Mysterious Beta Spike Before Sendai Earthquake

Originally posted by Chakotay

Originally posted by Justoneman
... the black line means nothing it goes from the bottom to the top and should be an artifact of the machination.

It is a marker for the time of the Sendai Earthquake... inserted by EPA...

Ok Chakotay,
Now that is entirely possible. However, I do NOT do that with my data. They are using a different color than the one blue pen for the monitor. One color per parameter, period. The black is definetly not a signal from the instrument to the recorder, I say that as a person who does this style of collecting data so I can eat. I suspect your reason for thinking this has merit but this chart does not have a valid scientific notation. It fails to designate the reason for the bottoming out and the susbequent peak or the reason the recorder pen changed its color twice. This is not practical to have something as significant as a set of changes in color for just 1 episode unexplained on the record. The black line does not flow with the 'trace' is what I am trying to convey. I have a friend of many year who is a health physicist I will ask him and see what he says about the beta waves and their significance as I recall it is nominal compared to gamma anyway. I am curious about the monitors and why they were there in the first place? It seems interesting and since I don't do that parameter I wonder WHY exactly, you know? Plus there does seem to be a good bit of data at the 900-1000 range of whatever paramater they called it and whatever the scientific units like micrograms per cubic liter of air for instance (those two details are huge to what we really have here).

Originally posted by DancedWithWolves
reply to post by Justoneman

 

I believe he is saying the black line is a calendar mark on the graph for informational purposes. It is not a spike or there for any other purpose other than to mark the date of the EQ/Tsunami/Fukushima disaster that made millions of people start looking at EPA's data. Or at least, that's how I have interpreted it. It's a save this date mark imposed over all data.

And that would make a Sherlock Holmes type like me say, hmmmm Ok. I was sorta going that way with my point, agreed. I do feel like the black line is not data and a mark in time for posterity sake qualifies for me.

reply to post by Chakotay


Been doing some cross reading in the earthquakes in Arkansas thread. Could fracking and/or earthquate activity have caused these Beta spikes? It would be important to know and look for evidence of this being the cause. This would potentially make these dangerous releases man-made. We would need to know if fracking is taking place around these monitors that show the abnormal Beta spikes. Compare the fracking locations to any earthquake activity on or around these dates.

Going to quote a thread leader there. ATS has been able to provide evidence that fracking can cause earthquakes and may have resulted in the Arkansas swarm. If fracking is causing these quakes, could it not be the cause of these dangerous beta spikes as well. Thanks in advance for the continued discussion. Much appreciated.

Originally posted by Robin Marks
I hope I'm wrong as well. My best evidence is the quakes themselves and this new report I found. I'll repost my conclusion from the QuakeWatch thread here. And the report. And the most recent list with 700 earthquakes over the last many months.

www.ouramazingplanet.com...

"From the report I just posted regarding mid-continental earthquakes.

"Now, new research from the University of Missouri suggests that inner-continental quakes such as China's may abide by a different set of rules than those that occur along plate boundaries."

This means the New Madrid Zone and Yellowstone and the surrounding mountains and fault act by their own rules and aren't like those occuring in California.

From the report,

"Along plate boundaries, small and moderate earthquakes that rupture along a particular fault lead to a build-up of stress along that same fault line, but mid-continent faults are connected to each other in a complex network, and a large earthquake along one fault will instead put pressure on a different fault."

This means that it's unlikely that the New Madrid will rupture in the same area. The larger quakes will migrate. So why is this important. It means that there is a connection between quakes in one area affecting the fault system of another at a much greater distance than geologists think. They believe that most activity is very local and contained with a particular fault. This means that earthquakes around these areas may be connected and this interaction is not understood. So. Earthquakes outside of Yellowstone have a relationship and can be putting stresses on the faults above the magma chamber. This means the earthquake in Arkansas my be destablizing a larger fault. Possibly under Memphis.

So if the Arkansas quakes are caused by fracking, this means the activity could have far reaching consequences. The deep well injection disposal is a known cause of earthquakes and there is injection in Arkansas. So fracking may be directly responsible for causing the next big quake in the Mississippi River area.

Remember that the New Madrid earthquake was not one quake. There were four. First starting in Arkansas and then migrate to the northeast. Coincidently, the trend of earthquakes near Guy, Arkansas, runs in the same direction. From the southwest up to the northeast.

