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.

 

Three Gorges Dam in China–Largest in World – Serious Problems? Affects the Whole Earth

page: 9
143
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I actually seek out your posts in threads like these, thank-you, for the detailed response and for the civility and decorum in not acknowledging / reciprocating her name calling.

While I comprehend your explanantion about the sun's distance bearing little affect on gravitational pull, and the slight increase of pull due to "super moons", I need to ask something. Do any other factors play a part in an increase in gravitational pull? Such as planetary alignment, or coronal impact on the magnetosphere?

I asked in a previous thread about planetary alignment impacting the magnetosphere and the anwer was "No", but what of gravitational pull?

Does this question make sense?

FWIW, I too believe nothing will happen to the dam during this eclipse / super moon, but why miss an opportunity to learn something about the hows and they whys.




posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by helpmefindtheway
 

Jupiter and Neptune are pretty close to being "aligned" with Earth but they are far too distant to have any effect. Jupiter is more than 4 times as far away as the Sun is, Neptune is 29 times (
) as far away. Jupiter is exerting about .006% as much gravity as the Sun is and Neptune .000006%. But as I said before, the gravity gradient is what is most important. Because the planets are so distant, the gravity gradient at earth is not noticeable. Venus and Mars are sort of, but not very, close to being aligned and are about 90º away from Jupiter and Neptune. But none of the planets are near enough and massive enough to have any effect, aligned or not.

Activity in the magnetosphere has no effect on gravity in general or on tides specifically.


Edit: For "fun" I worked out the actual difference in tidal forces:
Jupiter exerts .00067% the influence of the Moon, Neptune exerts .0000001%


[edit on 7/21/2009 by Phage]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Hello Phage, well the big sun is about to be blocked out by the little moon. and nothing is to come of it... dam. Again all this hype and nothing. I see a trend here. Say Phage you seem to have a good grip on the solar system stuff ... do you think there is any link to earthquakes and the moon..



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   


I posted this in the eclipse thread, may have some relevance here. The Magnetosphere sim has gone skitz. And shortly after the site goes down so it's getting hammered for views too I guess!

Edit: until the site comes back you wont be able to see the image, but it's very interesting to say the least!

[edit on 21/7/2009 by OvernightGuy]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy
 

There just aren't any convincing statistical correlations or patterns between the phases of the moon or the orbit of the moon to indicate a direct correspondence. Tidal effects do affect the crust of the Earth but the effects are over a very wide area, generally distributing the stresses evenly. The stresses in themselves would probably not be great enough to cause earthquakes but combine them with an unstable fault and it would be silly to say that they could not trigger movement of the fault. There are just so many other things going on though that a direct relationship cannot be found. Very large earthquakes may happen at lunar perigee, but they also happen at apogee and everywhere in between. They happen during full moons as well as quarter moons.

I think there may be a relationship but I don't think it's possible to say that the Moon can cause earthquakes.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy
 

Tidal effects do affect the crust of the Earth but the effects are over a very wide area, generally distributing the stresses evenly.


The tides do not affect plate tectonics, plate tectonics have a greater effect on tides in the form of water displacement. Plates don't move according to the moon, they move in accordance to divergence zones spreading plates apart and continental plates subducting the oceanic plates. The moon merely moves the water that sits on top of the basalt.


The stresses in themselves would probably not be great enough to cause earthquakes but combine them with an unstable fault and it would be silly to say that they could not trigger movement of the fault.


Its plate movement that creates earthquakes. Once again, the moon doesn't affect the Earth in that way.

[quote[There are just so many other things going on though that a direct relationship cannot be found. Very large earthquakes may happen at lunar perigee, but they also happen at apogee and everywhere in between. They happen during full moons as well as quarter moons.

I think there may be a relationship but I don't think it's possible to say that the Moon can cause earthquakes.

A moon is a moon. Plate tectonics are plate tectonics. They are unrelated.



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks for the number crunching.

It certainly puts things in perspective!

I'm a little disppointed that I've been robbed of my full moon / super moon excuse to be an "irrational, moody pain in the...girl"

I'll find another reason


Cheers



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Dnevnoi
 


That isn't entirely true. There is a moon of Jupiter I believe that is cracked all over and such due to the gravity of Jupiter. Of course, the size of jupiter and the size of that moon is a huge difference compared to our moon and the earth, considering it's the moon that cracks, not the planet.

So there has to be some relevance to it.

I think the question is really if it's enough to actually cause it. And I'd have to think it's not. Maybe if it was already on the verge of having an earthquake, the tiny extra force might push it over, but it would have happened anyway. In the same line of thinking a cow could fart and "cause" an earthquake as it was just enough to push it over. In reality, cows still don't cause earthquakes.





