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.

 

There were 3867 more earthquakes in the USA than last year!

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ns9504
reply to post by Violater1
 

Magnitude, type, depth, and location need to be factored in before sweeping statements are made. Yes, the numbers are higher than last year, but 3K in the world of earthquakes is really not that big.
Respectfully, this thread feels like its trying to make mountains out of mole hills...



Please read the tables that I provided as well as the links before posting.
This is about earthquakes in the USA not world. If you read the facts, it's quite clear.
3000 additional earthquakes in the USA is something not to shake a stick at.




posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Violater1
reply to post by Honor93
 


You sir are the one confused.
The number of quakes speak for them selves.
Instead of trolling, review the numbers from the USGS.

been there, done that and continue to, daily ... i am far from confused and old enough to have witnessed many of the events you are 'studying'.

And to you, rude one, that'll be Ma'am rather sir.
I don't troll, i learn, you should try it sometime.
apparently, you didn't even BOTHER to look at the USGS links provided.
typical assumption without any validity whatsoever. keep reading, you MIGHT learn something.



posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Violater1
 

This is about earthquakes in the USA not world. If you read the facts, it's quite clear.
3000 additional earthquakes in the USA is something not to shake a stick at.



We continue to be asked by many people throughout the world if earthquakes are on the increase. Although it may seem that we are having more earthquakes, earthquakes of magnitude 7.0 or greater have remained fairly constant.

A partial explanation may lie in the fact that in the last twenty years, we have definitely had an increase in the number of earthquakes we have been able to locate each year. This is because of the tremendous increase in the number of seismograph stations in the world and the many improvements in global communications. In 1931, there were about 350 stations operating in the world; today, there are more than 8,000 stations and the data now comes in rapidly from these stations by electronic mail, internet and satellite.

The NEIC now locates about 20,000 earthquakes each year or approximately 50 per day. Also, because of the improvements in communications and the increased interest in the environment and natural disasters, the public now learns about more earthquakes.
source: earthquake.usgs.gov... (notice the word "learn" in the address?)

There is much more to quake activity than just the amount of them, or the location of them or even our understanding of what contributes to them.
If you are not going to bother to learn, don't expect us to inform you ... do your own homework.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by ns9504
reply to post by Violater1
 

Magnitude, type, depth, and location need to be factored in before sweeping statements are made. Yes, the numbers are higher than last year, but 3K in the world of earthquakes is really not that big.
Respectfully, this thread feels like its trying to make mountains out of mole hills...



Please read the tables that I provided as well as the links before posting.
This is about earthquakes in the USA not world. If you read the facts, it's quite clear.
3000 additional earthquakes in the USA is something not to shake a stick at.


I did read the facts, for the USA and the world. I'm not confused. I still think you are taking the information and putting in to your own context. However, I e-mailed my dad (50 years with the USGS as a seismologist) and asked him why more earthquakes in 2010 in the US. This is his response:

"It's unfortunate that the USGS doesn't explain the apparent increase in earthquakes in the US over the past decade.

Note, however, the increase in recorded earthquakes is not the same proportionally across all magnitudes. Proportionally, the number of M 7 to 7.9 quakes changed not at all over the decade. These are the most powerful & therefore the most destructive earthquakes. M 6 to 6.9 quakes showed a lot of variation in number w/ an apparent uptick toward the end of the decade. These quakes are felt over wide areas. It's very unlikely that any M 6 to 7.9 quakes in the US have gone unrecorded in the US in at least the last 50 years. So to look for periodicity or episodicity one should look at least 50 years of available data.

On the other hand, there has been a significant increase in M 2 to 3.9 earthquakes throughout the decade and what looks like significantly more in 2010. M 2 & 3 quakes release too little energy to be felt by humans in all but the most quiet surroundings. The increase in energy release by these small is not much compared to a single M 7 quake. Each increase in magnitude by one equals the release of 32 times as much energy. A M 7 quakes releases 32 x 32 x 32 x 32 32 as much energy as a M 2 quake.

However, I can think of three reasons to explain the distribution of quakes across the decade & magnitude scale.
1. More sensitive instruments to detect earthquakes & greater density of instruments across the US. Over the last decade USGS has largely replaced analog seismometers with more sensitive digital seismometers This would explain much of the increase in M 2-3 quakes. Any old seismometer can detect a M 6 or 7 quake, but a really sensitive one is needed to detect M 2 & 3s.

2 Earthquakes are not evenly distributed over time. They happen more frequently at some times than at others. Just as with tossing coins. The probability of getting a head on any toss is always 0.5, but still there is a significant probability of tossing heads two times in a row. Or even getting a head four times in a row. Looking at the last 50 or so years of M 6 to 7.9 quakes would give a much better idea if how the amount of energy released over time has changed.

3. There is a real variation in the number of earthquakes over time. I remember reading that the number of small quakes in southern California between Palm Springs & the Gulf of California has increased in the last few years, but its the big ones we watch for."

Take or leave it. I believe and trust my dad, the scientist.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 


The numbers of the quakes do NOT speak for themselves. The numbers are completely irrelevant unless they are related to magnitude and even then they are completely irrelevant as it is the amount of energy released that matters.

If you want to see a proper analysis of the decade 2000 to 2009 plus 2010 look here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

You are putting forward statistically inaccurate and irrelevant information and trying to make some big deal out of it. I suggest that rather than playing a geologist on TV, if you do, go and learn something about geology before attempting something like this. I cannot see where you get the figure of 8131, it does not even appear on the USGS page.

