reply to post by hawkiye
Hi Hawkiye, I can see where you are coming from, but I would also say that if you have subsequently read the links you will have discovered for
yourself that what this guy is saying is just nonsense.
Anyway, I had hoped I would not have to listen to that drivel again, but I had to in order to reply to you.
He states that every single seismic station in the world is on that page. Actually there is a selection of about 82. They are spaced around the world,
for obvious reasons. There are many thousands of seismic stations in the world. Here is
of seismos that feed into the NEIC but BE WARNED this is a long page. Not recommended for dial-up.
He points to a helicorder page which is showing a mess of lines. I think it is a Chinese one. He says that this mess is magma flow. It is not. Magma
flow is indicated by HT and I doubt if you would even see it on those seismos/helicorders (sorry confusing. I will just call them seismos). What he is
seeing is telemetry problems and/or interference. Most of these signals are transmitted back to the IRIS Data Management Centre in the US. There are
many relays on the way and it is not the least bit uncommon for there to be some quite severe interference at times.
He says Spain is having some heavy seismic activity. If you have not read my links yet then I recommend that you do so now as they explain why the
seismos all show activity, but that ALL this activity is from ONE earthquake (later on he identifies it, but does not realise that he has done so)
This earthquake he is seeing on the recorders is the 7.0 in the Loyalty Islands. Here are some brief details.
2011-01-13T16:16:41.000Z,-20.62250,168.45900,7.0000,9.0000,Loyalty Islands. New Caledonia
I keep a record of all earthquakes that I can lay my hands on. I get data in from USGS, from Europe - the EMSC and from GeoNet in New Zealand. I have
over 700,000 earthquakes in my database. One thing that I try and do is to take snaps of that LISS page whenever there is anything over a mag 6.0
since they will be the ones that will probably ring the seismos.
This is the page that he is showing on the screen.
As you can see I have noted on the top of it the earthquake that cause the seismos to show this. You can always ask me if this happens again, as I
said, since I will probably have the details.
He says this is not normal. Well sorry chap but it is, as I explain in my links and at the end of my earthquake analysis. On average there are 20 or
so magnitude 7+ earthquakes a year and every one of them will do this. There are also around 150 mag 6+ quakes a year. Very many of these will also do
this, especially if they are very deep. For example the deep 6.5 subduction zone quake at Acre, Brazil last year which triggered a rash of this
Internet rubbish. What amazes me is that the number of times this same nonsense has been trotted out yet nobody remembers? Why is that I wonder?
Digisonds lined up? Well I am not going to argue the toss on how they tune HAARP but I can tell you that the supposed 120 degrees perfect angles were
WAY off perfect. No way were they lined up. As I remember - and I don't have the details immediately to hand, one leg was 312 miles and the other 246
miles. That does not make an equal sided triangle (the base was even longer of course)
He talks about the seismic monitor and how there were 22 earthquakes that day. So? There were 29 yesterday. I don't see him jumping up and down about
that? This is average for ANY day of the year and certainly not insane as he said. He also says that they are all over 4.0. Well yes, because USGS do
not report worldwide quake under that.
In fact yesterday from the three providers that I collect there were 163 quakes above 1.0 and the ones I collect at present are only a fraction of the
total. Sheer guestimate would be several hundred worldwide above mag 1 and many thousands of mag 0 and above. (And yes you can have magnitude 0
Of course my lists include all major quakes but 4.0 is not a major quake as he said. It is relatively minor and may cause slight damage depending in
the geology of the area.
By the way one thing he said is correct and he probably does not even realise it. The seismos record the quakes because the ground DOES move, but it
is slow enough not to cause any damage or for anyone other than the seismograph to notice. If the ground did not move the recorder could not record
the quake. Literally the whole world does shake when there is a big earthquake.
Oh sorry the 'none of the magnitudes are below 4' bit was at 07:08 - forgot to show that, and 'a 4 is still a powerful earthquake' was at
He show the magnetometer at HAARP. He say look at all the activity. The inference is that this is because HAARP is operating.
The magnetometer measures that magnetic flux of the Sun but he is such a dummy he probably does not even bother to check that out. If it was a
'busy' day on the sun a day or two prior to that then this will show the activity.
By the way if you want them I have magnetometer record going back to 2008 and I think even earlier than that since I am studying magnetic flux and any
possible effect upon earthquakes.
He says this is America "after the New Madrid opens up"
First of all let's get rid of this daft notion of the New Madrid "opening up" in the manner he is suggesting.
The North American continent is pushing against the Pacific - hence the Cascades and the JDF subduction zone etc etc. This is because it is being
pushed by the spreading of the North Atlantic ridge. The whole continent is moving and it is not pulling the New Madrid apart.
Now, whilst that is the the case that does not mean to say that there could not be an earthquake on the fault. You are probably only too aware that
there have been big quakes in the past but you should also be aware that there is a theory that the energy in the New Madrid is residual, i.e. is not
being replenished therefore each and every earthquake, if that is the case, lessens the possibility of there being a big one. It is a theory so I am
not going to say that what they suggest is correct but as far as I can tell it seems to be a reasonable suggestion. To be honest I really do hope it
Now I have to say that I no idea what that map was since I can't make it out and he does not say but I am assuming it is a sea level rise scenario
My apologies for not setting my case out better. I hope you will understand that I just groan when I see one of these threads!