Monstrous Earthquake to Hit Mansfield, OH?

reply to post by menneni


Yeah, we kinda already came to that conclusion.

reply to post by sled735


Your source...

Those are just normal light pillars. You can see them during the winter, when tiny ice crystals are in the air. Its pretty common around here.

It's a possibility..... I live in Kevil, Kentucky right on the New Madrid fault and we had an earthquake last night. It was only a 2.6 but the whole week before we kept hearing strange booms all through the Paducah area.

reply to post by sled735



I love in Norwalk ohio right next to there! Think I'll stay at my parents house for a few days!!

MichiganSwampBuck
Has anyone down there heard any strange sky noises before this?

Any possible connections to other strange or unexplained phenomena ?

How about other earthquake signs?

If I saw that light show around here, I'd be getting ready to evacuate!

ETA: I took a close look at the picture and I can see in two places where these light rays are coming from the outdoor lights behind all the buildings. My opinion is that this is just an atmospheric effect from ice crystals. Very cool looking effect though.

edit on 26-1-2014 by MichiganSwampBuck because: Added last comments

Nope didn't see the the lights either.

Aleister
reply to post by sled735

 

(EDIT: After I posted I saw the post above this one, the one that denies ignorance. Rest well Ohioians)

From your photo and the source article and photos it looks like these lights were sustained, while in most historic earthquake light sightings the lights weren't sustained (or were they?). These look like they are coming from well-lit areas. Ohio is in the midst of the current Midwest U.S. cold and snow snap, so hopefully there are just some kind of ice crystal phenomena. It's odd that news sources are picking up the story though, just enough to put locals on edge for a few days, which will at least take their minds off the well-below zero windchills.

edit on 26-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

Yep alls well, didn't want to stay at my parents any ways, smells like old moth-balls there!

While these pictures are quite beautiful, I have to say that the concept of the "ice crystal" proposal seems to make the most logical argument. It would be interesting, however, to finally grasp some sort of early warning indicators such as ground to air lightning.

I'm not saying that such indicators don't exist, I'm just saying that the initial picture of this post doesn't indicate pre-quake activity.

Lil Drummerboy

19KTankCommander
The lights in the sky don't mean nothing, it happens here all the time in Northern Wisconsin, when the air is clear and cold you can see all the street lights and signs shooting a beam of light up like in your picture. Have not felt or heard of one earthquake here.

look up the history of this phenomenon before you claim its nothing.. it has merit and has happened before

Look at the photo and you can clearly see that the street light is the source for one of the beams of light. This isn't rocket science.

Earthquake lights are real and basically understood, but it's just sad someone illiterate enough to equate common light pillars with earthquake lights is publishing articles on the Internet in my opinion. Not only that, the author is trying to scare people which is even sadder.

Purposeful hoax? Could be, or could be the author really is that illiterate. Who knows. Glad to see people here are not falling for it.

While the local TV Weatherman claims all is well - saying it's only ice crystals in the air - this phenomenon has been seen before in many places just days or hours before a massive earthquake.

(This story is NOT intended to frighten or panic anyone, but it can't hurt to make some emergency preparations with food, water, medications, flashlights, batteries, radios, blankets and such just in case.)

That line shows clearly the authors intent is anything but honesty IMO. I find it hard to believe they had permission to post so much of the real article from National Geographic, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the photo's of the light pillars. ...and they don't even provide the name of the author of the trash that precedes it. It almost looks like they want you to believe the author of the real article who is named, is also involved in this nonsense.

InterestedReader
"Several hoaxes on the news site alone?" Care to be more specific?

Sure. This is a confirmed hoax created by the hoaxer radio network:

VISUALLY CONFIRMED: Enormous Craft Detected on Moon

The debunking is here. Note that it goes from "alien base" there, to "alien craft" on the hoaxer radio network.


