It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I have been predicting earthquakes since June 20, 1990, when I observed a long line-shaped cloud with a tail pointing in the northwest direction. 18 hours later, a magnitude 7.7 earthquake struck Iran, and killed or injured 370,000 people. Because the earthquake was the only one bigger than 7 to the northwest of my hometown Hangzhou (30.3 N, 120 E), China, for 333 days from May 31, 1990 to April 28, 1991, I believed that there must be a strong relationship between the cloud and the earthquake. As long as the epicenter was not located by Kagida's law, but on where the cloud's tail pointed toward, I believed that the method of earthquake clouds should not have been abandoned. Since I heard no report of a successful prediction, I felt my duty to develop the method.
According to more than 100 cases of my reliable records and predictions, earthquakes always follow within 49 days of the appearance of the cloud. The other 9 predictions were incorrect due to my inexperience and inability to determine the precise origin of an earthquake cloud. For example, the 6.2 Mexico earthquake on January 30, 1995 * had been predicted in Southern California just by my estimate, but the probability including the missed place is only 5.6 %.
underground water percolates into the crevices. Its expansion, contraction, friction and chemistry further reduce the cohesion. Friction heats the water and eventually generates vapor at high temperature and high pressure. The vapor erupts from an impending hypocenter to the surface through the crevices, and rises up. It forms an “Earthquake Cloud” on encountering cold air, or dissipates part of a cloud to form a cloudless space, denoted Geothermal Eruption or “Geoeruption”. The both have two basic properties: sudden appearance with heat and pressure, and a fixed vapor source in the ground, by which they can be distinguished from weather phenomena. Afterward, the yield strength of the rock drops sharply. Once it drops sufficiently, the rock yields or an earthquake occurs.
An earthquake can be predicted by three reasons. First, the tail of a vapor precursor points toward an impending epicenter, so the epicenter can be predicted. Second, the bigger the mass of the vapor, the larger the magnitude, so the magnitude can be predicted by comparing the mass with formers, whose magnitudes are in an earthquake catalog. Third, a statistic among over 500 events shows 112 days as the longest duration from vapor eruptions to relevant subsequences and 30 days as the average, so the time can be predicted.
Originally posted by soma_pills
Also, just saw this 2.6 in NV near Lovelock. Screen shot in case it gets deleted.
Originally posted by pynner
reply to post by questioningall
Thanks for the info on the earthquake clouds... but it's been discussed to death in here.. we know about them and see them from time to time.
Might I suggest taking some time to familiarize your self with the thread.. just so we don't get a bunch of duplicate info on here.
we know about the clouds.
we know about the water.
we know about animals.
Originally posted by soma_pills
reply to post by pynner
I like to think that some of the deletes are for valid reasons. P-wave from a distant quake triggering a false reading for example. But the fact that certain areas seem to be hotbeds for deletes just seems odd. Why Nevada so darn much?
Having not gone through the entire thread, has anyone ever emailed the USGS? I'm 0 for 1 with emails to them but would be happy to see what the official word is if no one has asked before.
Originally posted by observe50
Nice sized 7.3 East of the Kuril Islands
Some big ones lately I think they are needed so nothing life shattering would happen here on Earth.
Date-Time Thursday, January 15, 2009 at 19:10:02 UTC
Thursday, January 15, 2009 at 12:10:02 PM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location 40.948°N, 106.922°W
Depth 5 km (3.1 miles) set by location program
Distances 31 km (19 miles) SSW (201°) from Grand Encampment, WY
32 km (20 miles) SSW (201°) from Riverside, WY
52 km (33 miles) E (100°) from Dixon, WY
53 km (33 miles) N (351°) from Steamboat Springs, CO
161 km (100 miles) WNW (286°) from Fort Collins, CO
214 km (133 miles) NW (310°) from Denver, CO
Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 9.7 km (6.0 miles); depth fixed by location program
Parameters NST= 13, Nph= 13, Dmin=85.8 km, Rmss=1.45 sec, Gp= 65°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=R
Source USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)