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.

 

6.4 Chile Earthquake

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Solar flares shoot out energy, CMEs, and lots of electrons when one occurs.
Im inclined to believe it does affect Earth and earthquakes but I highly doubt it. Just not enough evidence, its pure speculation.




posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by guessing
surely this one has gotta be caused by the partial luna eclipse today.

I mean the sun really has a lot do with earthquakes.

no offence intended but that is bad science...

nothing to do with plate movement, that would be way to mainstream.........

best wishes for chile btw...



Well when solar flares batter the Earth's magnetosphere, the magnetosphere pushes and pulls all over the place.
The movement of the magnetosphere pushes and pulls on the plates (magnetism). Therefore causing plate movement. Resulting in earthquakes.

I'm no scientist, but it seems plausible to me.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by AmatuerSkyWatcher
reply to post by guessing
 


So what you are basically saying is that you cannot think for yourself, and you have to wait until something is in black and white until you can even consider it might be a possibilty? Go you!

edit on 1-6-2011 by AmatuerSkyWatcher because: (no reason given)


Actually that is your interpretation of what I said, I did not say that.

Go you !



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by guessing
 


But actually, you did say that, just in other words!

Go me? Thanks



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   
This is a good little read.

I am having trouble finding the bit about solar flares though..... hmmmm

Earthquakes by USGS

Contrary to what some people may insinuate, I love to have an open mind and explore new possiblities.

The whole earthquakes are caused by solar flare thing is just not true.

Maybe in the future there might be a media announcement that goes like this.

January 21-2015
Scientists and geologists have teamed up and have concluded that solar flares may indeed assist tectonic plate movement. This does no suggest that solar flares cause earthquakes but merely support the occurances.
The scientific community are pleased to have finally cleared up the myth. The also go on to say that earthquakes still happen when solar flares are not present. However they do admit a relationship between the two. Speaking from a remote location, Professor B Spark, from the global earthquake research center says "the relationship poses no major significance."

Lobby groups are devastated. For years they have argued that the proven theories on earthquakes were wrong and believed that Solar flares and planetary alignements and even comets, were responsible for the destructive earthquakes. Lets hope we see less Earthquakes in years to come.







edit on 1-6-2011 by guessing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by thedeadwalkk
 


Yes pure speculation based on what I know to be fact and what I have observed.

There is a lot we just do not know and there is a lot of what ifs and maybes and speculations based on what we do know.

All I am saying is I do know for a fact what I have observed is a pattern.

With our magnetosphere weakened to a degree who's to say it isn't a contributing factor. I can't see anything of significance in regards to something lurking around in our Solar System reeking havoc and causing more EQ's. The proof is just not there. Not yet, anyway.

When I began noticing significant flares and then a 6 or more EQ, I began to wonder and take note. I began researching the two and if there was indeed a relation. I found there was.

On March 9th there was an M2 Solar flare.....it was said to be "Earth Directed". We all know what happened on the 11th of March.

I really do not care if I am wrong....its not about being right or wrong for me. I am only stating what I have found to be of significance within my own study. ;-)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 

What flares?



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 

Patterns can be tricky.

It's like when you're getting in the shower (A) and the phone rings (B). Most of the time it doesn't happen but when it does it's really annoying and you are made particularly aware of it. Does it mean that getting into the shower induces someone (anyone) to call you at that moment? What about all those times you get into the shower and the phone doesn't ring? Is something preventing those people from calling at that moment? Is the correlation of (A) and (B) of any significance?

Now, let's say it's your birthday and you've got a lot of friends and family. All these people are calling to offer you their best wishes. You're getting a lot more calls than you normally do. The chances are greatly increased that just as you step into the shower someone will call. On your birthday the chances of (B) following (A) are increased.

Do you understand what's happening? Two unrelated events which, when they occur simultaneously, you notice more than you normally would. Now if you increase the frequency of just one of those events. You increase the chances that both will occur at the same time.

Now, instead of getting into the shower we have an earthquake (A) and instead of a phone call we have solar activity (B). When there isn't much solar activity (solar minimum) there are just as many earthquakes as there ever are. Sometimes an earthquake follows solar activity and sometimes it doesn't. But what happens at solar maximum? That phone is ringing (B) a lot more often. Because there is more solar activity, the chances that an earthquake will follow it are increased, even though the earthquake would have happened anyway. The correlation is dependent upon the frequency of only one of the events. Now, if the occurrence of (A) and (B) increase and decrease together the correlation is stronger (though causation is still not implied). But in the case of earthquakes and solar activity that relationship is not seen. All we see is that sometimes an earthquake occurs after solar activity, the same way that sometimes the phone rings when you step into the shower.

