New ATS Member Claiming To Have Important Warning/Information. You Be The Judge...

3.0 near Tijuana (which is still pretty close to LA). This one was within the last hour, and occurred in the same place as a 4.0 that shook less than a week prior.

Magnitude
3.0
Date-Time
Thursday, September 15, 2011 at 04:35:11 UTC
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 at 09:35:11 PM at epicenter
Location
32.089°N, 115.254°W
Depth
16 km (9.9 miles) (poorly constrained)
Region
BAJA CALIFORNIA, MEXICO
Distances
26 km (16 miles) SSW (211°) from Guadalupe Victoria, Baja California, Mexico
61 km (38 miles) SW (227°) from San Luis Río Colorado, Sonora, Mexico
64 km (40 miles) SW (225°) from San Luis, AZ
173 km (108 miles) ESE (106°) from Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 2 km (1.2 miles); depth +/- 23.6 km (14.7 miles)
Parameters
Nph= 10, Dmin=76 km, Rmss=0.26 sec, Gp=256°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=1
Source
California Integrated Seismic Net:
USGS Caltech CGS UCB UCSD UNR
Event ID
ci11006677

earthquake.usgs.gov...

ALSO: Check out this video of the "lights"...


WT# is that?

Credit for finding videos goes to loam (click for post)

Originally posted by DamaSan
Anyone looked at the ATS Live Feed lately? There are widespread reports of meteors, lights, and UFOs in the sky over the US South West. First reports were of a giant meteor-like object streaking across the sky, now residents of SoCal (LA/Orange County) are reporting strange blue/green lights in the sky.

Earthquake lights? Prequel to the big shaker?

www.abovetopsecret.com...
There were other threads in the live feed, but they aren't showing now. Twitter was ablaze of the meteor sighting (still unconfirmed to be a meteor)

losangeles.cbslocal.com... tm_campaign=men-from-mars

(Earthquake lights are widely reported and documented by people, but the physics of the matter are still in dispute)
en.wikipedia.org...

An earthquake light is an unusual luminous aerial phenomenon that reportedly appears in the sky at or near areas of tectonic stress, seismic activity, or volcanic eruptions. Once commonly challenged, it was not until photographs were taken during the Matsushiro earthquake swarm in Nagano, Japan (which occurred from 1965 through 1967) that the seismology community acknowledged their occurrence.

Also a report of landslides/sinkholes in Virginia. Havent read this yet, but I'd be ready to write this off as post-Lee issues (ground saturation, etc)
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Shaping up to be another interesting day here in CONUS!

edit on 14-9-2011 by DamaSan because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-9-2011 by DamaSan because: (no reason given)

Yep saw one around 8:30 pm. I'm in LA county in the foothills. This was orange and was very bright at first, the fizzled out at it went down behind trees out toward the canyon behind us. While it was bright, I saw another smaller light which appeared green or blue go into it! My husband saw it too very quickly.

So not all the eggheads are reading from the same book within the ivory tower:

At the core of this debate is whether or not earthquakes are fundamentally predictable. Some have argued that the crust is continuously in a state of self-organized criticality (SOC) with the probability of earthquake size and location remaining steady

That's at least good to know, but there are still ideas and concepts they consider anathema and will not even enter into a debate where certain subjects are raised. So us amateurs are forced to wade in and take a look at things in ways that scientists won't or can't.

What they were seeing then:

The exciting aspect of these recent seismic cycle models is that they predict temporally and spatially varying deformation patterns in the termination regions of locked fault segments. These models can constrain earthquake fault system behavior, and should be of a magnitude measurable with radar satellite systems

There are certain characteristics of faults during the stress cycle of pre-,co-, and post-seismic releases. These characteristics induce very specific and measurable stress patterns within the topography of an area near a fault and this pattern can be read by satellites.

The longer period of time the area is observed by the satellite, the better able they are to pinpoint and describe the faults in that area. There are several layers of scanning that take place which are done from constellations of satellites in different orbits. From this they are able to build a base image upon which all future images are compared against on a mm scale resolution.