Then we have another hoax created by the hoaxer radio network:

VIDEO: NEWS HELICOPTER FROM KCRA-TV SACRAMENTO AIRS VIDEO OF ROGUE PLANET; INBOUND TOWARD EARTH

Who declared it to be a rogue planet hurtling towards earth? The planet is nothing more than the crescent of Venus.


And another created hoax:

PROOF: Rain Brings Radiation To U.S. and Canada From Fukushima

Someone's opinion or interpretation of the NETC map is not proof of anything. Or should we just call it fear-mongering? Earthquake fear mongering, rogue planet fear mongering, radiation from rain fear mongering. We could call it the "Fear Mongering Network".


Then there's this:

T.S.A. THREATENS TO "RED FLAG" CITIZEN OVER YOUTUBE PARODY VIDEO WHICH POKED FUN AT GOVERNMENT

It's a parody video. It's not real. It's fake. Most people on this site and YouTube could see that. That's why it's in the HOAX bin on this website.

But yet, the fear mongering hoaxer radio network still peddles it as something that actually happened, creating more unnecessary fear about the TSA.


These are but a quick few examples of the many.

InterestedReader
1) The title of the article ends with a question mark. That means it is a question, not a statement of fact.

But many people won't see the question mark. The fright or worry from the story headline is enough to invoke fear amongst the gullible whether that question mark is there or not.

As another post stated, the author of the story should have done the proper research, and should have known that these weren't "earthquake lights". Not even in the same universe, and not related to each other in any way.

But, hey, what's another shock headline to get plastered around the internet?

InterestedReader
2) In case you don't understand, that paragraph talks directly to your point that it could simply be harmless light pillars and offers it to the public as a possibility for the sake of truthfulness.

True, however the second part of the paragraph stating that the "phenomenon has been seen just days or hours before a massive earthquake" is completely false.

It's either false because the author was negligent in doing the most simplistic of research before creating this "shock" story, or it was deliberately false as some of the other shock headlines are. We'll let the readers decide.

InterestedReader
3) The third paragraph makes clear "(This story is NOT intended to frighten or panic anyone...

You are correct, however, I call BS. Hoaxer radio network creates a shock title either from negligence or deliberately, but then claims they're not trying to frighten. I don't buy it.

InterestedReader
What if the TRN story is correct and your interpretation is wrong?

I wasn't the least bit worried about that. I know exactly what light pillars are, how they're created, and recognized them quite easily. And I already knew they had absolutely nothing to do with earthquakes.

InterestedReader
4) The article about earthquake lights was written by NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC and the link to the original article is: news.nationalgeographic.com...
Care to describe them as a "hoaxer network" too?

No. You can compare the image from NatGeo's earthquake lights with the light pillar image that hoaxer radio network posted, and see they're not even in the same universe as each other.

InterestedReader
In the future, maybe YOU should get YOUR facts straight;

I'd say my post got all the facts straight while showing that the hoaxer radio network does not. Where's the facts on the "rogue planet hurtling towards earth"? Where's the facts on the "enormous craft that was detected on the moon"?


p.s. My post is my opinion only, and does not reflect the opinions of the staff or owners of AboveTopSecret.com

CosmicDude
reply to post by sled735

 

WOW if this is a real picture of lights that are not artificial nor photoshoped I`d be very scared if I lived there

SnF

Light pillars.
www.webdesignerdepot.com...

reply to Bone Z

"p.s. My post is my opinion only, and does not reflect the opinions of the staff or owners of AboveTopSecret

Your post does reflect my opinion. The contributer with only 3 posts as of this writing appears to be an employee of the offendinding "network". My name is megabogie and I approve your message.

Personally, I think that earthquake lights are produced by piezoelectric force. Just like how you can take piece of quartz, put pressure on it, and it will produce a small electric current. Therefore, it is my hypothesis, that earthquake lights are probably (more than likely), caused by the incredible pressure forced upon the layers of fracturing rock strata beneath the earthquake epicenter.


But his is just my guess....what do y'all think????

