Earthquake - in Richmond Virginia, AND Richmond, CA... Earthquake?

reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo


On the same day as the DC/VA earthquake, a very rare 5.3 quake hit ~90 miles south of Denver Co near NM border as well www.9news.com...
It does seem odd that quakes this size hitting in areas not known for any significant quake activity occurred on the same day just a few hours apart.

Originally posted by earth2mayavision
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo

 

On the same day as the DC/VA earthquake, a very rare 5.3 quake hit ~90 miles south of Denver Co near NM border as well www.9news.com...
It does seem odd that quakes this size hitting in areas not known for any significant quake activity occurred on the same day just a few hours apart.

Not attacking anyone just saying

Considering the amount of seismic activity all over the world in the last few months I don't find it surprising at all.

Given what we don't know about earth quakes in general shouldn't we expect dormant or mostly dormant faults to become active at any time ? Thinking any other way sort of seems like just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring what is probably inevitable. Fun thread bye the way

Originally posted by Heyyo_yoyo
Originally posted by SatoriTheory
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo




Yep, look like Nuke Detonation signatures to me!





Always nice to have a "professional" opinion...

Originally posted by Heyyo_yoyo
Originally posted by Chance321

I'm sorry, but I'm not ready to believe in the nuclear blast in an underground bunker, yet. If there were a blast, wouldn't there be a large ground depression from the below ground blast? I mean look at the underground nuclear blasts on You Tube, there's always an cave in after the blast. If I can find it,it's been a few years but I'll post it if I can find it, but I remember reading or hearing that quakes on the east coast are sharper because we're basically setting on soild rock and that the west coast quakes are more of a rolling type because the ground is looser . . or something to the effect.

There was a depression formed.... in the form of a sink hole amigo, didn't you read the memo?

Really? Where? If you're referring to the sinkhole in Stafford - it is 50 miles away from Mineral VA - the closest city to the site of the VA quake epicenter. Wouldn't we have seen a sinkhole/crater IN Mineral, VA if it were a nuke?

Originally posted by Heyyo_yoyo

Originally posted by Chance321
I'm sorry, but I'm not ready to believe in the nuclear blast in an underground bunker, yet. If there were a blast, wouldn't there be a large ground depression from the below ground blast? I mean look at the underground nuclear blasts on You Tube, there's always an cave in after the blast. If I can find it,it's been a few years but I'll post it if I can find it, but I remember reading or hearing that quakes on the east coast are sharper because we're basically setting on soild rock and that the west coast quakes are more of a rolling type because the ground is looser . . or something to the effect.

There was a depression formed.... in the form of a sink hole amigo, didn't you read the memo?

Still not buying it. Are there bunkers where these earthquake sink holes located? First one is in the Caymen Islands after a quake: ireport.cnn.com...
The second one here is from the New Zealand quake: www.kvewtv.com...

a nuclear reactor does not explode in the same manner as a nuclear weapon.

if your thinking hiroshima, then your on the wrong track.

reply to post by RelentlessLurker


Much like pulling the string on a guitar tight, then, letting it go. You build the tensor, then, you release it. The energy dissipates in the form of mechanical energy in the target area. And, it "rings", just as the seismograph shows from several other forum posters links.