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.

 

2011 - The Year of the Earthquakes?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:16 AM
link   
We're 227 days into the year and have had 1805 Earthquakes. 227 / 1805 = 8 Earthquakes every day, magnitude of above 5.

Wikipedia

We have recorded the first ever magnitude 9 Earthquake in March, killing 15,000 Japanese.


Here is a live Earthquake map: quakes.globalincidentmap.com...

A Major Earthquake in North America Imminent




Australian Beach Disappears - 2011




With 4.5 months left in the year, and 8 Earthquakes per day, 2011 will easily have the most Earthquakes out of the last 11 years of recording.

Do you believe this Earthquake activity is normal?
edit on 15-8-2011 by Gexi1992 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-8-2011 by Gexi1992 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-8-2011 by Gexi1992 because: Correct Youtube Video's.




posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:19 AM
link   
I suggest you read the QUAKE WATCH thread.

Almost every aspect of your post of fearmongeringly wrong.

Edit - having thought about it some more, "a big pack of lies" designed to earn stars and flags is a better description.

edit on 15-8-2011 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


I don't want stars or flags, I have no ego to fill. The last thing I want is fear, I'm all about truth.

Do you believe it's normal that an Australian Beach Disappeared ?



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:27 AM
link   
Year of absolute madness, insanity and earthquakes.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:36 AM
link   
If you just started watching earthquake activity it's easy to believe they are happening in a higher frequency. They are not, the earth shakes often. Don't flame this poster, encourage him/her to do more research.

We are your best resource for information. Everyone knows the news sucks, don't discourage new "eyes" by making fun of their ignorance.

All is well on planet earth.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gexi1992
I'm all about truth.


Refer to the quake watch thread. puterman recently did a great analysis of the year so far, lots of graphs.
All is normal. We're not going to die.




Originally posted by Gexi1992
Do you believe it's normal that an Australian Beach Disappeared ?


Already covered in depth in this thread.
Summary is that this is not new, not unusual, happens a lot at Inskip beach, always has done.
Gympie police duty officer Sergeant Vic Tipman said sink holes – which swallowed portions of beach as big as houses – were common at Inskip.
...and also has nothing whatsoever to do with earthquakes.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:40 AM
link   
I don't know about the frequency of earthquake. whether there is being an increase or not. But when you take a birds eye view of happenings world over.

I could say this is one interesting times we're leaving in.

PS: Didn't know about the Ozzy beach disappearing, you can add that to the 2011 endless mayhem.

No fear mongering here...

Peace to you

edit on 15-8-2011 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   

We have recorded the first ever magnitude 9 Earthquake in March, killing 15,000 Japanese.


Wrong. The boxing day Tsunami in the Indian Ocean was 9.1

I can see the point you are trying to make, all is not well on the planet. Two massive Tsunamis in the last ten years speaks for itself really.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11I11

We have recorded the first ever magnitude 9 Earthquake in March, killing 15,000 Japanese.

Wrong. The boxing day Tsunami in the Indian Ocean was 9.1



I think what he was trying to say is that the month of March has never experienced a magnitude 9 before.

But considering there's only been a small handful ever *measured* (as opposed to observed or recorded in history) thats not really a surprising statistic.

Edit - actually thats not even true either...
March 27, 1964 Prince William Sound, Alaska, USA 1964 Alaska earthquake 9.2

edit on 15-8-2011 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 04:02 AM
link   
I think we should keep in mind that we've been able to accurately monitor earthquakes for less than 200 years. It's kind hard to say either way what is and isn't normal, or to be expected. I do think we've had quite a number of larger earthquakes this year. I mean, since the 1600s there's only been 4 or 5 9.0+ and in the past five or so years we've had 2.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Its also worth considering that after the big Japanese earthquake, a MASSIVE number of aftershocks have been recorded in that area. As a consequence, the stats for the first half of this year look big.