So fracking is not a good idea.

They are fracking south of Yellowstone. The geologists have convinced everyone that what happens on one side of the mountains have very little to do with events on the farside. It looks like they might be wrong. It looks like quakes near Yellowstone can change things above the chamber.

So fracking is an insane idea."

Link to map.


Here's the map.


folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu...

Link to the Arkansas thread Here

Could solar activity be picked up by this sensors?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/43000188f86f.png[/atsimg]

Or a precusor to the earth quake.

There is some intriguing research about whether large earthquakes are associated with ionospheric changes caused by electromagnetic signals released by the crushing of rock crystalline structures. If so, then this might be a mechanism for major earthquake prediction.

solar-center.stanford.edu...

Originally posted by kdog1982
Could solar activity be picked up by this sensors?

That looks pretty darn close

Or a precusor to the earth quake.

Careful with that ... ionosphere + earthquake = HAARP

reply to post by zorgon



Oh,no.Not HAARP!!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b0a70d51ef8b.png[/atsimg]

137.229.36.30...

I wanted to start a new thread for this, but even though I've been a member for years, I don't post often, so I can't yet start threads.

I have come to realize that my knowledge of how the nuclear industry works, was completely wrong, and until the Fukashima disaster happened, my assumptions on how the reactors were designed and built, were off base.

Understand, that I'm an engineer, so like others I try to come up with a worst case scenario each time I design and build something, so that I don't have any "gotchas" happen, or that Mr. Murphy can't show up, or if he does, I have designed plans around that.

If I was involved in the design of reactors, one of the first questions I would ask would be "okay, so what do you do if you completely loose power for days or hours at a time"?

I then also started to realize that every reactor on the planet, has this same issue.

So, my thinking started to center on again, worst case scenarios.

We have all read on here and other places, where either a large solar flare could take out entire power grids for months at a time. Or, someone with a nuke could EMP pulse us, also knocking out power.

In either case, the first thing that would happen, is the nuke plants would scram, and shut down. Since the grid is down, they would switch to generators.

Out of all of the plants out there, which ones are going to run out of fuel, and then not have the ability to start up again to cool their cores?

As stated, I had ASSumed that the engineers who designed the plants, would have an option for worst case scenario, and that's not the case.

I now don't like nuke plants, which is a complete change of heart for me.

Thoughts?

Originally posted by matadoor
As stated, I had ASSumed that the engineers who designed the plants, would have an option for worst case scenario, and that's not the case.

I now don't like nuke plants, which is a complete change of heart for me.

I remember the early science education we received back in the Sixties. The emphasis was to destroy the "dark ages mentality" of creationism and religion in favor of the "cold analysis" of science.

The fatal flaw in this: science had existed, in modern form, for some 200 years. It was a baby exploring an ancient cosmos. Religion, on the other hand, had one thing going for it: ancient memory, stretching back as folktales for tens of thousands of years.

The resulting conflict of apocalyptic catastrophism (religion) and uniformitarianism (the concept that the small changes observed by science today, continued over vast time, create the geological features we observe) made it politically correct in the WW II postwar years to deny the catastrophist hypothesis.

In the 1960's, certain space scientists challenged this philosophical constipation: notably, Eugene Shoemaker and the Alvarez family. This has led to a quiet paradigm shift that melds occassional catastrophism with uniformatarianism, as seen at Benfield Hazard Research Centre.

So the plants were designed by a generation in denial of dragons from the sky and innundations from the sea.

Nuke plants, as your gut tells you, are doomsday machines on a bad day. And a bad day will come, sooner or later- but it will come. Especially when old metal is run beyond its already optimistic design lifetime. That means we have to rethink the design and engineering of everything.

As a flight test engineer, I am honored that you chose my thread to post on. It is nice to communicate with a kinded mind on a subject of vital importance.

I suggest you study what Amory Lovins is talking about.

The world needs your ideas.

Chak

reply to post by matadoor


Are you familiar with Chief Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen? He's got the best nuclear and radiation info on the net in my opinion!

fairewinds.com...

reply to post by kdog1982


Kdog,

could you please describe which things in this graph lead you to believe HAARP was responsible for the Japan quake? I clicked the link and today's graph looks quite similar to my nooby graph-reading eyes

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
Are you familiar with Chief Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen?

yes we have been posting all his latest videos in this thread as they are released

Kdog,
could you please describe which things in this graph lead you to believe HAARP was responsible for the Japan quake?