Part of the model for individual faults and fault systems consists of sections that experience either continuous or transient creep. Creep, or aseismic slip, describes slip on fault surfaces that does not produce seismic waves, or discernible shaking. While some creeping fault segments are recognized, and several such segments are monitored locally in well instrumented regions such as California, many creeping faults are still unknown

emphasis mine

There are still many unknown faults all over the world and some are situated beyond any scope of measurement we have been able to devise, and any of those could go at any moment. And from a previous post of mine:

The researchers also noted that creep events in other locations can sometimes trigger earthquakes. While they caution that their study was focused on triggered tremor rather than triggered earthquakes, they suggest that prolonged triggered creep episodes could be relevant for both phenomena. In particular, triggered creep episodes could provide a physical explanation for the time delay commonly observed between passing seismic waves and distantly generated earthquakes.

emphasis mine

So says the USGS

More GESS:

The requirements for detecting these signals requires both wide swath (on the order of 100 km), and detailed spatial sampling (10–100 m). Also required is long-term temporal continuity (over decades) but at fine enough temporal sampling (several days) that precursory phenomena can be separated from the coseismic, postseismic, and aftershock signals that accompany a large earthquak

This is what I was referring to a bit earlier in this post.

There is a lot of technical data in the report (well, duh) but the point is, they know what they need to do, what tools they need to do it, and what it is they are looking for. They go on to say that quicker intervals between scans will allow for a greater depth of detail which then turns in to more accurate predictive capabilities. There is a detailed overview of several types of satellite to be deployed along with a few images of circuitry that would do the measuring.

Trying to winkle out what is important and relevant to this particular issue is difficult as there is not a small amount to read, digest, and analyze. I don't think the technical details of the satellites themselves are important here, but the methods used, what's searched for and any conclusions drawn should be our target should anyone else wish to see what can be gleaned from within it's pages.


ETA
reply to post by DamaSan


Ok, those are NOT bolides.

Not no way, not no how.

I'm looking for something at the moment, will edit again when I've found it.



Anyone wanting to post here solely to mark the thread is more than welcome to do so, since this whole thing is a (cough)hoax(cough) there's no topic to speak of, no?

ETA

5 . Are there non-seismic precursory phenomena that may enable and improve earthquake prediction?

There are numerous geophysical phenomena other than surface deformation that have been associated with seismic events.These include: very low-frequency (VLF), ultra low-frequency (ULF), and extremely low-frequency (ELF) magnetic fields observed on the ground and in space, high-frequency electric fields (including earthquake lights), and thermal anomalies observed with satellite sensors. There are individual events, such as the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake ELF magnetic field, or the warming observed coincident with the Hector Mine earthquake, that appear significantly correlated with seismicity.

Still from GESS, I've got chills now...


and more

Precursory quasicontinuous electric and magnetic fields associated with earthquakes, when they can be confidently observed, appear to arise from electrokinetic effects of fluid flow (Fenoglio et al., 1995; Park, 1996)

Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
ETA
reply to post by DamaSan

 

Ok, those are NOT bolides.

Not no way, not no how.

I'm looking for something at the moment, will edit again when I've found it.

Looked a lot like the Bolide example from Wiki... what did you find that changed your mind?

ETA
5 . Are there non-seismic precursory phenomena that may enable and improve earthquake prediction?

There are numerous geophysical phenomena other than surface deformation that have been associated with seismic events.These include: very low-frequency (VLF), ultra low-frequency (ULF), and extremely low-frequency (ELF) magnetic fields observed on the ground and in space, high-frequency electric fields (including earthquake lights), and thermal anomalies observed with satellite sensors. There are individual events, such as the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake ELF magnetic field, or the warming observed coincident with the Hector Mine earthquake, that appear significantly correlated with seismicity.

Still from GESS, I've got chills now...

Looks like you've corroborated the existence/acknowledgement of EQ Lights... creepy!

reply to post by DamaSan


OR that was the UARS coming to Earth early.
satellite tracking had it in the right region at the time, just a little southeast (Mexico/Texas coast, Gulf region).

reply to post by jazkaat

That certainly comes to mind, but NASA/military says it wasn't the satellite OR any kind of space junk.

Best video so far...

