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.


7.7 EQ just now in Russia, 5.1 on the US west coast

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 12:23 PM
reply to post by Char-Lee

John Travolta was in a movie where he had a brain tumor and he was supposed to pick up on ulf to predict a quake.That was in 1996

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 01:00 PM
One thing I find slightly odd and unusual is that when we have a large scale event (to me an EQ over 7) its usually followed up by a lot of after shocks. The last big one in Chile and now this one hasen't been rung bye the usual occurences of sizable aftershocks.

Is this just because of the depth of this quake being so deep????


posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 01:38 PM
reply to post by dustwolf

I wrote to and asked them about the disappearing earthquakes and here's the response I just received:

The M7.3 very deep earthquake near Poronaysk, Russia last night caused a flurry of "fake earthquakes" in the real-time earthquake system last night. The three fake earthquakes in California were from the sequence of seismic waves from the Russian event all arriving at about the same time in three "waves". The automated system in California interpreted these as three local earthquakes instead of recognizing the signal as from a distant deep earthquake. Seismic analysts subsequently deleted these non-earthquakes from the system.

In addition three separate seismic networks located the Russian earthquake and sent information into the system. The locations were different enough that the automated system didn't recognize them as the same earthquake, so there were three events until the two extras were deleted.

Please also see

- Lisa

Sounds Logical.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 01:53 PM

Originally posted by mideast81 minutes ago.another quake in Iran - tabriz.magnitude
Do you think it was induced by the West? (HAARP) ?

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 01:58 PM
So is this quake going to trigger more big quakes around the ring? There must be way more to these quakes than we know, to trigger a 5+ false quake near America it means there may be some sort of metallic crystal lattice connecting these points for the energy to transfer and dissipate from the origination.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:12 PM

Originally posted by storm2012
This is it folks, the guy who posted a video about earthquake hitting california 9.0 could.come true, he even said god will give a warning.tsunami from or near japan and in two weeks after that cali will be hit with 9.0 . I suggest ppl should.take this warning seriously . This is very concerning california is experincing a lot earthquakes recently and if i live near the tremors i would pack my bag and move in land. Take care all

If god is going to give a warning... then unfortunately i find that very hard to take seriously.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:15 PM

Originally posted by hp1229

Originally posted by mideast81 minutes ago.another quake in Iran - tabriz.magnitude

Do you think it was induced by the West? (HAARP) ?

I don't have a robust reason for HAARP.

IMO , it is suspicious.

Read other people's comment.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:35 PM
reply to post by mideast

Good page to see this earthquake:

but all it shows is that the earthquake was a fairly normal 20-30s long pop. No foreshocks are aftershocks identified yet, but that is not unusual for a deep earthquake.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 09:40 PM

Originally posted by SaneThinking
One thing I find slightly odd and unusual is that when we have a large scale event (to me an EQ over 7) its usually followed up by a lot of after shocks. The last big one in Chile and now this one hasen't been rung bye the usual occurences of sizable aftershocks.

Is this just because of the depth of this quake being so deep????


Ocean quakes this deep are not normally known to create aftershocks.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:07 PM
does anyone think the recent cali/sydney earthquake prediction thread relate to these events? I followed it for a while until the trolls took it over but the time scales are kind of linked just not accurate prediction of location.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:24 PM
Hello everyone, sorry for getting into the conversation so late -- this is actually my first post ever on ATS -- I have remained a silent reader/observer for several months now but have never contributed to any of the discussions yet. I love the community here and better yet, I love the similar lines of thought in other members here that mirror my own lines of thought that I have held for years. I figured now would be as good of a time to start posting as any. Please bear with me if I make any formatting errors in my posts and help me to correct them.

