A big earthquake MIGHT soon hit California. (changed the title not make more people cry. )

Interestingly enough, both Drake and Tolec have been talking about an earthquake coinciding with the passing of a pair of asteroids, 2012 QG42 and 2012 QC8, on September 14th, 2012. However, Tolec mentioned it being off the coast of Oregon, not in Southern California, but I'm sure they'll find excuses.

For all we know, these large of amounts of small earthquakes and smell of rotten eggs might be legit earthquake signs, but due to all the failures of the past, we might be self-blinding ourselves to the obvious.

Only time will tell.

Originally posted by ExNihilo
This is not based on dreams or visions but on facts.

Now, in the 1755 Lisbon earthquake people had too been reporting a massive smell of rotten eggs couple of days before the earthquake. Same thing for the 1811 Madrid earthquake and the earthquake in Jamaica in 1692. Conception in 1835, New England 1727, Lima 1865.

Add to that all the small earthquakes that have been hitting the region and i think these are all precursors to one huge earthquake.

Instead of researching earthquakes and seeing which had prior reports of rotten egg smells, you should probably see how many rotten egg smell reports led to earthquakes. That will tell you the more likely outcome in an unbiased fashion!

I'll leave this article for what it's worth: Salton Sea fingered as culprit of big Calif. stink

vulcan.wr.usgs.gov...

The Salton Buttes lie within the Salton Sea Geothermal Field located about 145 km (90 mi) southeast of Palm Springs in Imperial Valley, California. The geothermal system is fueled by heat emanating from zones of partially molten rock (magma) deep below the Earth’s surface. Eruptions occurring about 400,000 years ago were followed by a long lull in volcanic activity until about 18,000 years ago. The most recent eruptions, which took place about 9,000 years ago, started explosively, then progressed to relatively gentle effusion of dense, glassy-looking (obsidian) lava domes. The Salton Sea Geothermal Field, which currently produces enough power to supply about 325,000 homes, has persistent small to moderate earthquakes related to the geothermal system and to movement along regional faults.

Originally posted by ExNihilo

lol people of your kind make me laugh so much. Absolutely don't give a damn about the issue here, all you care about is discrediting me

You do realize that if a person claims something, it does not become an issue. The issue/matter at hand is to try to figure out whether or not it IS an issue. In other words, it is ALL about judging what you said. Which I did.
Not only that, you specifically ASKED people to analyze your theory. Which I did.

...for some star and a boost to your ego.

Actually, I do not know what those stars "do". Why do I need them?
Second, I see that people who start threads like "Alien Invasion on Thursday 05:24 PM" will get plenty of those. This thread is somewhat similar. I hardly think my dry way can compete with fiction, so I'll have to live without the stars (whatever they do).

Too bad for you i won't play that game of yours.

If you don't want to defend your theory or your words, that is fine.

I made sure to insert the words you are using against me not to be called a fail medium.

I have never claimed you to [claim to] be one. I'm just seeing holes or inconsistencies with your statements, of which some are just plain false.

I believe in science and made assumptions based of phenomena that happened before an other earthquake.

You did not do a very good job. Also, assumptions is the mother of all screw-ups.

Also, i have a a master in political science and a bachelor in common law so of course i am going to say that i do not know much about earthquake.

It is completely fine to say that. It is the first step to not be ignorant, to admit that one just doesn't know it all.
However, you still did say that there is a big earth-quake coming, without knowing that.
Science does not work that way. People who "predict" don't mind, though.

tip to you : Kill your ego, it is poison to the soul.

What is wrong with my ego? Where have I emphasized it? Haven't every word been about your text? Where have I given space to myself?

reply to post by Consequence



cute.

I'll let you quote that word now.


And wow what the hell did i just read. Science is based on assumptions by the way.

Originally posted by ExNihilo
cute.

It gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside.

I'll let you quote that word now.

Aren't you getting a bit off-topic?

And wow what the hell did i just read. Science is based on assumptions by the way.

