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.

 

Earthquake Swarm in Arkansas Intensifies. Memphis, Tennessee could be epicenter for the next big one

page: 275
287
<< 272  273  274    276  277  278 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Wow S&F for you!
I live in Memphis and will definitely be on the lookout for strange signs.




posted on Sep, 11 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Since Ive lived in California most of my life I thought Id put into perspective the recent swarm in LA area. The LA area itself doesnt get as many as the desert but still gets alot. The first map is LA since 1990, and the second is SoCal this year. Swarms are pretty common.

Im not saying that a big one isn't probable, because Ive thought one was probable for many years.Kinda just waiting for it to happen really. But I dont know what value the recent swarms have in predicting this big one. If they have found a way I think thats great, but I kinda doubt it.






posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
More info. This is an intercept of an email:

Once again, it reads backwards, so start at the bottom.

(I am scheduled to participate in the MB tomorrow, I'm hoping to have more info at that time)

------------------------------------------

From: xxxxxxx
Date: Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: UPDATE: Precautionary
To: xxxxxx


Thanks xxxxxx. Based on your history, I would agree. We'll continue tomorrow at our MB. Thanks!

xxxxxx

Sent via iPhone

------------------------------------------------

On Sep 12, 2011, at 11:28 AM, xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:27 AM
Subject: UPDATE: Precautionary
To: xxxxxxxxx


xxxxxx

As we follow the data, my discernment concludes the risk of an additional foreshock within the next 72 to 96 hours likely. Obviously, based on what we have witnessed in recent weeks. Again, supporting our discussion early today, in my opinion the main shock remains only subjectively imminent.

Would love to know your thoughts.

xxxxxx



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by tmiddlebrook36
 


Sure hope to find out more tomorrow.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by tmiddlebrook36
 


Thank you for stopping in,
awaiting to learn more from
you.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   


As we follow the data, my discernment concludes the risk of an additional foreshock within the next 72 to 96 hours likely. Obviously, based on what we have witnessed in recent weeks. Again, supporting our discussion early today, in my opinion the main shock remains only subjectively imminent.


So what do you guys and gals think about this statement?

the risk of an additional foreshock within the next 72 to 96 hours likely

meaning, there has been a foreshock, there is a risk of an additional foreshock likely within the next 72 to 96 hours. So, where was the original foreshock?

and, in my opinion the main shock remains only subjectively imminent. means they are NOT SURE

This is driving me crazy and also making my head hurt from thinking



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by berkeleygal
 


Also...do we know what "MB" stands for?
The only thing I can think of is "bowel movement" backwards...which, although probably extremely uncomfortable, has nothing to do with potential earthquakes in California.
edit on 12-9-2011 by CLPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime
 


Yeah, I was trying to think of what MB stands for, but my head hurts.....


Monitoring Board?

I dunno... can't wait for more info tomorrow...



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Double post
edit on 12-9-2011 by jadedANDcynical because: Doubled up



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by berkeleygal
 


Mission Briefing?

It makes sense within the context.

CLPrime, did you get my other u2u?



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by jadedANDcynical
 


I did. And, I'm deciphering it...when I find time. I'm almost always multi-multi-tasking, and I want to make sure I understanding it all, so I'm being especially meticulous.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by berkeleygal
 





meaning, there has been a foreshock, there is a risk of an additional foreshock likely within the next 72 to 96 hours. So, where was the original foreshock?


Additional foreshock - so should our question be - where on the west coast has there been a quake
recently that was large enough to consider it a foreshock. Does he mean additional foreshock in regards to the swarms which I suppose would be considered foreshocks as well.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:18 PM
link   


Check out this map. I was reading something about this today on GLP, I know, anyway, I did find the theory interesting. The poster seemed to think there were a lot of earthquakes around this North American Craton.
I'd never even heard of this word before, any of you? Anyway, he seemed to feel that this large land mass was breaking away from the other masses.

More to learn about.
edit on 12-9-2011 by SunnyDee because: (no reason given)


Edit to add this was in relation to the west Texas quakes in the last day, as well as the virginia quake.
edit on 12-9-2011 by SunnyDee because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime
 


I think " MB" is for " Management Board"

Google search "MB meeting"



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by tmiddlebrook36
More info. This is an intercept of an email:


t, I remain skeptical. But if there is new data and studies out there discussing the reasons for this increased awareness of a potential big one, please share this with us. Im sure you could U2U someone on this thread that would post this data for us and you.

But the bottom line is, the plates are in motion and heating up. Big ones.....probably everywhere soon as far as I can tell. In fact they already are happening. And all that released pressure is going somewhere else. The tohoku EQs in Japan sent a massive chunk of energy our way via the lithosphere. Both the Cascadia subduction zone (CSZ) and the New Madrid Fault (NMF) have been absorbing energy for 200 to 300 years without really moving. And move they must. Its the law of earth physics.