By the way my report has been seen by people at USGS and has had favourable comment.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 


Flawed study + Bad Science = Outrageous conclusion




posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Violater1
reply to post by Mayura
 

Agreed. Were only half way through the month and we have had 33.
Wow, now's there's a Freakmason number!


We are now up to 101 earthquakes at the end of the first month!
At this rate, we could hit 10,000 for the year!!!



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by Violater1
 


The numbers of the quakes do NOT speak for themselves. The numbers are completely irrelevant unless they are related to magnitude and even then they are completely irrelevant as it is the amount of energy released that matters.

If you want to see a proper analysis of the decade 2000 to 2009 plus 2010 look here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

You are putting forward statistically inaccurate and irrelevant information and trying to make some big deal out of it. I suggest that rather than playing a geologist on TV, if you do, go and learn something about geology before attempting something like this. I cannot see where you get the figure of 8131, it does not even appear on the USGS page.

By the way my report has been seen by people at USGS and has had favourable(sic) comment.




statistically inaccurate and irrelevant information.
Really?
Really!
Here again, for the committee of Puterman, is the USGS link as well as a copy and pasted chart that is displayed at this link.
My question to you is, why are you being untruthful?

earthquake.usgs.gov...
Number of Earthquakes in the United States for 2000 - 2011
Located by the US Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center
Magnitude 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
8.0 to 9.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7.0 to 7.9 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
6.0 to 6.9 6 5 4 7 2 4 7 9 9 4 8 0
5.0 to 5.9 63 41 63 54 25 47 51 72 85 58 71 3
4.0 to 4.9 281 290 536 541 284 345 346 366 432 289 649 18
3.0 to 3.9 917 842 1535 1303 1362 1475 1213 1137 1486 1492 3539 29
2.0 to 2.9 660 646 1228 704 1336 1738 1145 1173 1573 2380 4005 49
1.0 to 1.9 0 2 2 2 1 2 7 11 13 26 36 0
0.1 to 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
No Magnitude 415 434 507 333 540 73 13 22 20 14 13 2
Total 2342 2261 3876 2946 3550 3685 2783 2791 3618 * 4264 * 8322 * 101
Estimated
Deaths 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
did anyone else catch this 'weather anomaly' (it's called) reported in Australia a couple days ago?


edit on 17-1-2011 by Honor93 because: edit numbers / dyslexic errors


That was a radar glitch. It was discussed here on ATS.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by Honor93
did anyone else catch this 'weather anomaly' (it's called) reported in Australia a couple days ago?


edit on 17-1-2011 by Honor93 because: edit numbers / dyslexic errors


That was a radar glitch. It was discussed here on ATS.




Ummm...what??
Radar glitch?????



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by Honor93
did anyone else catch this 'weather anomaly' (it's called) reported in Australia a couple days ago?


edit on 17-1-2011 by Honor93 because: edit numbers / dyslexic errors


That was a radar glitch. It was discussed here on ATS.




Ummm...what??
Radar glitch?????

Nothing to do with earthquakes-did you look at the image linked?
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 



My question to you is, why are you being untruthful?


In what way am I being untruthful or about what? Did you read my analysis?

By the way you quoted 8131. I note that the figure on the page - as posted by you - is 8322.

Edit: By the way if you are quoting my text why do you meed to add in sic after the correct English spelling of favourable as opposed to the American spelling favorable? If is is a quote and is correct it does not need sic beside it. That is used for misspellings.


for the committee of Puterman


I am not a committee by the way. I really am not quite sure what you are attempting to infer by that remark.

edit on 30/1/2011 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 


Actually there have been 6385 earthquakes so far this year from Magnitude 1.0 upwards. It is pointless in you looking at the USGS figures without being aware of how they are derived.

That figure of 6385 does not include earthquakes from many areas that I do not collect yet so actually the figure is almost certainly at least 10,000 already this year.

I collect USGS which goes down to 1.0 in the US and 4.5 in other areas of the world, and EMSC which goes to 2.0 in Europe and 4.0 in other areas of the world, and GeoNet (New Zealand) which is from 1.0 upwards.

There are numbers of quakes all over the world that I do not collect yet including Iceland where there have been:

280 in week 1
246 in week 2
133 in week 3
181 in week 4 (so far)

That is 840 quakes from that one little country alone.



posted on Jan, 30 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by Violater1
 


My question to you is, why are you being untruthful?

In what way am I being untruthful or about what? Did you read my analysis?
By the way you quoted 8131. I note that the figure on the page - as posted by you - is 8322.




Thank you for admitting that you were wrong and being untruthful.
Now back to the thread.
It's obvious that the USA had almost double the earthquakes than it has had since 2009.
So far this month, the US has had over 100 earthquakes.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 


Excuse me?

Not only have you failed to point out to me where I have supposedly been untruthful but you have now somehow read into my reply that I have admitted this? Perhaps you could enlighten me as to where this would have been then. No in fact don't bother, I don't wish to engage you in further discourse.

You continue to display your complete ignorance of the subject of earthquakes making statements that as I said previously are statistically inaccurate and incorrect. You do not understand enough about the subject to pass earthquake 101 and your comprehension of English appears to be seriously lacking.

I shall leave you to your thread and it's complete lies as you are unwilling or unable to learn and are not worth wasting time upon to teach.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join