More credit to loam.

hello all,
i thought many here would find TAs new thread about Yellowstone rather interesting so here's the link ... www.abovetopsecret.com...&flagit=753004

as for the lights, i'm guessing precursor myself but have no scientific 'proof' ... not that my opinion counts, just tossing it in the proverbial hat.

for those of you interested in some of the science since the GESS report, you may find this google search page full of interesting links ... www.google.com...:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a

here are a few i find helpful ...
www.geos.ed.ac.uk...
www.geos.ed.ac.uk...
arxiv.org...:+Thanassoulas_C/0/1/0/all/0/1
rses.anu.edu.au...

to those who think prediction is unattainable, think again.
to tm, thank you kindly for offering what you have or can. tis a shame so many simply refuse to teach themselves. thanks again and be safe

reply to post by DamaSan


That video in your second post doesn't look like the same light as in the first post where you had two videos. The first post you made with a video, the light seems to change trajectory a couple of times and change colors as well. There are also 2 - 3 other flickering lights closer to the horizon which wink in and out. Those may or may not be related to the light that was moving, but they were present.

reply to post by jadedANDcynical


Yeah, there was one eyewitness video clip toward the end of one of those YouTube vids that had a "UFO" that moved as the camera did. The guy was standing under a streetlight, so I have to dismiss it as possible lens flare/bloom. In that same clip, however, there was a stationary light... but that clip is beyond trustable to me now.

There are plenty of other good ones though. And the news guys seem to have confirmed from all angles that it WAS TWO EVENTS, and that the FAA/NASA/Vandenburg have no clue what it was.

Meanwhile, reports continue that roads are blocked off everywhere...

What a night!

I've been keeping up with this thread and associated others. I don't understand everything that is being discussed but I have tried to do some research myself. I seem to have focused in on the restricted access to the "The M8-MSc predictions for California and Nevada" on the Keilis-Borok site on earthquake predictions (www.mitp.ru...).

To that end I came across a presentation PDF from the California Geological Survey (CGS) titled "Development of Earthquake Prediction Public Policy" dated 8/3/09.
Presentation PDF

In this PDF they consider the Keilis-Borok methodology for earthquake prediction and state..

"The Keilis-Borok methodology appears to be a legitimate approach in earthquake prediction research. However, the physical basis for the prediction put forward by the authors has not been substantiated, and they have not yet issued enough predictions to allow a statistical validation of their forecasting methodology."

Further along but within the Keilis-Borok subject matter is a "slide" called "A Real Time Earthquake Forecast Experiment: Forecasting Locations of Future Significant Earthquakes 2000-2010".
It's focus is California.
I can't make much of that slide but perhaps someone else can and perhaps it has some relevance.
Go to pg 9 of PDF

Also an 8/11/11 article on a study by the California Institute of Technology with NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory regarding an unusual fault pattern as it relates to the use of satellites on the April 4, 2010, El Mayor-Cucapah earthquake. They state that

A 3-D view of the surface rupture of the April 4, 2010, El Mayor–Cucapah Earthquake (red line) reveals a new fault line connecting the Gulf of California with the Elsinore fault, which is likely to become the main fault at the boundary between the Pacific and the North America plates.

and

"Although the surface trace is nearly linear, we found that the event, which started with a smaller quake, happened mainly on two faults with opposite dipping directions," says Wei.

LINK

I don't know if any of this is relevant or not. It seemed so when I read over it the first time...now, not so sure.

Originally posted by daxpax

A 3-D view of the surface rupture of the April 4, 2010, El Mayor–Cucapah Earthquake (red line) reveals a new fault line connecting the Gulf of California with the Elsinore fault, which is likely to become the main fault at the boundary between the Pacific and the North America plates.

That one piece right there is VERY interesting. Do you have any more data/links associated with that part? Your entire post was very relevant but that one part really stands out to me.... I wanna check into that.

Sorry it took so long to post but I didn't expect 22 pages to catch up on.

I dont believe T was agreeing with the Cayce thought, other than to acknowledge the interconnectedness of the earth's lithosphere.

It's the pressure build up in the lithosphere, and how that pressure and energy is transmitted, often thousands of miles, and how that pressure and energy finds equilibrium, that he's referring to.

But in all fairness, mystics like Cayce have been predicting EQs setting off EQs for a long time, and that's what we are talking about here. It's only recently with technological advances that the scientific community is now able to grasp the point that the skin of the earth transmits energy throughout and that there are locking points that are currently under extreme stress and ready to snap at any given moment. And right now the CSZ (and sister faults like the San Andreas) and the NMF are ground zero for pressure locking points. All the big quakes have been squeezing the lithosphere towards those two junctions.

