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.

 

Quake Watch 2012

page: 79
159
<< 76  77  78    80  81  82 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Three until now.


2012-03-20 19:02:48.8 35min ago 16.41 N 98.30 W 60 5.1 OAXACA, MEXICO\

2012-03-20 18:35:47.0 1hr 02min ago 16.68 N 98.02 W 60 5.0 OAXACA, MEXICO

2012-03-20 18:22:40.0 1hr 15min ago 16.31 N 98.19 W 63 5.2 OAXACA, MEXICO
source(www.emsc-csem.org...




posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
EMSC is calling it a 7.3 now, and USGS is calling it a 7.4. That seems more correct judging by reports.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I'm very confused. Local news & Google are reporting Mexico City. Oaxaca & Mexico City are about 500 miles apart.
Or are they confused? (wouldn't surprise me)
Sooo glad for this thread!



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...

www.cbc.ca...




edit on 20-3-2012 by ericblair4891 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   
The official word is in on the Mexico quake from Global CMT:

7.2

I am taking -.1 off your next credit, PM and Muz, for using USGS and EMSC!




posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Nah, sorry. I already had it at 7.2 from GeoFon and 7.3 from GeoAzur.

But......... *USGS sneaks in quietly and upgrades two earthquakes after the 7th day*

Magnitude 6.2 SOUTH OF THE KERMADEC ISLANDS
Sunday, February 26, 2012 at 05:24:59 UTC
- was 5.6mb

Magnitude 6.0 SOUTH OF THE FIJI ISLANDS
Sunday, February 26, 2012 at 05:21:24 UTC
- was 5.5 mb




posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


Hey PM, I know you don't give much credit to the 188 day cycle and I totally understand why, but though you do point out that there are a number of 7's peppering the days in between, my understanding of the claims were always that the 188 cycle 'only' related to large quakes that happen in built up areas and have a major impact on life and or infrastructure.

Just putting my understanding of the claims out there and I'm not saying I agree with the theory, other than I felt it should be made clear why the several other 7's aren't taken into consideration for the 188 day cycle.

Of course this is slightly early for the claim, so hope there's nothing to follow of similar or larger size, further north in the next 48 hours or so



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   
The bottom line on the 188 day thing is that there has been a big quake every 188 since the 8.8 in S. America.

No one ever said that there would not be any big quakes in between:@

And furthermore, I think the pattern may go back to 1960, or something like that.

Anyway, you have to admit, this is very intriguing to say the least.

One of you math geeks do the math on the odds of this happening.......just figure in that there are about 19 7+ annually(open for correction on the #'s)



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Don't know if I should be posting this here but I've been curious... Say a 9.0+ (which I hope will never occur) struck near or at the New Madrid fault... How will it affect us in Canada, primarily in Toronto?



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 



my understanding of the claims were always that the 188 cycle 'only' related to large quakes that happen in built up areas and have a major impact on life and or infrastructure.


Fair enough. I can't honestly say that I was aware of that. I shall look upon it in a new light and discount rural quakes in future. Of course urban quakes are so much better! So how exactly does one define urban and infrastructure? A rural road is infrastructure is it not?. What defines a built up area? I think the local town to me is a built up area. Can't stand the noisy smelly place. But it only has 1200 inhabitants. It is a town and it is built up. Does that count, or are these earthquakes much more discerning.


@radpety:

The bottom line on the 188 day thing is that there has been a big quake every 188 since the 8.8 in S. America.

No one ever said that there would not be any big quakes in between:@

And furthermore, I think the pattern may go back to 1960, or something like that.


