It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Quake Watch 2012

page: 127
<< 124  125  126    128  129  130 >>

log in


posted on May, 3 2012 @ 12:42 PM
reply to post by Olivine

Hi Olivine, yes the data I put up came from "solar cycle" who are now "solar" and their source was in fact the same data that you linked so my graph is of that data.

I need to get at the older stuff however although I have to say that at present it looks as if it may be coincident BUT ye never know.

It is certainly interesting that the largest surge in the past 8 years also coincides with the largest earthquake but then again there is no surge immediately before the Banda Aceh quake.

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 02:33 PM
reply to post by SpaceJockey1

gotta go to work now, but threw this graph together from the excel csv file I used for the Mag 8+ map and list

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 06:22 PM
reply to post by PuterMan

I had read about the March 20th eclipse theory but from a different site to the one you linked. Thanks for this link

That's why I mentioned several posts ago that I might be 4 or so days to early with my major quake prediction for the 14th to 16th of May, as I hadn't taken the eclipse into account when making the prediction just over 2 weeks ago.

My original prediction is for the event to happen around Sumatra, but I'm also feeling something for north of Japan.

I'm really interested to see if anything comes of this.

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 06:25 PM
reply to post by muzzy

Thanks Muzzy, much appreciated.

I sure hope we don't see a repeat of that sort of energy release from the 1800's, anytime in our lifetimes

There's no doubt that if one of those babies crop up in a heavily built-up area, millions could possibly die.

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 07:55 PM
reply to post by SpaceJockey1

I have to say SJ, that I to am interested to see what comes of your "prediction". You really shook things up last month. I hope for safety reasons you are wrong but if you are right.....

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 08:21 PM
reply to post by Doodle19815

Personally I'd rather be totally WRONG, so here's hoping

The trouble is it's hard to shake the gut feelings, and the research I have done in the last year or so, since the devastating Christchurch earthquakes of 2010 & 2011

It's like they awoken some internal mechanism of 'awareness' (or just FEAR of earthquakes)!

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 09:26 PM
reply to post by SpaceJockey1

I don't have "that headache" for a larger quake at the moment - most often, it would have started it's slow build up by now, but will state that my equilibrium has been off for 2 days and kind of in a time warp which could be the beginning. We are a week and a half out though - will let you know -

Cascadia is truly bothering me. Very surprised that John has not said anything on the Port Hardy umm swarm? John does this have you Folks on edge also?

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:07 PM
reply to post by Anmarie96

If you follow the link PuterMan posted about the 20th May solar eclipse, the line passes thru Japan and over the cascadia subduction zone, so it can't be ruled out as a potential area of increased activity.

Now, my original 16th of May date can't be ruled out, as after reading info about the 20th's solar eclipse, it is stated that historically the major earthquakes can be 3 days before to 5 days after the event.

If something MAJOR happens during that period, I'll certainly be calling it more than just a COINCIDENCE.

Of course if nothing of note happens, then I might just be dust-binning the planetary & astrological theories

The next big one
Although the last giant earthquake hit Washington's coast 300 years ago, scientists say that the Cascadia Subduction Zone may be storing up energy to be released in the next catastrophic earthquake. The stresses detected off Washington's coast could generate a huge earthquake (magnitude 9 or more). That would rival the largest earthquake ever recorded. (A magnitude 8.7 earthquake would release 1,000 times the energy of the magnitude 6.6 earthquake that struck Los Angeles in 1994.)

When it hits
Violent shaking will last at least two minutes. The ocean floor will drop, most likely creating a tsunami that will strike long stretches of the coast. The central Olympic peninsula will suddenly rise, while some coastal areas will sink below sea level.

If an earthquake occurs at the coast

Drop, cover and hold. Get under a sturdy object and hold on. Watch for falling objects.
As soon as the shaking is over, move to high ground or inland. Do not wait for an official warning.
Stay away from the coast. Waves may continue to arrive for hours.
Listen to your local radio station for an official "All Clear" notice before returning to the coastal area.
Be alert for aftershocks.

Protect yourself and your family

Develop a family disaster plan. Everyone needs to know what to do on their own to protect themselves from an earthquake.
Be familiar with local Emergency Management earthquake and tsunami plans. Know where to go to survive a tsunami.
Be prepared to survive on your own for a minimum of three days.
Prepare a disaster supply kit for your home, automobile and work.
Take a first aid course and learn survival skills. Knowledge is your greatest defense against potential disaster.

edit on 3-5-2012 by SpaceJockey1 because: added info

posted on May, 3 2012 @ 10:11 PM

Originally posted by Anmarie96

Cascadia is truly bothering me. Very surprised that John has not said anything on the Port Hardy umm swarm? John does this have you Folks on edge also?

Swarms in that area around 4.0 are quite common, are they not?