Since we are moving toward solar maximum it can be expected that we will see more solar activity. Does that mean more earthquakes? Evidence does not seem to indicate so.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by guessing
 


Well, if you look at the link I provided you and read it, you may just be enlightened. I cannot help you nor will I entertain you when all you can do is mouth off. I simply do not like people like you. You say you have an open mind...? Well, when you are done making yourself feel bigger (you must be a shortie) then by all means please come back to me with some real talk. Right now I have no idea what you are trying to convey because I can't help but read your attitude.

Actually on a nicer note (because I like being nice) I have read some of your comments to others. You seem to be on the smarter side, so why must you knock me down based on something I have observed for myself. Research it as I have and maybe just maybe you will come up with, if not the same conclusion, something worthy to add to the conversation.

I do not appreciate your rude comments.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
This link may interest those who think there is a link with the suns activity and Earthquakes.
Only 5 mins long.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


I think he probably has a crush on your profile picture!


I'm just saying!


st.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 


The Space Weather Centre has warned that the sun is undergoing some instability, which has implications for electronic communications. "There is a very active area on the sun as rotated onto the invisible solar disc. This active area has got the potential for more flaring for the next five to six days,"

www.news24.com...

As I said...what flare? The weather man doesn't always get it right. There was an M1.4 flare two days ago but that's not much to get excited about.

edit on 6/1/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Also, I am aware of patterns as I am an aware entity.

Like I said before and will say again my opinion is based on MY observation. I am not forcing my opinion on anyone. You can say the sky is black and if I see it is blue based on my perception and observation I will call it how I see it.

Supposedly EQ's cannot be predicted but I say based on the past year and half I have noticed a pattern. When our Sun lets off a decent flare I have noticed within a few days a mag 6+ within a few days.

The best thing to do (I think) is to make a mental note of a decent flare and sit back and wait to see if ole Jenn (ME) is correct.

Then....come back here and let me know what you observed. Otherwise, I don't know what else to say.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by MamaJ
reply to post by guessing
 


Well, if you look at the link I provided you and read it, you may just be enlightened. I cannot help you nor will I entertain you when all you can do is mouth off. I simply do not like people like you. You say you have an open mind...? Well, when you are done making yourself feel bigger (you must be a shortie) then by all means please come back to me with some real talk. Right now I have no idea what you are trying to convey because I can't help but read your attitude.

Actually on a nicer note (because I like being nice) I have read some of your comments to others. You seem to be on the smarter side, so why must you knock me down based on something I have observed for myself. Research it as I have and maybe just maybe you will come up with, if not the same conclusion, something worthy to add to the conversation.

I do not appreciate your rude comments.


In this instance Phage has been able to eloquently explain the dilema. I was unable to do so.

I was not knocking YOU down, only your speculative theory. Big difference

Compared to 20 ft alien creatures in another thread, my 6ft frame is short....



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


youtu.be...


edit on 1-6-2011 by MamaJ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Today and tomorrow are the five planetary lineup days. The crop circle from 2009 was indicating this was special and occuring. Maybe its all pulling on the sun and earth?



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 

An aware entity. Thanks for clearing that up.

There are an average of 150 earthquakes of 6.0 and greater a year. That's an average of one every 2.5 days. The chances are pretty good that one will occur within a few days of a solar flare. Phone? Shower?

There are no more earthquakes when the Sun is not very active than when it is.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by MamaJ
 

Yes, that would be the CME associated with the M1.4 flare I was talking about.
The CME was not Earth directed. It will have no effect on Earth.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by SatoriTheory
reply to post by MamaJ
 


Magnitude 6 and above quakes used to be seen as 'big deals', but ever since the Japan's Godzilla quake no one seems to pay much attention.




I agree. People also seem to forget that a 6.0 that hit in 1900 is not the same as a 6.0 that happens today. Everybody always says -- see, we've had stronger ones in 1800...nothing to see here.

But what they fail to remember is that in 1800 there were half the people and a third of the structures that exist today.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join