I have read the thread and the statements made about how these 5.1 quakes in California were supposedly "phantom quakes". Before now, I have never even heard of such a thing, or even known that an erratum page containing phantom quake data existed on the USGS site. If this is true, I would think it would be an very rare event. Would that be due to the fact that they theoretically happen only with extremely deep quakes? If this was the case, would that not mean that the respective seismographs in California actually did pick up at least some sort of seismic activity in California? Can anyone explain to me how a seismograph can detect seismic activity in an area where no seismic activity has actually occurred, when the said triggering activity is actually thousands of miles away? One would think that today's seismographs would be advanced enough to distinguish between a deep and powerful quake (the 7.7 in Sea of Okhotsk and 388 miles in depth) thousands of miles away on another continent on a separate fault zone.

The Monterey Bay, CA quake was initially reported to have been only 3.1 miles in depth, while the other 2 quakes detected in California around the same time frame were 40 and 41 miles in depth. Why was the depth so much shallower than the 7.7 Russian quake if these were just ghost quakes triggered by it?

In my opinion, if a seismograph were to report even a so-called phantom quake in the seismograph's *local* area, then it must have felt the seismic activity in that area -- would that in itself not classify as being a legitimate quake or series of quakes in the California area?

I apologize if I sound like I'm being redundant, just trying to put my thoughts into words here.

Now, here's the reason I felt like I had something to contribute to this conversation...

For about 6 or 7 years now I have subscribed to earthquake notifications through email from the USGS's Earthquake Notification System. I am currently subscribed to receive an email alert for any 3.0 or larger quake anywhere in the world. I have been interested in earthquakes and anomalies in the geological activity of the Earth ever since I was about 10 years old. I initially subscribed to the ENS to gain a better understanding of how quake patterns occur across wide geographical locations and how large quakes and plate movement affect and/or possibly trigger other quake activity on adjacent or closely stressed tectonic plates.

The patterns I have seen lately coming in through ENS have become very unusual for about the past 18 months or so (just before the March 11, 2011 Japan quake) but I have noticed an even sharper turn in strange patterns throughout the past 2 months now. This pattern is on the rise in areas rarely affected by seismic activity. Small yet moderate quakes are occurring in areas accustomed to activity, but in greater numbers and in shorter intervals. More areas that were having 5.x's just months ago are now having 6.x's (China, Iran, coast of Oregon, Southern Alaska and the Aleutians, just to name a few areas). I used to get probably about 30 or so notifications a day for quakes 3.0 and over worldwide per day and that number is now typically over 50 per day. I am concerned about this pattern, I am sure others have noticed it as well, there may even be threads here on ATS about this very topic (I spend most of my time reading on ATS across the entire broad range of topics, not just the quakes, and I often just get buried in the sheer amount of reading content available on the site).

The USGS's ENS system works in nearly real-time, since it is automated. I will usually get an email alert on any quake before it has been reviewed by a duty seismologist or even posted to the USGS Recent Earthquakes map or list on " target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> . Sometimes I will get a follow-up alert on recent events once it has been reviewed by a human and properties of the event in question will be updated, such as depth, epicenter, finalized moment magnitude, precise lat and long, possible location uncertainty measurements, etc.

On Monday evening (August 13) the ENS sent me 3 real-time notifications of three separate detected events in California within one minute -- the first one at 10:12 PM Central (my time zone) and the other two at 10:13 PM Central. Two of these events were listed as being being in Northern California and one in Monterey Bay.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:25 PM
The exact latitude and longitude, depth and chronological order of the three events was:
1. Northern California -- 40.117N 122.072W -- 65 km -- 13 Aug 2012 20:08:50 near epicenter
2. Monterey Bay -- 36.677N 121.906W -- 5 km -- 13 Aug 2012 20:09:04 near epicenter
3. Northern California -- 37.054N 121.636W -- 66 km -- 13 Aug 2012 20:09:11 near epicenter

To give you an idea of the geographic distances between these three events, event numbers 1 and 3 are approximately 250 miles distant from each other and events 2 and 3 are about 50 miles apart. 1 and 2 have the furthest distance between them, at approx 300 miles total. Logically with such distances between the events, they look to be three separate events, when you factor in the depths and times as well, it becomes obvious.