ETA: a freind mentioned they just felt a small tremor in Tokyo.
edit on 3-5-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 12:06 AM
reply to post by stanguilles7

The swarm is a bit far north for us to worry much - the quakes have been away from the subduction zone. Even if they were on the megathrust, the chances of a dangerous quake are not high. Unfortunately, the odds are that when the next bad quake strikes, it will be a complete surprise.

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 12:09 AM
reply to post by SpaceJockey1

Any link between eclipses and earthquakes would be a great surprise to me. I don't see any reason for there to be a correlation.

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 02:46 AM

Originally posted by JohnVidale
reply to post by SpaceJockey1

Any link between eclipses and earthquakes would be a great surprise to me. I don't see any reason for there to be a correlation.

Hi John, I hear you, but in written history you will find a number of writings about megaquakes happening around the time of solar eclipses (examples given in the link provided by PuterMan. Often 3 days before and up to 5 days after).

Won't be long to wait and see if anything 'odd' occurs around this time.

BTW I stated on the 14th of April that I believed that after the high activity around the 11th of April (which I predicted on ATS several days beforehand) for those a couple of days, that we wouldn't see anything larger than a 6+ mag again (less that 7+), until around the 14th to 16th of May, when I believe that based on planetary alignments we would see our next 7+ or larger quake.

So far as predicted, 20 days later, there hasn't been a 7+ mag quake anywhere in the world since my 14th of April prediction. Note that all over ATS (after the 2 x 8+'s) people were going crazy thinking that something major was about to happen, and were posting every quake that happened! lol

I did mention a couple of days ago that due to the solar eclipse on the 20th which I had missed taking in to account, and the planetary alignments still being in effect, I might be a few days out with my prediction of the 16th of May.

Let's see what happens and maybe discuss in more detail later

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 03:50 AM
reply to post by JohnVidale

So tell me John, do you remember this article from December 2009. I remember it being published.

Parts of the San Andreas Fault are so sensitive to stress that the faint gravitational tug of the sun and the moon may be enough to cause tiny tremors 15 miles underground, a team of UC Berkeley seismologists has found.

San Andreas found extremely sensitive to stress

Of course to counter the set of unconstrained scientists we have the constrained point of view

Ediz_Celik: Do solar eclipse affect earthquakes ?

Mitzi: There's no correlation between solar or lunar eclipses and increased earthquakes or increased storms.

NASA: Eclipse

Of course the good conspiracy theorist would reject the later as it is NASA and therefore by default it is a lie.

You also have to wonder, if you indulge in unconstrained thought of course, why as an example in Turkey the populace think there may be a link?

Turkey's top seismologist explained to a nervous public yesterday that there is no link between eclipses and earthquakes and gave assurances that there is nothing to fear from a solar eclipse on March 29. "When we check to see whether there is a scientific or statistical model to link solar eclipses with earthquakes, we find none," Gulay Barbarasoglu, the head of the Istanbul's Kandilli observatory, said. "Right now, we unfortunately see a serious lack of knowledge and a serious mix-up of facts out there."

Source for more reading

As it happens there was no earthquake on the 29th March 2006 in Turkey but...

.....I will leave you with a quote by an unknown person

So how can any of you be certain that the alignment of the sun and moon, and the combined gravitational effect this alignement has on this planet’s floating crust, would not be enough added stress to trigger the release? Particularly when the alignment is precise enough to produce an eclipse?

Solar Eclipse In Africa & Asia (Earthquake Connection?)

Remember the 55mm?

I am not saying there is a connection, neither I am I saying that there is not. I am not sitting on the fence either. I have an open mind on the subject and am trying to research the possibilities because I don't want

Any link between eclipses and earthquakes would (to) be a great surprise to me.

Science trains one to think inside the box these days but life makes you think outside it. (2012 Puterman)


For those who hang on by their toes:

Lunar eclipse prompts lunatic quips but is not going to rock your world

By the way this type of denial, which I have come up with myself, always excludes the trigger aspect rather than the cause aspect. The Trigger aspect is virtually impossible to quantify unless you have an accurate picture of stress on the fault(s) at the time.

If as an example there is a 60% relationship between new moons and earthquakes then it is acceptable to say that there is a 60% chance that the gravitational effect of a new moon may trigger areas already under stress. It is not acceptable to say that there is a 60% chance that the new moon will cause an earthquake. Two very different things.
edit on 4/5/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



Now here is an interesting paper. A New Insight towards Earthquake Prediction (PDF)

I have no idea how credible the organisation or author are BUT the distribution graph on page 6 of 10 interests me.