I give the CSZ a year. It will set off the San Andreas and other localized fault systems. When these go, so goes the NMF shortly afterwards. Im just thinking out loud.

The thing I use as a predictor is Edgar Cayce. In a trance he said that the big one along the CA coast would happen 3 months after the second sister erupted. Two famous volcanoes are considered the two sisters by most (and for the life of me I cant remember which two), but I like a different theory that says that the two sisters are actually Mt St Helens and Mt St Helena. Helens blew, and it's well known that the geysers area north of Mt St Helena is the most seismically active area in the lower 48. If Mt St Helena starts acting up, sell the ranch quick.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
reply to post by berkeleygal
 


Mission Briefing?

It makes sense within the context.


I would agree, as thats the only way Ive seen it used, other than megabytes, but isn't a mission briefing something that military forces, security forces, gov't agencies, emergency workers etc use. What mission would a technology company be on that would discuss the big one and the potential death of millions. If the mission is to make people aware of a coming disaster, they sure arent doing a very good job of it. Other than t, and he's being as clear as mud in the Texas heat.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Just for something to do and since someone mentioned there was a Middlebrook, VA, I wanted to see how close it was to Mineral.



pretty damn close



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 07:50 AM
link   
iv been been reading and watching this thread as well as the earthquakes going on and just found this 3.5 in california.. I know its not very big, but it was not very deep either.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 at 12:27:13 UTC
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 at 05:27:13 AM at epicenter

Location 35.727°N, 121.109°W
Depth 8 km (5.0 miles)
Region CENTRAL CALIFORNIA
Distances

12 km (7 miles) NE (38°) from San Simeon, CA
19 km (12 miles) N (354°) from Cambria, CA
21 km (13 miles) W (267°) from Lake Nacimiento, CA
40 km (25 miles) WNW (286°) from Paso Robles, CA
193 km (120 miles) SSE (158°) from San Jose City Hall, CA

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Been a little edgy since reading this thread.. Anyone with new info should post and keep this thread going as we all want to be informed.



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Since Virginia was mentioned here, I brought my post from last night on the t35 thread over.

Everyone expects a big one in California. But what if it isn't first, or sets off a bigger one farther east? There must be lots of pressure built up around the east coast too. Was Virginia a sign?
When Chile had their big one, we heard the 'Seneca Guns' here in PA about 15 minutes before their quake happened! Lots of banging & scraping, like two cars broad siding each other, the whole length of the car! Didn't know what it was at the time, thought it was an accident & noted the time. Found out later. I posted about it then. If Chile can 'domino effect' all the way to PA... Maybe a good size west coast one would cause even more damage more easterly. The New Madrid is in the' middle' of the dominoes! The whole line could go. The 35th parallel?
'Middle... middle of the US; brook...Mississippi? Would still be felt on the east coast too. Like in 1811, maybe worse. 200 years of pressure have built up. Just saying... & thinking out loud....

From last night:

Okay WOQ, take a deep breath!
Lost my post three times trying to go back & forth to tabs for info.
Tech challenged person + computersaurus = lots of stress!!!

When I read the new post I had a light bulb moment. Admittedly, it's a pretty dim bulb, but I had to throw this out there...
What if it's Virginia? Not quite 35/36 latitude, but maybe a little off on purpose.
There is a Middlebrook in Virginia. I don't remember if that was mentioned before. But not in California.
First Virginia eq 8/23. First posting 8/26. Maybe that uncommon eq made them realize there was trouble. The east coast is not prepared for eqs. I'm thinking too of the video someone posted of the USGS dude saying they down graded the eq from a 6 or larger, because of the nuc plants. Plus D.C., N.Y. & Philly are some of the most heavily populated cities on the east coast, & would probably be affected.
The post today says, "...additional foreshock within...hours". So there has been a quake they are calling a foreshock, which will be recognized as such.
Post on 9/1, "So Cal. The ground is already moving as well." As in..'.in addition to'...besides the place that they are expecting the big one. Implying there will be other quakes in that time frame? Or seemingly related ones? Like Colorado & Virginia? Now Texas looks like it's on a roll.
Before Virginia's big one, for three days, there was a swarm of good sized quakes in Vanuatu. And New Guinea, Japan & Sumatra each had a moderate one the two days before. Just about everyday that Virginia has had some, so have Vanuatu, Japan, New Guinea & Indonesia. Now they are starting up again fairly close together.

Thoughts anyone? I hope I'm wrong!



posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by wasobservingquietly
 


Agree with you on all points. Nice summary of what I'm sure many of us consider. The fact the Tmiddlebrook posts in the Arkansas thread, seems telling.



new topics




 
287
<< 272  273  274    276  277  278 >>

log in

join