes
is the outgassing found in the deep layers of the crust.

the heat from the mantle region, causes the trapped gasses and hydrocarbons to rise toward the surface...these gasses & petroleum rise along fissures and even pool & collect in chambers which are created.

caves, & voids in chambers where gas &/or oils have migrated from, even underground salt domes (appox. 500 along the Gulf Coast TX to FL)
are parts of that 'complexity theory'....[at least i think so]
its just that the Tectonics Model is the -giant blanket- which covers all these other minor causes (which tend to get lost & overwhelmed by plate-tectonics as the acceptable answer to 'earthquake cause')

~~...............~~

i think the underground-lightning model, peizoelectric & quatrz,
is rather a result of the stress & sudden movement of earth & rock which is under pressure....and not the cause or initiator of an earthquake.

for ages in humans history, man has known that there is a 'network' of underground energy lines of energy known as Ley-Lines...
there could be a connection or a relationship with these ley-lines and certain spots on the earth, aka 'vortices'...and the latent or potential energies trapped in quartz & silicates )peizoelectric???
and in a metaphysical rather than scientific sense act as 'tunnels' or conduits for electromagnetic energies to transfer from the atmosphere and space to/from the internal earth.
could this be ?another precurser or progenitor of earthquake activity??
that is; another 'little-something', along with gravity fluxuations+heat+lubrications+et al... that contribute to the plate-tectonics movements



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by St Udio

another one of the 'many different things' which can cause earthquakes
is the outgassing found in the deep layers of the crust.

the heat from the mantle region, causes the trapped gasses and hydrocarbons to rise toward the surface...these gasses & petroleum rise along fissures and even pool & collect in chambers which are created.

caves, & voids in chambers where gas &/or oils have migrated from, even underground salt domes (appox. 500 along the Gulf Coast TX to FL)
are parts of that 'complexity theory'....[at least i think so]




Thanks, St U - but links, please I need links.







its just that the Tectonics Model is the -giant blanket- which covers all these other minor causes (which tend to get lost & overwhelmed by plate-tectonics as the acceptable answer to 'earthquake cause')



The tectonic plate model is supposed to be part of complexity theory - which was developed to explain and predict earthquakes.

...But now, too much info is buried - and broad-ranging discussion is "discouraged" - tells me there's a cover-up.





i think the underground-lightning model, peizoelectric & quatrz,
is rather a result of the stress & sudden movement of earth & rock which is under pressure....and not the cause or initiator of an earthquake.




Seems to be what the paper above says - but - could also initiate a positive feedback loop under certain circumstances, no?





for ages in humans history, man has known that there is a 'network' of underground energy lines of energy known as Ley-Lines...
there could be a connection or a relationship with these ley-lines and certain spots on the earth, aka 'vortices'...and the latent or potential energies trapped in quartz & silicates )peizoelectric???
and in a metaphysical rather than scientific sense act as 'tunnels' or conduits for electromagnetic energies to transfer from the atmosphere and space to/from the internal earth.



Hmmm. For example, certain geological factors create "lens structures" that focus and amplify seismic waves (see my Quakes thread) - so it may turn out that "Ley lines" can be explained physically, not just metaphysically.





could this be ?another precurser or progenitor of earthquake activity??
that is; another 'little-something', along with gravity fluxuations+heat+lubrications+et al... that contribute to the plate-tectonics movements




Why not? "Self-Organized Criticality" (SOC) says that any complex system reaches a state of precarious organization and balance where even the slightest perturbations can compromise the system - and the study linked above seems to describe that phenomenon in Peru...


.



posted on Oct, 18 2005 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frosty
This is just my hypothesis and if you want to run to your proffesor to use this as your doctoral, postdoc or sabattical thesis, be my guess, this is not what really interest me.

Thanks for the feedback, Frosty. For me, osmosing this type of data is more in lines as an autodictact, like Yngwie Malmsteen


I'm still looking for new model data that directly links space weather to terrestrial activity, so I guess we still have to go with observation and correlation til then. The localized systems like the sun and thunderstorms also produce gamma rays and gravity waves, and these phenomena may be precursor events for earthquakes also.

Cosmic Rays May Help Predict Earthquakes

They found that six earthquakes had struck the site in the last 24,000 years, and were able to date them to 400, 1,700, 2,600, 7,000, 20,300 and 23,800 years ago. The estimates are accurate to within 400-3,000 years.

Knowing the pattern of timing of past earthquakes at a particular fault may help in predicting when the next one will hit. "This approach has the potential for predicting large earthquakes along major faults, especially if the earthquakes are not very frequent, and many major faults fall into this category," Zreda says.

Gamma Ray Bursts, Gravity Waves, and Earthquakes*
Was the December 26, 2004 Indonesian Earthquake and Tsunami
Caused by a Stellar Explosion 45,000 Light Years Away?

*Note that the GRB detection occured after the earthquake, so the theory here is that "gravity waves" associated with a GRB would procede the detection of it.
9.0 tsunami quake N. Sumatra: December 26, 2004 at 00:58:53 UTC
Record gamma ray burst: December 27 at 21:30:26 UTC


Real time GRB date here:
grb.sonoma.edu...
cr0.izmiran.rssi.ru...
grad40.as.utexas.edu...
www.aavso.org...

Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory*
www.ligo.caltech.edu...
*Still looking for more realtime data monitoring in regards to detecting gravity waves.

Tama Seismic Monitor
(Japanese Interferometric Gravitational-Wave Project)
tamago.mtk.nao.ac.jp...
tamago.mtk.nao.ac.jp...


Towards purposing a hypothesis: Gravitational effects from large space collosions, supernova, black hole formation, pulsars, magnetars, solar hard x-ray events, etc. are more likely to cause earthquakes than electromagnetic irradiance from gamma ray bursts.




top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join