Now here is the strange part: All three of these events initially had different, and much lower initial reported magnitudes. In their respective orders, the initial magnitudes were 4.3 for 1, 3.9 for 2 and 3.9 for 3. Somehow all three were revised up to 5.1 as a finalized moment magnitude and then completely deleted from record within minutes.

Why would a duty seismologist take three possibly legitimate seismic events of computer- reported low magnitudes, review them, revise them higher nearly one whole order of magnitude (over one whole order for events 2 and 3), and then just vanish them from the system?

I have included a screenshot here of my ENS email notifications. The emails highlighted in bold are the emails at question here. The older the notification, the lower it is in my inbox.

As you can see in the notification list, the three events come in at the bottom of the boldened list. Next two notifications up show event numbers 1 and 3 being updated to 5.1 followed by event #1 then being completely deleted from record. At that point, event #2 is now updated to 5.1, promptly followed by the deletion of both event numbers 2 and 3. Further up you can see the Sea of Okhotsk event at 7.3 and then up to 7.7, which actually occurred ten minutes before any of these California events, even though I never received any initial reports on that one at all.

Having a real-time quake notification and an archive of tens of thousands of those notifications, this is not the first time that I have noticed suspicious deletion of potentially moderate quake activity and I have not seen it occur anywhere more than events that take place in and around Yellowstone National Park -- imagine that?

Anyway, that's all I've got. Sorry for rambling, I hope I was able to express this sufficiently here on ATS. People need to see the pattern, people need to wake up to the extent of which the information not deemed 'appropriate' for public consumption is controlled. Those that control the information thus ignorantly think they have the power, ie, knowledge is power. It is time for the people of Earth to reclaim that power, thereby, reclaiming our rights to the information. It all begins here on ATS. How far will YOU go to reclaim the information. Glad I can be a part of this wonderful group of individuals. Thanks for reading.

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 12:24 AM
Looks like the guy with 104 day prediction stuff is on to something

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 12:46 AM
reply to post by minettejo

I am confused Mimjetto.

lf these 5.0 earthquakes happened in Northern California, on a Tuesday.

YET Coombes predicted a single earthquake would happen the previous Sunday, so devastating it would create a tidal wave so large it would hit 90 miles inland

Obviously his prediction was wrong, and these earthquakes are not related to Coombes.

He dead on said, SATURDAY would be the day, and he was wrong. A majority of you claimed that he saved the day, b/c the powers that be knew that the topic had been researched on ATS and likeminded sites and their cover had been blown.

So many things are wrong with this on SO many levels.

1) Coombes was wrong. You just think these weeks tiny earthquakes are relevant because you are clinging to the belief that it is relevant for whatever reasons, your ego, you want to believe theres a conspiracy, I dont know. I am not critisizing so much as pointing out that if you want to see something bad enough, youll see it whether it is there or not (like you totally choose to ignore the possibility that Coombes was wrong, and these 2 very minor, untidalwave-causing earthquakes were related to his claim)

2) How about we see if any ATS members in San Francisco/ N. Cali come forward to say they felt the earthquakes...You are all squabbling about screenshots when not a single ATS'er from SF says they felt anything...when if there really were two 5.0 earthquakes, DO YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO HIDE IT? THE ENTIRE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA STATE WOULD HAVE FELT IT AND THE NEWS WOULD HAVE BEEN ALL OVER IT! ATS MEMBERS FROM SAN FRANCISCO WOULD BE POSTING ABOUT IT! Of course you believe the powers that be would be able to hide it, because they can do whatever they want!

3)If the powers that be really were as strong and powerful as alot of you believe, Combes would have been killed in an 'accident' the day before the Japanese earthquake and his facebook profile deleted, and he wouldnt be alive. The powers that be ARE the illuminati that have been ruling the earth as if it were a monopoly game for the past 1000 years, right? It almost makes you wonder....if Coombes wasn't killed after his Japan prediction, maybe there is no powers that be? If I had all the power in the world and some asshole hacked into my super weather machine, you can guess I would have my hitmen kill him. Once again, you are so blind you choose to dissect the facts open mindedly. You are seeing what you want to see...