No it's not.

The OP isn't entirely off base and this has happened before and prior to MAJOR Earthquakes. Here is a report from the New Madrid Series of 1811/1812

From the beginning of 1811 to the close of 1815 was a period of intense excitement. In December, 1811, there was an earthquake that startled our inhabitants. It had been raining for three months and the Calfkiller River was running muddy water. The earthquake was at night. There was a smell of sulphur in the air before the shock.

Source

and another eye witness report from the Quake in February of 1812.

A "thrust fault" uplift dammed the Mississippi for a few hours early on the morning of Feb. 7, 1812 from about Island #10 north past island #9. Ice breaking up on the Ohio River had just allowed several boats to make it to the region the day before. Multiple eyewitness stories came from those moored near Island #9, rudely awakened after 2 a.m., and found their boat going upstream "at the speed of a fast horse" -- "had to hold my hat on" -- while trees continued collapsing into the river. The air smelled of sulfur and was filled with coal dust.

Source

The thrust of that story (no pun intended) was the physics of how the quakes made the Mississippi River run backward for a period following the major quakes here at the time. However, the report of Sulphur odor is repeated and over different quakes and locations in that series. I gather it's not a unique thing to experience before or after a 'big one'.

Then again, there was a huge quake swarm in Brawley at the Salton Sea where they say this is all starting. I wonder if NASA/JPL has any Satellites capable of seen through the shallow waters there and get a good look at the lake bed? I'm wondering if there is some venting or other action people aren't physically seeing?

Originally posted by Consequence

Originally posted by ExNihilo
cute.

It gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside.

I'll let you quote that word now.

Aren't you getting a bit off-topic?

And wow what the hell did i just read. Science is based on assumptions by the way.

No it's not.

edit on 12-9-2012 by Consequence because: (no reason given)

Ok when i die ill make sure to tell Richard Feynman and Albert Einstein that they were wrong and you were right. That science is not based on the assumptions that There are natural causes for things that happen in the world around us, that evidence from the natural world can be used to learn about those causes and that there is consistency in the causes that operate in the natural world.

Bravo you have debunked science and sent us all to the dark ages.

reply to post by Consequence

You may not know this since you haven't been here for very long, but quoting a user's argument sentence by sentence and then presenting a counter-argument to every sentence is viewed by the general population of ATS as pretentious. Although that might not have been your original intent, we have seen so much of that it becomes annoying even if your points are valid. It's alright to break up a giant amount of text into sections and respond accordingly, but is it really necessary to respond to every little thing with a separate quote? On your first response, you broke one sentence into three different quotes.

reply to post by ExNihilo

On the other side, snide one-hits such as "cute," "kill your ego," "bravo," etc., are just fueling the fire and keeping the argument going. None of those are adding anything of substance to your argument and are making you come off as angry.

The second you show frustration when arguing online is the second you've lost.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I have to wonder if there are any undersea volcanoes in the region that could be causing the smell.

Originally posted by ExNihilo
Ok when i die ill make sure to tell Richard Feynman and Albert Einstein that they were wrong and you were right.

I think we are pretty much on the same page. But please do say "hi!".

That science is not based on the assumptions that

Science is not based on assumptions. Where did you get that?

There are natural causes for things that happen in the world around us, that evidence from the natural world can be used to learn about those causes and that there is consistency in the causes that operate in the natural world.

That is quite accurate, unless we take into account the uncertainty principle, which in itself could be debated upon, namely, how much it has to do with the lack of proper tools. But maybe this is not relevant in this discussion.

Bravo you have debunked science and sent us all to the dark ages.

No, I haven't.

Earthquake might hit California?

You may as well say Hurricane might hit Florida, or, it might snow at the North pole.

In case you are not aware of it, please check out RSOE where you can get every bit of doom porn you ever wanted from nuclear accidents, biological hazards, earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis, hurricanes, forest fires, and maybe even kittens stranded in trees.