Fig. 3. Frequency distribution and normal distribution fit of the number of days between major
earthquake and solar eclipse events for the 1901 to 2010 period

I need to take a closer look and see if they are up to statistical trickery but it certainly seems interesting at face value.

edit on 4/5/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 04:53 AM
For anyone interested in the the Australian Continent, I found this map today that may interest you that I thought I would Share with you.

It shows earthquake epicenters and fault scarps in Australia between 1841-2000

Apologies I've forgotten how to imbedded the image within in my post.

edit on 4-5-2012 by TheKingsVillian because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 05:21 AM
reply to post by TheKingsVillian

Warning to dial up users. That is a PDF file of 1.7 MB


update to post by PuterMan

Sorry folks that paper is using the climate statistical model - garbage in, desired results out.

Best use for it is cut into squares.

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 09:59 AM
reply to post by PuterMan

I've only a few minutes at the moment, but a couple of comments. The San Andreas work is referring to tremor, not earthquakes, and yes, they correlate well with tidal stresses, although the peak tidal stresses do not do anything special, as would be expected from adding just an extra few percent to the normal oscillations. A post-doc, some collaborators and I (Rubenstein et al., Science, 20008) wrote one of the original papers on the subject.

However one slices what one expects to happen, the test is what does happen, and larger tidal stresses do not do much to the rate of earthquake occurrence.

The excess stress during an eclipse compared to peak stresses not during an eclipse is tiny. In fact, tidal stress addition due to the variation in distance to the Sun and Moon are more important than whether the alignment is so perfect as to result in an eclipse, so keying on the presence of an eclipse is a mistake.

Finally, whether an earthquake happens or not in this instance is much less diagnostic that examining whether the centuries of recorded earthquakes tend to happen during eclipses. This is just one more sample on a time series of thousands.

Fun to speculate, though.

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 01:21 PM
Since about April 25th, there's been quite a few quakes around Northern Vancouver Island (that's where I live). Could it mean anything?

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 05:15 PM
Does the moon cause earthquakes?

But let's ask a different question.

In earth's past, did the moon cause earthquakes?

To this question the answer is yes. Millions of years ago, the moon was much closer to earth. The gravitional tidal forces were much greater. So, the moon over the last couple billion years would have caused billions of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions of all sizes.

Life on earth without the moon would be remarkably different.

How did the moon form? Here's a bunch of theories.

Acually, one of the best theories is one of the oldest. Anaxagoras, the Greek Philosopher from 5th Century BCE, thought the moon was earthly. He also came to understand the true nature of an eclipse.

Later, Darwin's theory would come close to explaining the moon's origin. (I don't know why I keep thinking he's not related to Charles) How did the material from earth get 5000 miles away from earth? I know. It was ejected. Like a rocket. Oxygen and Hydrogen make good rocket fuel. Also, remember with all moon theories, you must now understand the moon is 200 million years younger than once thought.

Anyway, off course. The real question should be, Does the moon still cause earthquakes and eruptions?

I think the moon has a bigger effect on earthquakes which are caused by volcanic actions. Oh, Puterman. I was going to explain about Yellowstone and the new moons and the eclipse and the webicorders from the swarms. I wish I could post January 15 with the trace of the first quake which shows up 2 hours after the eclipse. On the 17th it was apogee. Both swarms preceded by "big full moons". Sorry, all this stuff is rehashed and it's been swimming around in my head for days. You guys mentioned the eclipse. I remember the one January 15 2010. Because I was watching the webicorders closely to see what would happen. I'll never forget that weekend.

Enough of that.

Seems quiet don't it? Except off Vancouver, Central America, and Turkey/Iran.

Almost forgot Washington State which is curious only because of the activity off Vancouver Island.

Oh. One last thing. That goofy Mexican volcano is making goofy as well. One day it was blowing smoke rings. That white plume means there's lots of water. H2O hydrogen oxygen. great combustables

edit on 4-5-2012 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 05:27 PM

Originally posted by phoenixlights321
Since about April 25th, there's been quite a few quakes around Northern Vancouver Island (that's where I live). Could it mean anything?

Those sciencey-types say swarms of that magnitude are very common at that particular, unique plate junction.

Experts say a "swarm" of small earthquakes off the northwest coast of Vancouver Island are part of the normal seismic activity in the area, and they could continue for several more days

Rogers said more small earthquakes are expected in the area over the next week.

"They often go on for days. There's been a lot of smaller ones, so eventually they'll wind down, but typically, what we've seen in the past is that most of these swarms last a few days to a week or so."

A similar but more powerful swarm that struck the same area in August 2008 included a magnitude 5.2 quake..
edit on 4-5-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 4 2012 @ 05:54 PM
Oh we go...Prof. Erik Klemetti's latest blogg is all about the moon and its effects on EQ's and volcamo activity. Far too long to post it here in its entirety...but please give his view a read.


top topics

<< 124  125  126    128  129  130 >>

log in