But really, we dont need a weatherman to tell us which way the wind blows. The major lower 48 fault systems are primed and ready to go any day, anytime, any how. Like he said, prepare.

reply to post by DamaSan


I think this is what you want


Very interesting to say the least.

The study, which was led by researchers at the California Institute of Technology with NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory geophysicist Eric Fielding serving as a coauthor, is available online in the journal Nature Geoscience.

Here is the abstract

And also at Nature Geoscience is this:

Stretching of the continental crust in the Basin and Range, western USA1, has more than doubled the surface area of the central province2. But it is unknown whether stretching affects the entire column of lithosphere down to the convecting mantle, if deep extension occurs offset to the side, or if deeper layers are entirely decoupled from the upper crust3, 4.

Found here

Wow, wish I had membership, would love to read the full articles

reply to post by DamaSan

Here are the links I have on that article.
The main one from California Institute of Technology
From NASA - Jet Propulsion Laboratory

The specific info you are referencing is from the diagram description in the Cal Tech story.

reply to posts by jadedANDcynical & daxpax


AWESOME. Thanks. Gonna check on those goodies then get a few hours of shuteye. Hopefully, California will still be around when I wake up.

Cuba just got whacked by a 6.0!

Magnitude
6.0
Date-Time
Thursday, September 15, 2011 at 08:43:07 UTC
Thursday, September 15, 2011 at 04:43:07 AM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
Location
19.574°N, 78.022°W
Depth
10 km (6.2 miles)
Region
CUBA REGION
Distances
122 km (75 miles) N of Montego Bay, Jamaica
169 km (105 miles) WSW of Bayamo, Cuba
216 km (134 miles) NW of KINGSTON, Jamaica
722 km (448 miles) SSE of Miami, Florida
Location Uncertainty
horizontal +/- 12.4 km (7.7 miles); depth +/- 2.8 km (1.7 miles)
Parameters
NST=322, Nph=324, Dmin=158.1 km, Rmss=0.97 sec, Gp= 36°,
M-type=regional moment magnitude (Mw), Version=7
Source
Magnitude: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Location: USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
Event ID
usc0005us9

earthquake.usgs.gov...

reply to post by DamaSan

Yes, saw that one. Very troubling.

However, there's just been another quake in L.A.:

Magnitude 3.5
Date-Time

* Thursday, September 15, 2011 at 09:56:41 UTC
* Thursday, September 15, 2011 at 02:56:41 AM at epicenter

Location 33.629°N, 117.823°W
Depth 11.6 km (7.2 miles)
Region GREATER LOS ANGELES AREA, CALIFORNIA
Distances

* 2 km (1 miles) NE (34°) from San Joaquin Hills, CA
* 3 km (2 miles) N (7°) from Newport Coast, CA
* 7 km (4 miles) E (79°) from Newport Beach, CA
* 7 km (4 miles) SSW (205°) from Irvine, CA
* 61 km (38 miles) SE (140°) from Los Angeles Civic Center, CA

Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 0.4 km (0.2 miles); depth +/- 0.7 km (0.4 miles)
Parameters Nph=134, Dmin=6 km, Rmss=0.49 sec, Gp= 83°,
M-type=local magnitude (ML), Version=0
Source

* California Integrated Seismic Net:
* USGS Caltech CGS UCB UCSD UNR

Event ID ci11006789

SOURCE USGS

This event could reasonably be taken to be associated (aftershock? foreshock??) with the previous one already noted in this thread.
ETA: This Mag 3.5 and the recent Mag 4.1 might not be directly related in the sense of the M 3.5 being an aftershock of the Mag 4.1. Only close study of the complex pattern of faults in the region would help to clarify that. All the same, I feel that this latest event tends to strengthen the credibility of "t" and we certainly need to keep a close eye on SoCal and related regions.
END ETA

Mike

Gonna be hard to sleep tonight... don't wanna miss anything. And don't wanna wake up with the roof caved in around my bed.

reply to post by DamaSan

Sorry if you mentioned it and I missed it, but would you be willing to mention your approximate location, Dama-San? Only if you feel comfortable with doing so, of course. No offense taken if you'd rather not.

The reason I ask is that if you're within the potentially affected region then we'd be glad for anything you're able to pass on. Reactions of local animals, unusual activity by emergency services, etc. (If safe to report at all, that is.)

Thank you and stay stafe,

Mike

reply to post by JustMike


Nashville, TN

2nd