You win i give up. I feel like i'm arguing with a master sophist who just learned how to quote.

Originally posted by Druscilla

Earthquake might hit California?

You may as well say Hurricane might hit Florida, or, it might snow at the North pole.

In case you are not aware of it, please check out RSOE where you can get every bit of doom porn you ever wanted from nuclear accidents, biological hazards, earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis, hurricanes, forest fires, and maybe even kittens stranded in trees.

Yes i could say a hurricane might hit Florida in a couple days if it was backed by some signs that had been observed in the past prior to a hurricane. What is the point of your reply?

Sulfur Odor in Virginia - Sept. 11, 2012
Residents in Virginia yesterday were reporting unexplainable 'Sulfur-Like' smells as well. Remember we had a major earthquake here a little over a year ago. Might be something, may be nothing. Only time can tell.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

California may have something big coming up soon.

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
You may not know this since you haven't been here for very long, but quoting a user's argument sentence by sentence and then presenting a counter-argument to every sentence is viewed by the general population of ATS as pretentious. Although that might not have been your original intent, we have seen so much of that it becomes annoying even if your points are valid. It's alright to break up a giant amount of text into sections and respond accordingly, but is it really necessary to respond to every little thing with a separate quote? On your first response, you broke one sentence into three different quotes.

Thanks for commenting.
I do realize that it might be especially painful for the person I'm answering.
However, if a text is filled with that many inconsistencies or false claims, I find it partly difficult to comment on the whole (because it does not make any sense due to all the problems), and partly it is because I really don't want to give the impression to the person that his/her view was valid "as a whole". It would steer the conversation off the actual problems in the text.

It could of course be that I have misunderstood those parts, or simply not understood them at all. And in those cases, I think it is also very helpful to show where I have gone wrong and get a comment back on those parts.
It's an easy way to iron out problems that have arisen from not understanding each other.

A good example of when I don't have to split the text is your reply to me, which made perfectly good sense.

When it comes to people seeing the "counter-argument on every single sentence" as pretentious, I honestly don't know how to change that in cases that have so many problems.
I've seen that discussions go way too far, in terms of giving an OP room to grow without first making sure that the content is sound. It also seems to have a psychological effect on late-comers that are merely interested because "they want to believe"...It is a snow-ball effect which blows the theories out of proportion because focus is lost on its validity.

What is your take on this?

reply to post by Consequence

I understand that some statements have so many flaws in them that it looks necessary to counter every single part, but when you do it all at once, it might overwhelm the person you are arguing with and shut them off entirely. In the instance of ExNihilo's opening post, instead of picking his argument apart piece by piece, you should have just pointed out one or a couple of the bigger flaws first and then went from there. Let's go back to your first post. This is all that you needed:

Originally posted by Consequence
people across south California have been reporting a smell of rotten egg across the state. Rotten eggs aka Sulfur.

Story is here :

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Rotten eggs are not also known as Sulfur. I think rotten eggs are rotten eggs. The smell of rotten eggs might be hydrogen sulfide and have several potential sources.

You didn't mind telling what is suspected to be the source, Salton Sea?

That was more than enough to get a debate going. You two could have argued about whether or not the Salton Sea was the source of the smell, whether or not the smell came from rotting fish or undersea volcanoes, whether it's the truth or a cover story for something more sinister, etc. If you believe everything in the OP's argument needs to be responded to, that's fine, but it's better to take it one step at a time instead of throwing it all on him at once.

I got a prediction.I am not 100% certain,but I think that maybe,possibly,somewhere a tornado will hit a mobile home park.I am basing this on facts.

reply to post by SonicInfinity


Yes, I could have chosen only one part, to "get the debate going", but as I said, I don't want to give the impression of him/her thinking that THAT is the problem and let the person waste time on explaining on that part not knowing that there's issues all over the place. I want to give them the chance to step back and think the whole thing through.

reply to post by Consequence


shhhhhhh

your ruining this thread