Kdog was responding to me, I am pretty sure he doesn't believe HAARP did it

reply to post by zorgon


Zorgon, I have a little clue into what may have caused the "tracking" phenomenon of the beta spike- but be forewarned, it goes into chemtrail territory.

There has been a public disclosure regarding radioactive cesium additives in A-12/SR-71 ZIP fuels at the Wikipedia article Beale AFB:

JP-7 used a caesium (cesium) containing compound known as A-50, which aided in disguising the radar signature of the exhaust plume. Cesium is the highly dangerous and toxic heavy metal element #55, many forms are dangerously radioactive and listed on the CIA's list as a potential terrorist weapon.

There is also another critical statement:

The SR-71's were a result of a top secret program called "OXCART". Under the guise as part of a satellite launch system, Oxcart was established as a means to continue Americas surveillance superiority with the development of a super sonic aircraft designated A-12, code named "Archangel".

So the public disclosure is: OXCART used radioactive cesium as a fuel additive, resulting in radioactive exhaust fallout... and if I edit and read the OXCART/Archangel cover seperately in italics, ...as part of a satellite launch system... A polar TSTO satellite launch system, with a re-useable winged first-stage booster.

There are/were follow-on programs to OXCART/Archangel. Are the chemtrailers right this one time? Is there a cesium-fueled system flying?

And I'm not through speculating yet- there are more ways than one to get a cesium beta spike in your airspace:

These studies mainly permitted a comparison of the two classes of nuclear flux engines, those envisaged by General-Electric (the simplest but dirtier system as the radioactive material was sent directly into the combustion chambers) or those using the indirect cycle proposed by Pratt & Whitney which utilized liquid sodium as a high-temperature conductor between the nuclear reactor and the combustion chambers of the J-58 propulsion unit.

Click on the quote to get to the article at the 456th.

The A-12/SR71 had that long, beautiful, stand-off shielding neck... for a nuclear reason.

Friend or foe, cesium-additive or nuclear turbojet, the pre-sendai beta spikes may have an OLD CROW explanation.

I'll be deploying overseas in a couple days. If you guys want to keep the threads going, I'd appreciate it, as I will be unable to post until I return in a year and a half or so. My wife might log in for me now and then, just to keep my account active.

The Answers Are Out There...

Best Wishes to All, Chak

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
reply to post by kdog1982

 

Kdog,

could you please describe which things in this graph lead you to believe HAARP was responsible for the Japan quake? I clicked the link and today's graph looks quite similar to my nooby graph-reading eyes

I do not believe HAARP caused the Japan quake,I was just being sarcastic.
But I do believe that HAARP may pick-up readings before or during a major quake.

There is some intriguing research about whether large earthquakes are associated with ionospheric changes caused by electromagnetic signals released by the crushing of rock crystalline structures. If so, then this might be a mechanism for major earthquake prediction.

solar-center.stanford.edu...

I have also been looking into gamma ray bursts and possible gravity waves

Strong Gamma Ray Burst (date) Earthquake Reported (date) GRB 20100319A -- This gamma ray blast, on March 19, 2010, was recorded by the SWIFT satellite at 18:34:50 Universal Time at RA 18:33:46 DEC -08:32:13. On March 20, 2010 at 18:08:09 Universal Time, a magnitude 5.6 occurred in Guantanamo, Cuba. Location: 19.731 N, 75.279 W; Depth 17.2 km (10.7 miles) On March 20, 2010 at 14:00:51 Universal Time, a magnitude 6.2 occurred in Papua, New Guinea. Location: 3.380 S, 152.231 E; 423.5 km (263.2 miles) GRB 20100317A -- This gamma ray blast, on March 17, 2010, was recorded by the SWIFT satellite at 04:43:54 Universal Time at RA 11:40:04 DEC -46:18:51. On March 17, 2010 a magnitude 5.4 occurred in South Sumatra. Location 4.701 S, 102.757 E, depth 67.9 kn (42.2 miles).

www.viewzone.com...

grb.sonoma.edu...

Any confirmed information about that? Or just thinking?

Originally posted by arthur2012
Any confirmed information about that? Or just thinking?

I didn't tie in any gamma ray bursts,but HAARP is intriguing around the time of some quakes.
Again,not the cause of quakes,just maybe an indicator of one coming or in progress.