[edit on 7/21/2009 by badmedia]



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 
damned dam...the solution? put a counterweight on the other side of the planet, another mega dam.


well, the eclipse has come and gone and there's no "leak in the dike" event. mods, shall you be putting up those [HOAX] tags that are becoming ever so familiar here on ATS?



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 01:34 AM
link   
Someone on here had suggested that we just make a whole new subforum for all of these threads from QA, and call it "failed predictions". I thought that was a good idea.





posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by reject
 

Too much wiggle room.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 01:53 AM
link   
So, since i was not online during the eclipse, did the dam fall on their heads yet killing thousands, or not?



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dimitrios
So, since i was not online during the eclipse, did the dam fall on their heads yet killing thousands, or not?


neah, just a few hundreds of millions pondering why the sky became dark like night



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 02:45 AM
link   
Suprise Suprise, nothing happened!
Just the same as nothing happened with the 7/7 crop circle solar storm prediction.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 02:49 AM
link   
I'm curious as to how we get an earth wobble from such a relatively insignificant mass of water. From what I've calculated, the mass of the water in the reservoir is 6 trillionths of the mass of the earth (6 x 10^-12).

Earth's mass is ~ 6 x 10^24 kilograms. The water in the reservoir is around 40 billion cubic meters, with a mass of around 40 trillion kilograms (40 x 10^12 kg).

If you put this in more familiar terms, if an ordinary car represents the earth, the mass we're taking about would be about 9 micrograms. That's 9 x 10^-6 grams, That's pretty much like saying a gnat would make your car wobble.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 03:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Witness2008
 

Your first link is to a PhysicsWorld.com article about neutron emissions during earthquakes. The only reference in the article to astronomical influences on seismic events is this short passage:


To back their theory, the researchers analysed data collected over 28 years from the Pacific 'ring of fire' - a region of intense earthquake activity. They found that the most severe earthquakes took place around the time of a new moon or a full moon.

Tellingly, it has nothing to do with the rest of the article.

Your second link is to an article published in 1914. If there was a clear connexion between the moon and earthquakes, 105 years'-worth of data would have established it by now, don't you think? Many have sought a link between moon phases, syzygies, planetary alignments, etc., and earthquakes, but none has been found.

Can the moon cause earthquakes? The US Geophysical Survey says no.

There is evidence that gravity may influence seismic activity, but it's Earth's gravity - as you might expect - not another celestial body's.

It is clearer that earthquakes influence gravity. But that's another can of worms altogether.



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
If the op makes so many crazy posts, then why do you people bother to read them?

Because we feel a responsibility towards sanity and truth. Those with less knowlege of these matters may read the OP's nonsense, believe it, and become unnecessarily alarmed. They may also pass the misinformation on to others.

I know we are supposed to criticize the post, not the poster, but I feel this member's contributions go against the common interest. And I don't just mean the common interest of ATS members.

Call it intellectual crimefighting.

questioningall, how do you feel now that another of your fantastical predictions has bitten the dust? Care to share?



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
I read 5 consecutive posts + a video that led to the conclusion that the dam was going to fail during a solar eclipse, but not one post on why it didn't fail. I demand an explanat - oh wait, none of the 5 posts contain any arguments supporting the theory of the dam failing, so how did he reach that conclusion? Very informative though.

@Evasius: Before we hit July 23, mind explaining your Timewave Zero algorithm? Why would it be more accurate than random guessing? Will you not post any more Timewave Zero predictions if your July 23 one fails?



[edit on 22-7-2009 by daniel_g]



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
@Astyanax and others who are criticizing Questioningall ...

Pray tell - what exactly is it that he ostensibly predicted and it didn't happen?


Here's something to mull over "Blowing out another person's candle doesn't make yours shine any brighter".



posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by daniel_g
I read 5 consecutive posts + a video that led to the conclusion that the dam was going to fail during a solar eclipse, but not one post on why it didn't fail. I demand an explanat - oh wait, none of the 5 posts contain any arguments supporting the theory of the dam failing, so how did he reach that conclusion? Very informative though.

@Evasius: Before we hit July 23, mind explaining your Timewave Zero algorithm? Why would it be more accurate than random guessing? Will you not post any more Timewave Zero predictions if your July 23 one fails?



[edit on 22-7-2009 by daniel_g]
If you read the thread , from what Indian said we still have 300 + days.
And the dam did fail they are trying to do repairs now, they called in that Dutch boy and some of his friends, we will have to see what happens.



new topics

top topics



 
143
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join