So I take it that before 1960 it did not happen? Yes I will do the maths. Back later. (I am assuming we are talking 7+ here yes?)



edit on 20/3/2012 by PuterMan because: Spelling and grammar :bnghd:



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Felt big time


Magnitude mb 4.6
Region SOUTHERN GREECE
Date time 2012-03-20 23:51:10.0 UTC
Location 36.01 N ; 24.25 E
Depth 70 km
Distances 372 km SW Izmir (pop 2,500,603 ; local time 01:51:10.0 2012-03-21)
110 km NW Iráklion (pop 137,154 ; local time 01:51:10.0 2012-03-21)
59 km N Khanía (pop 54,565 ; local time 01:51:10.0 2012-03-21)
54 km N Mouzourás (pop 1,462 ; local time 01:51:10.0 2012-03-21)



EMSC



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


I think that I read that it did indeed go back further then 1960.........and yes, work out the 7+ thingamajiggys



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by radpetey
 


Unfortunately it does not even go back 1 step from 2010



Japan brackets the date but does not actually fall on it. This one today is a day short. So basically @188 it does not work, and certainly not going back from 2010 where it is many days out.

I hardly think that 3 or maybe 4 quakes that do not actually quite fit out 0f 1827 since 1900 qualifies it as a roaring success however I shall continue on backwards and see if the pattern does appear again.

 

Nope, I can't get it to fit going backwards at all. Many days out. Perhaps the rules of the game should be explained. Is it 188 from the last one or 188 strict so not 187 and not 189?


edit on 20/3/2012 by PuterMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


On another thread they explain a 4,8, and 15 day plus or minus......I know, I know, that brings the odds way down when you have +/- 15 days thrown in there


This has been fun watching anyhoo.

Hey Puterman, thanks for running those #'s for my lazy @$$!!!



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by radpetey
 



On another thread they explain a 4,8, and 15 day plus or minus


ROFLMAO that is not a system at all. That sounds like climate change scientists massaging the figures to fit!

Either it is large quakes or it is not. The time period is 188 or is not although +/- 1 day may be acceptable.

With that sort of leeway I could make just about any magnitude quake fit any period.

It is as we say, complete piffle!



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Here are the parameters. This video is 23 min. but it is entertaining....I thought so anyway!

www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 20-3-2012 by radpetey because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nothing5
Don't know if I should be posting this here but I've been curious... Say a 9.0+ (which I hope will never occur) struck near or at the New Madrid fault... How will it affect us in Canada, primarily in Toronto?


I believe Toronto would experience significant disturbance, and heres why. According to Wikipedia, there was a 5.4 NewMadrid quake in Illinois on the morning of November 9, 1968, 11:02am. (I turned 9 yrsold just a month and so, earlier, but I don't recollect getting rocked-and-rolled. I was a dense mopey kid, though.) Here is what Canada experienced.
en.wikipedia.org...

The earthquake was felt in 23 states and affected a zone of 580,000 square miles (1,500,000 km2). The shaking extended east to Pennsylvania and West Virginia, south to Mississippi and Alabama, north to Toronto, Canada, and west to Oklahoma.[11] Isolated reports were received from Boston, Mobile, Alabama, Pensacola, Florida, southern Ontario,

edit on 20-3-2012 by Saucerwench because: ad link



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Saucerwench
 


This is worrisome... What makes this worse is the fact that I live in an old apartment! Hopefully none of the predictions come true.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by radpetey
 


Sorry it has taken me all this time to get this far so I will look at the vid tomorrow as I have to get to bed as I must be up in 6 hours

Here is the 'strict' interpretation. Precisely 188 backwards from the 2010 quake back to 1900
On the graph there are just 3 that match the date precisely and this goes to 1970. The longer the bar the further 'out' the closest quake to the date was.




posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Nothing5,....Yeah, I live sorta high up in an apartment building thats so flimsy, I felt (very slightly though) the Oklahoma EQ, and I am all the way over north of NewMadrid area up by Iowa. (I don't like to say exactly...where, is all.) About 3 years back, there was a richter 3 a couple hundred miles (not more) away from me, and I -most- -definitely- felt that'un. Geez, a nine? That would end my little world, I think.
edit on 20-3-2012 by Saucerwench because: ad txt



new topics

top topics



 
159
<< 76  77  78    80  81  82 >>

log in

join