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.

 

3 huge Earthquakes, 3 big disruptions in magnetosphere!!!

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 03:04 AM
link   
What do you think about this?

No Niribu comments please.
I would appreciate a scientific explanation.

3 big magnetosphere disruptions.
3 big earthquakes (M 8.0 or bigger)

One day before Chile earthquake (2010)


One day before Sumatra earthquake (2004)


On the days of the Padang and Samoa earthquakes (2009)


Spaceweather was apparently calm on these 3 days.

What strikes me is magnetic alterations BEFOREthe huge earthquakes.




posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Nice, star and flag for gathering some interesting information!

I have no experience in this, and i can't say if this always happens, but maybe earthquakes release signals before they occur?

If not, HAARP maybe, but saying that possibility on this site has turned into a biased thing.

Last but not least, Nibiru



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 03:29 AM
link   
Those "disruptions" seen in the simulator are the result of very calm solar winds taking a northern orientation. It is actually the magnetosphere taking on its normal shape.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Doesn't do much to help the geomagnetic storm/earthquake connection.

[edit on 4/7/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by segurelha
 


The 'dyno' of our planet (iron core spinning within an iron-rich crust) creates a magnetic field, that is the nature of Earth's structure. Our magnetic field is a reflection of what our core is doing in relation to our crust/magma. When there's a shift within our 'dyno' our magnetic field will show it. And any shift within the 'dyno' also means ripples within our magma and our crust, ripples in our crust=earthquakes.
Shifts in our core, magma or crust are simply caused by the fact that the magma is not a uniform fluid and the core is not perfectly round, so the motion between them is not always smooth. When a shift occurs, the magnetic field will show it.
There will be magnetic tell-tale signs before 100% of earthquakes. Only problem is, ya can't predict the location of the quake.
The solar system's, sun's and galaxy's magnetic fields also influence ours, so any external magnetic forces can also cause earthquakes here in the reverse order that our earth causes them. i.e. the magnetic field shifts the earth's core/magma/crust and causes the quake.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 03:55 AM
link   
very interesting. the best way to test your theory is to see if you can predict an earthquake happening based on the magnetosphere fluctuations.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 03:56 AM
link   
I would expect to see alot more earthquakes in the near future. There have been talk about the cracks in the earth, how do you say, waking up I think. Its creating a ripple effect and scientist are saying that even the small ones under New York could start causing problems.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by nevermindme
 

The Earth's magnetic field is produced by the liquid outer core which is composed of nearly pure iron and nickel, 1,800 miles beneath the crust. Between it and the crust is the mantle which is in a more or less solid state. Between the mantle and the crust is a very thin layer, parts of which consist of magma. Magma, in general is not very magnetic. Try going to a lava flow sometime with a magnet and you'll find that out.


The strength of Earth's magnetic field at the earth's surface is at its strongest near the poles and at its weakest near the equator. At the poles its strength is over 60 microteslas and at the equator its about half that.

For a comparison, a refrigerator magnet (a strong one) has a strength of .01 tesla, more that 160 times more powerful than the Earth's field at the poles.

At the peak of the recent geomagnetic storm the magnetometer at Boulder, Colorado recorded a fluctuation of about 125 nanoteslas. That is .125 microteslas, 1/480th of the strength of the magnetic field at the equator and 80,000 times less powerful than that refrigerator magnet.

The actual magnetic fluctuations produced by a geomagnetic storm are minuscule. They cannot move barely magnetic magma and if they have any (very tiny) effect on the liquid outer core it is so deep that it could have nothing to do with the shifting of faults (though 1,800 miles of rock) which causes earthquakes.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by gandhi

Last but not least, Nibiru


Star and a long-distance high-five!



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I am aware of that, thanks.
The tiny fluctuations are all that is required to move the magma or the core. The gause may be weak but the field itself is enormous.
The field around a fridge magnet is about six inches across, the field around the earth is about 30 000 kilometres across. A small movement in the field causes a small movment of everything in the field. Spin a magnet arund a fridge magnet and the fridge magnet moves, even though the force required to move it is not adequate. Same principle with the earth.
The field may weak, but it is enormous. It is more than sufficient to affect the planet's structure.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:24 AM
link   
reply to post by nevermindme
 

If that were the case, whenever there was a geomagnetic storm every magnetic compass on the planet would show it. This does not happen. It requires very sensitive instruments to detect the changes.

Earthquakes do not originate in the Earth's core, they originate in the lithosphere. Magma, even magma which is very high in iron content is not magnetic. The Curie temperature of magnetite is about 580º C. The temperature of magma is in the neighborhood of 625º to 1200º. Magma is not magnetic, nor is the molten iron of the outer core.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:24 AM
link   
I've been telling folks this for years. Our sun has a direct impact on our planet... and you have marvelously provided additional proof to folks about whats been explained.

I even predicted that the next major Earth Shattering event was going to be the advent of crustal displacement due to a off the chart C.M.E...

So far, since that public prediction we've had an increase in Solar output, and five additional Major (above magnitude 7.0) Earthquakes... Chile, Japan, Pakistan, Mexico, and now Sumatra.

The only thing left to expect now is for the volcanoes to blow...



Boy... I sure hope to GOD He capped YellowStone good and tight that last eruption!