A different data set, just looking at earthquakes in the USA for this year, look normal to small.
usgs



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Gexi1992
 


Beaches come and go all of the time. That is the nature of beaches. In fact, some beaches disappear in winter and reappear in summer.



posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Gexi1992
 


Welcome to ATS, even if slightly belatedly.


We're 227 days into the year and have had 1805 Earthquakes. 227 / 1805 = 8 Earthquakes every day, magnitude of above 5.


I have explained on the QuakeWatch thread that Japan, the area that has been creating a large number of earthquakes, is actually normally quite quiet. Looking just at mag 6 quakes for example there have been 140 or so this year. About 70 of those were in the Honshu region. Prior to this year that area only had 3 mag 6 in 2 years so if you remove the 70 from the figures you get 70 left over 7 months which means 120 by the end of the year, if it continued at the same rate. There were 143 last year, but there 178 in 2007 and 168 in 2008. Actually in terms of numbers 1995 was the highest count of earthquakes 5+ in the last decade + 2 years (2000 to now) You can apply the same calculation to mag 7 as well and it will work out fewer this year.

Most of thes figures you will find here in my 2010 analysis (now very slightly out of date).

But do numbers actually matter? Not really. Take the Chile quake in 1960 - a mag 9.5 Mw. Japan was so much smaller that it would actually take over 700 magnitude 7.5 earthquakes to make up the difference in energy.

This is actually calculated in Megatons of TNT as I am in the middle of doing a presentation of megaquakes

9.5 = 2,681.7 mTons TNT
9.1 = 673.6 mTons TNT
Diff = 2,008 mTons
7.5 = 2.7 mTons TNT

Divide 2008 by 2.7 = 749.

If you start at the op of page 190 in quakewatch you will find quite a lot of information about earthquake number and energy release.

I believe it is very unlikely that 2011 will have the most earthquakes or the most energy release ever, It might manage the most energy release in the decade, but that is about it. Bear in mind that energy release is completely dwarfed by 1960

This is mag 7,8 and 9 earthquake counts and energy from 1900 to end July.




A Major Earthquake in North America Imminent


Berkland is a scaremonger and his Cascadia prediction for the last super moon was an epic fail.

As far as beaches go I do not know this particular one, but this type of thing is quite common.


Do you believe this Earthquake activity is normal?


Within normal margins yes, I do.



edit on 15/8/2011 by PuterMan because: missing words, bad spelling - the usual stuff!




posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Celestica
 


Actually there is a great deal of reticence on the part of seismologists to classify anything prior to 1900 as a mag 9. Many are done as intensity, based on descriptions, and may have been mag 9 but it is not really possible to tell.

Of the ones that I have in my databases there are these:


1700, 27-Jan, 06:00:00, 45 -125 8.5 9 - Cascadia
1868, 13-Aug, 20:45:00, -17.7 -71.6 25 8.8 9.1 - Chile
1877, 10-May, 02:16:00, -21.06 -70.25 25 8.8 9 - Chile
1952, 11-Apr, 16:58:27, 52.75500 160.05700 9.0000 M - Kamchatka
1957, 09-Mar, 14:22:32, 51.55600 -175.39200 9.1000 M - Alaska (Some have this as 8.6)
1960, 22-May, 19:11:17, -38.23500 -73.04700 9.5000 M - Chile
1964, 28-Mar, 03:36:12, 61.01700 -147.64800 9.2000 M - Alaska
2004, 26-Dec, 00:58:53, 3.316°N, 95.854°E 9.1 Band Aceh
2011, 11-Mar, 05:46:23, 38.322°N, 142.369°E, Honshu.


The two in the past decade are part of the grouping of mega quakes that happens every 35 to 50 years, however the ones prior have not been classifies and 9+ but the are very significant quakes and when I have finished by current study I should be able to say if my grouping theory holds good. For the time being think back

1906 San Francisco
1857 Fort Tejon
1812 New Madrid
1755 Lisbon
1700 Cascadia (above)

etc



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join