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.
Originally posted by LilyFlower
The distance of one degree latitiude is 69mi, so for a person quibbling about 37.7, 37.75, and 37.8 degrees (for example) they are talking about a range of .1 degree or seven miles
Originally posted by AuranVector
Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by LilyFlower
Dear LilyFlower,
What area along the New Madrid fault lies on the same path, if you know? Another question I have is related to the magnetic pole movement that occurred. Dr. Kaku stated that there is a possibility of increased solar activity into 2012, he also said that he believed the sun's magnetic pole will shift. Dr. Kaku on the suns impending polar shift. We know that our pole has shifted slightly, I have been wondering if the shift in the suns magnetic pole has been affecting ours. A magnetic pole shift is expected every 25,000 years roughly and it has been hypothesized that this results in wild climate change and earthquakes and volcanoes. Dr. Michio Kaku is not some simpleton, he is one of the best in physics today. When he says the sun's magnetic pole is going to shift, I for one am going to listen.
You may already know this but the Sun reverses its poles every 11 years. 2012 is when it reverses its poles again.
What worries me is the 11 degree pole shift of the Earth that Edgar Cayce predicted decades ago.
There has already been a 10 degree shift in the magnetic poles of the Earth. So what we need to know is: is a magnetic pole shift a precursor to the actual physical shifting of the Earth's poles?
Because if it is, we are in trouble. Even an 11 degree pole shift -- this would explain the major geological changes that Cayce saw in his visions of the future.edit on 11-5-2011 by AuranVector because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
I prefer to see it as someone who says 2 latitudes are "exactly the same" when they are 7 miles out is 7 miles wrong.
YMMV
Originally posted by LilyFlower
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
I prefer to see it as someone who says 2 latitudes are "exactly the same" when they are 7 miles out is 7 miles wrong.
YMMV
Outside of your reply, does the original post or the source say "exactly the same" anywhere?
The original post says "the same" and that latitude is the 37th parallel. The source indicates the positions in more detail.
Originally posted by LilyFlower
First you claimed that the locations were wrong, until the latitudes were provided for you.
Now you're jumping on semantics about the title.
However you want to split hairs, you're ignoring the point that there is a range of events close to a latitude around the world. ... Mt Etna (37.74° N) and Spain (37.699 N) today. and coincidently (although nothing has happened here yet) Fukushima, Ft. Knox, and San Francisco are close to or on 37.75.
Fukishima (location of the critical Nuclear reactor)
37.75
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
nope - the locations are wrong - none of them are at 37.75N - you provided ONE location of 37.75N - but that is actually 37 deg 46 minutes and some seconds N - so 37.75 is insufficiently accurate to give the precise location anyway......
Originally posted by LilyFlower
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
nope - the locations are wrong - none of them are at 37.75N - you provided ONE location of 37.75N - but that is actually 37 deg 46 minutes and some seconds N - so 37.75 is insufficiently accurate to give the precise location anyway......
Check again
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Originally posted by LilyFlower
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
nope - the locations are wrong - none of them are at 37.75N - you provided ONE location of 37.75N - but that is actually 37 deg 46 minutes and some seconds N - so 37.75 is insufficiently accurate to give the precise location anyway......
Check again
Yawn.....I did
As I said originally - SF is a big city that does cross 37.75 ....as well as quite a lot of other fractions.....I'm surprised you missed that I had said that, what with your penchant for grouping ranges of lattitude together ....
Originally posted by babybunnies
I'd bet if you look at just about any parallel line around the world, you'd find earthquake zones along them in several locations.