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Yea, ok phage. Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. Try doing some study before debunking people. You may find it saves you face.

The two metals in a dyno are not magnetic, but when they move in relation one another thy create a magnetic field. Just like the core and the magma.
Or is that wrong? Phage.

No one said magma was magnetic, no one said the core was magnetic.
You come up with this crap on your own and try to make others look as though they don't know, it doesnt work phage. We see through it. Stop using the internet for tidbits of info and try actually learning something, it may save you fro looking like a fool.

[edit on 7-4-2010 by nevermindme]

[edit on 7-4-2010 by nevermindme]



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:40 AM
link   


PHAGE!!! (kills bugs dead....)

Phage is a pretty intelligent kinda guy, I enjoy his rebuttals. =)



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 04:46 AM
link   
reply to post by DarkspARCS
 


So do I.

But he only seems intelligent because he spends ALL day on ats so he has time to butt in to EVERY thread that there is, and he gets ALL his info from the internet as and when he needs it, thus creating the illusion of knowing-it-all.

Don't idolise phage, he's just a guy sitting at home on the net. Like you and me. Don't take what he says as gospel. He seems to put words into the mouths of others and then he targets those words in his rebuttals, he's a trawler. I've been watching him.

That said, I do enjoy his posts.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by nevermindme
reply to post by Phage
 


The two metals in a dyno are not magnetic, but when they move in relation one another thy create a magnetic field. Just like the core and the magma.
Or is that wrong? Phage.

No one said magma was magnetic, no one said the core was magnetic.
You come up with this crap on your own and try to make others look as though they don't know, it doesnt work phage. We see through it. Stop using the internet for tidbits of info and try actually learning something, it may save you fro looking like a fool.


If the magma is not magnetic and the core is not magnetic, how can a magnetic field cause either one to move? Can that refrigerator magnet move a piece of aluminum?



The tiny fluctuations are all that is required to move the magma or the core. The gause may be weak but the field itself is enormous.



[edit on 4/7/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Oh my GOD phage.

They don't move because a magnetic field makes them move, they move because the planet was spinning as a process of it's creation. Thus, there are already moving, spinning. So, they therefore create a magnetic field.
Now, when THAT magnetic field is influenced, the whole 'dyno' moves. And vice-versa, when the 'dyno' moves the magnetic field is influenced.
Get it?



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:28 AM
link   
I know from doing a little braizing of metals.

That when you heat steel to red hot a magnet will no longer stick to it.

That is how we knew the metal was hot enough to braize.

So I guess what Iam saying is that the magma being molten would loose it magnetic qualities.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by segurelha

Spaceweather was apparently calm on these 3 days.



Actually, I already researched the Chile and Indian Ocean tsunami earthquakes and found out that spaceweather WAS NOT quiet... one minute. Let me get the links for you.

Earthquake Information: "2010 Chile earthquake 2010-2-27 06:34"
www.spaceweather.com...

Solar Activity Information: "Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) images bracket the eruption between 0719 UT and 1919 UT on Feb. 24th. The event did not produce a bright solar flare, as sometimes happens when filaments erupt, but there was a coronal mass ejection (CME). SOHO coronagraphs observed at least one and possibly as many as three clouds billowing away from the sun: movie. If any of this material is heading for Earth--a big unknown!--it would arrive on Feb. 27th or 28th. Arctic sky watchers should be alert for auroras on those dates."
www.spaceweather.com...

HAITI EARTHQUAKE
Earthquake Information: "12 January 2010 Earthquake"
en.wikipedia.org...

Solar Activity Information:
"A solar wind stream flowing from the indicated coronal hole should reach Earth on Jan. 12th or 13th. Credit: SOHO Extreme UV "
www.spaceweather.com...

I noticed these correlations on accident, and then decided to look at other major seismic activity in the past.

-------Past Events-----

2004 ASIAN TSUNAMI
Earthquake Information: "The 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake was an undersea megathrust earthquake that occurred at 00:58:53 UTC on December 26, 2004"]
en.wikipedia.org...

Solar Activity Information:
"Earth is glidng through a solar wind stream flowing from the indicated coronal hole. December 26, 2004."
www.spaceweather.com...



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:35 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


Although spaceweather does look calm around September 30, 2009 so that should be taken into account.



posted on Apr, 7 2010 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by nevermindme
reply to post by Phage
 


Oh my GOD phage.

They don't move because a magnetic field makes them move, they move because the planet was spinning as a process of it's creation. Thus, there are already moving, spinning. So, they therefore create a magnetic field.
Now, when THAT magnetic field is influenced, the whole 'dyno' moves. And vice-versa, when the 'dyno' moves the magnetic field is influenced.
Get it?



Well then I guess you confused me when you said this:



The tiny fluctuations are all that is required to move the magma or the core. The gause may be weak but the field itself is enormous.
The field around a fridge magnet is about six inches across, the field around the earth is about 30 000 kilometres across. A small movement in the field causes a small movment of everything in the field. Spin a magnet arund a fridge magnet and the fridge magnet moves, even though the force required to move it is not adequate. Same principle with the earth.
The field may weak, but it is enormous. It is more than sufficient to affect the planet's structure.

It sounded to me like you were saying fluctuations in the Earth's magnetic field cause magma and/or the iron in the core to move, causing earthquakes.
I apologize for misunderstanding.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join