reply to post by MamaJ
good to hear from you.
Thanks for the link to that article. You've asked for my thoughts so I'll give them. (But be warned: I haven't finished my
second coffee yet!)
Okay, first off: the article is from Sorcha Faal -- often referred to as "Sucha Fail", who in the past has been known as a hoaxer of the highest (or
lowest) order. So, that got my alarm bells ringing right away. However, just because someone has cried "Wolf!" many times in the past, it doesn't mean
that she or he is doing so this time, so I read the whole thing.
Sorcha Faal refers to a "disturbing report" prepared by Moscow's IPE (IFZ in the original language), telling us that it is circulating in the Kremlin.
Faal gives several links in the article and yes, they all check out as being what they appear to be. The quakes referred to did occur, there is such a
fault, there is a MODIS satellite under the aegis of NASA, and heating of the ionosphere above the region where the March 11, 2011 tsunami hit, did in
fact occur and has been documented and reported (and also in threads on ATS).
So yes, we have links to known events and information. But the only link that I really
wanted was one that would let me read a copy of the IPE
report that Faal quotes from -- and that link is not given. Nor are the relevant sections of the report quoted in full. There is just the odd phrase
here and there, with Faal's added info. True, we have a link to the IPE, but I've searched the site and that particular report is not there and I
could find no reference either to the report itself or even a summary of its findings. So, I don't know who did the research for the report, who
headed the research team (and hence takes first "naming rights" in the report -- very important in the academic world), or anything else.
My wife speaks Russian so I asked her to look through the site and she couldn't find anything about it either.
That leaves us with a few possibilities. Here are four that come to mind right now:
1) The report may be genuine, but has not been published (and therefore is not mentioned on the IPE website) and is only being privately circulated to
certain people in the Kremlin. Question: in that case, how did Sorcha Faal get this information? One has to wonder! Further, spies being everywhere,
you'd have to suspect that the US Govt also has got their hands on a copy. If the US PTB have a copy and the report is considered accurate and
reliable, what are they doing about it, if anything?
2) The report may be genuine, but Faal doesn't have a complete, unadulterated and unredacted copy of it to hand. In this case, the rather precise
details that were given to
Faal may be accurate, but could also be understated or overstated.
3) The report may be false, meaning that it exists but is not based on real research and has been fabricated by someone (or an organization) then
given to Faal to disseminate, perhaps to deflect the attention of the public and the MSM away from other, very real and serious matters.
To be honest, I find it remarkable that the report's findings (as Faal gives them), would be made within such a short space of time after the most
recent quake event it used as a basis for study. I find it even more remarkable that a full report (including what amounts to a prediction) would get
circulated in such a short time. A synopsis of the findings and perhaps some private meetings with certain high-ups -- yes. But a full report? Very
4) The report does not exist at all and Faal's article is a fabrication, carefully constructed around checkable facts (with valid links) to lend it an
air of credibility. Faal has done this before and there are numerous threads on ATS now languishing in the Hoax bin that were written up on the basis
of Faal's articles.
My own feelings? Well, I seriously doubt that a mag 6.2 quake, at almost three magnitudes lower in energy release than Japan's mag 9.0 of March 11,
2011, would cause anything like the ionospheric heating that preceded the huge quake. As for the mag 4.1 quake referred to, I doubt even more that
such a small event could cause “extreme” atmospheric temperature variations. The energy released would be very localized and nowhere near the
scale of the Japan event -- and this would still apply even if the energy (for atmospheric heating) was greater than normal. Compared to a mag 4.1,
the Japan quake was about 79,000 times bigger in terms of "shaking" and more than 22 million
times stronger in terms of its energy release!
So, I'm dubious. But if we could get a copy of the IPE report -- if it exists -- then we can run it past our resident "quake geeks" and see what they
say. We could also contact some people who are professionals in such things and seek their opinions.
Okay, run out of room. Thanks for reading.
edit on 24/1/12 by JustMike because: typos