Major 7.0-magnitude earthquake hits Papua New Guinea

Major 7.0-magnitude earthquake hits Papua New Guinea

news.yahoo.com

PORT MORESBY (AFP) – A major 7.0-magnitude earthquake struck a remote mountainous region of the Pacific nation of Papua New Guinea on Thursday, seismologists said, causing panic but no initial damage or injuries.

The quake hit a sparsely populated area of the island of New Britain at 8:01 am (2201 GMT Wednesday) at a depth of 54 kilometres, the US Geological Survey (USGS) and the Papua New Guinea Earthquake Office said.

"We are not aware of any damage at this point, but it was pretty strongly felt in the town of Kimbe and on other parts of the island, people are really shaken up," se

(visit the link for the full news article)

I believe we all saw this coming after NASA announcements regarding the sun sports and upcoming visible northern lights throughout most of Canada and other countries...


Sunspots = Solar Flares = Magnetic Field Shift = Shifting Ocean and Jet Stream Currents = Extreme Global Changing Weather= Earthquakes= Volcanic Eruptions



[edit on 4-8-2010 by CanadianDream420]

reply to post by CanadianDream420


Definitely the sun, and we are coming up on a powerful new Leo moon.

Could get bumpy

Star and Flag

Yep, you are correct about the recent sloar flares and the Northern lights....

and the upcoming quakes...

But i've a feeling that a more significant quake is to come

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
Sunspots = Solar Flares = Magnetic Field Shift = Shifting Ocean and Jet Stream Currents = Extreme Global Changing Weather= Earthquakes= Volcanic Eruptions
[edit on 4-8-2010 by CanadianDream420]

If you changed = to (may or may not =) I would be right in there with you. I think the sun spots and general activity are a significant factor, but it's still only a theory. (IMHO)

[edit on 4-8-2010 by network dude]

reply to post by CanadianDream420

Do you think it would be difficult to locate another 7.0 earthquake during which there was no unusual geomagnetic activity?

When it is considered that the aftershocks are also included in the number of earthquakes which have been taken into the comparison, in the area within the given coordinates, there is no finding that shows that the earthquakes occur as a result of a triggering under the effect of geomagnetic storm. In order to mention such a finding, more number of earthquakes should occur with percentages that correspond to geomagnetic storms. This is not verified by the results.

www.ciencias.unal.edu.co...


[edit on 8/4/2010 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


I know what your saying phage, and you are entitled to your scientifically correct opinion, definetly more plausible than what were trying to say but, I can't help but see a corellation, I really can't, unless the last 7-8 month's have been pure coincedances, CME's seem to coincide with large earthquakes, earthquakes at yellowstone and the re-ignition of volcanoes.

Something we just can't prove I think, but surely theres some way the CME's can add addition energy to our atmosphere somehow over exciting the earth's magnetic field thus causing increased plate activity? Something along those lines.

Who know's eh.

reply to post by Mr Zeropoint

Well, 2 problems.
1) The data does not back up the theory.
2) Saying "over exciting the Earth's magnetic field thus causing increased plate activity". Is pretty vague.

People like to find cause and effect relationships. But without data and without some sort of explanation of how it can happen, it's easy to imagine relationships which really don't exist.

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by CanadianDream420
Sunspots = Solar Flares = Magnetic Field Shift = Shifting Ocean and Jet Stream Currents = Extreme Global Changing Weather= Earthquakes= Volcanic Eruptions
[edit on 4-8-2010 by CanadianDream420]

If you changed = to (may or may not =) I would be right in there with you. I think the sun spots and general activity are a significant factor, but it's still only a theory. (IMHO)

[edit on 4-8-2010 by network dude]

Hypothesis would be the proper term scientifically. A theory would mean that it holds to be true. I am honestly on the fence about this, it would need more evidence before I could say yay or nay and come to a conclusion.

reply to post by Phlynx


you are correct sir. That's about where I am. I just know how important it is to have proof before stating fact. After all, I am an amazing golfer. (as far as you know) but I can't prove it here. (or at the course)

Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by Phlynx

 

you are correct sir. That's about where I am. I just know how important it is to have proof before stating fact. After all, I am an amazing golfer. (as far as you know) but I can't prove it here. (or at the course)

Honestly since it has no proof at the moment, I am assuming CMEs and sunspots have no effect. I am still open if they find scientific proof towards it though.

I use to believe this hypothesis to be correct. I use to come to a lot of assumptions here on ATS, but I am becoming more skeptical, and requiring much more evidence.

Edit for some horrible grammar and spelling.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by Phlynx]

[edit on 4-8-2010 by Phlynx]