I hope MODS dont take this down or anyone takes it as an insult...its just sometimes, ATS members need to observe and judge things a little more openly than 'ITS A CONSPIRACY' every single time. The day an ATSer looks up something open mindedly and tries to think of counterpoints to his opinions and also to think of sound ways in which those counterpoints can be proven wrong using data, I would love to listen and would star and flag that post. Until then, its all just wishful thinking....

Its just that some of you wouldnt care if hundreds, thousands, hundreds of thousands were killed in a disaster so much as you just want to be right about these conspiracy theories so you can brag to your friends.

You all may hate me, but a majority of the time I do not see any evidence at all on this site other than WISHFUL THINKING. My point of this post, is, imagine if you all had counterpoints that a skeptic might come up with and researched ways to argue that skeptics point of view. We would all gain from posts such as that. Unfortunately, thats not the case...just wishful thinking. I'm just saying it how it is....

edit on 15-8-2012 by bodybagPAT because: because I can do whatever I want. end of story

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 02:04 AM
reply to post by thesmokingman

The epicenter was 582 kilometers deep


The deepest part of the ocean is only a few km deep, and most Earthquakes aren't even a few multitudes of that in depth.

582 km is just about on the border between the mantle and the crust.

Not sure about the validity of this fully. Especially on weak crust like Japan.

Who knows, maybe I'm getting something wrong here.
edit on 15-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 02:35 AM
reply to post by bodybagPAT

Not defending the guy (Mitchell Coombes) for a second, but for what I've been following he never end up posting the 104 warning or at least disclosing it publicly. All he said in his FB page is that such event was approaching and consequently he would post the 104 warning once HAARP could no longer be turned off making the outcome inevitable.

But to be honest this HAARP conspiracy sounds more like an fallacy than anything else.

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 03:02 AM
Im in san diego, its 1:00 am, about 5 minutes ago there was a slight shaking in my room, I was laying here and the bed rocked a little bit... o i think it my cat,.. nevermind

edit on 15-8-2012 by Llama619 because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 04:16 AM

Originally posted by thesmokingman

Well, I bet Mitchell coombs is loving this....... Im confused, has the 104 hour period started yet? At any rate, does anyone know if the issued any warnings yet?

No reason to even mention Mitchell Coombs.

His "prediction", as interesting as it is, does not apply in this situation. His claim is that the result would be 9.0 + earthquakes. Which was what his Japan prediction was as well, and part of what makes it all so interesting. 9.0+ are not common and he said it would by 9.0 or higher. His current "prediction" (for lack of a better word), is another 9.0 +

Not sure if the 104 hour window has started or not, but even if it has, this EQ does not measure up to his claims.

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:36 AM
Earthquakes that happen so deep, don't cause aftershocks, or cause very few of them. Geology is very different after 100km depth. These rocks are at very high temperature and under huge pressure. They cannot crack and grind like on surface. They are too tightly packed.

Deep quakes are caused either by:
- Cold slab can find something solid to push against even very deep, this can cause shallow-like earthquakes even very deep. Slabs can also unbend pack to their normal form.
- At 50km depth basalt and gabbro turn to blueschist mineral suite, and then to garnet rich eclogite. Water is released in this reaction, causing high stresses.
- At 160km serpentine turns into olivine and release water.
- Water can cool down the rocks, causing them to turn solid. Solid takes much less space than liquid form. This can cause fractures.
- At 410km, olivine starts to change into identical minerals as spinel. This causes volume changes. Its not chemical reaction, but a phase-change.
- At 500k depth, changes such enstatite-to-ilmenite, and garnet-to-perovskite begin.

So deep earthquakes might be caused by jewels, but we know far too less about these. These earthquakes simply shouldn't happen. One of unsolved mysteries of science.
edit on 15-8-2012 by Thebel because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 09:59 AM
reply to post by thesmokingman

And we should be fearful because why?? No Tsunami.. The 5 on the west coast was days before the 7.7 in the Sea of Okhotsk. >>>>>>Ring of fire

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in