I lived in Mansfield for 7 years. Most notable for its old prison and the Weiner King. It truly is.a town that deserves to get sucked into the earth. Hoaxes are such a bummer.

_BoneZ_

InterestedReader
"Several hoaxes on the news site alone?" Care to be more specific?

Sure. This is a confirmed hoax created by the hoaxer radio network:

VISUALLY CONFIRMED: Enormous Craft Detected on Moon

The debunking is here. Note that it goes from "alien base" there, to "alien craft" on the hoaxer radio network.

Neither the word "alien" nor the word "base" appear anywhere in the article. As for the story being "debunked" the link you provide merely provides an _alternate explanation_. People are free to believe that alternative or not. It does not change the fact that the TRN story is "news." The fact that the London Daily Mail newspaper, the New York Daily News newspaper, the Hindustan Times of India newspaper and the Huffingrton Post website all covered the same story gives credence to the newsworthiness of the material. The fact you disagree does not make the story a "hoax." You don't get to be the arbiter of what is true or not for everyone else.

Then we have another hoax created by the hoaxer radio network:

VIDEO: NEWS HELICOPTER FROM KCRA-TV SACRAMENTO AIRS VIDEO OF ROGUE PLANET; INBOUND TOWARD EARTH

Who declared it to be a rogue planet hurtling towards earth? The planet is nothing more than the crescent of Venus.

There you go again, declaring what is truth for everyone else. In the video, didn't the news anchor call it a "celestial rock?" TRN coverage of the KCRA-TV news video made clear they were interested in whatever was blocking a portion of Venus; which is what looked to be a planet-sized object. When one factors-in the "Anomalous Secular Eccentricity of the Moon" discussed in papers published by well-known Physicists, and mentioned in that article, it is not a leap in any sense to put two and two together; that the "celestial rock" is what has been affecting our moon. You are free to disagree, but not to declare it a "hoax."

And another created hoax:

PROOF: Rain Brings Radiation To U.S. and Canada From Fukushima

Someone's opinion or interpretation of the NETC map is not proof of anything. Or should we just call it fear-mongering? Earthquake fear mongering, rogue planet fear mongering, radiation from rain fear mongering. We could call it the "Fear Mongering Network".

There are two maps in the story you mention, one shows the NETC radiation alerts map, the other shows the weather map from the National Weather Service. It is not rocket science or a "hoax" for any reasonable, rational person to see that the radiation alerts traced almost precisely with the then-happening weather system that was taking place. Further, it is irrefutable fact that weather systems of rain and snow take place when water vapor evaporates from the oceans and accumulates into a storm. Since the water in the Pacific Ocean is irrefutably polluted by radiation from the Fukushima nuclear disaster site in Japan, that the radiation in the Pacific water would evaporate with the water vapor and be carried inland is a no-brainer. Of course, you can deny these realities, but your choice to deny the truth doesn't make the article a "hoax.".

Then there's this:

T.S.A. THREATENS TO "RED FLAG" CITIZEN OVER YOUTUBE PARODY VIDEO WHICH POKED FUN AT GOVERNMENT

It's a parody video. It's not real. It's fake. Most people on this site and YouTube could see that. That's why it's in the HOAX bin on this website.

Perhaps you are right. I think not. I have seen how government operates and they are tyrannical, abusive and dangerous. It was no stretch of the imagination to take the claim at face value. You are free to believe what you like and one day - I hope it NEVER happens - maybe you'll find out just how tyrannical and abusive our government can be, then realize how possible the claims were in the videos published. Again, YOUR perception is not necessarily reality and if one takes the video at face, then your claiming it to be a "hoax" is just one more example of denial.

But yet, the fear mongering hoaxer radio network still peddles it as something that actually happened, creating more unnecessary fear about the TSA.

I am not certain how often you travel by air. I travel by air quite frequently. I hear the announcements in the airport that "joking about TSA can result in you being detained or arrested." I have been groped, probed, patted down and more by the TSA and can tell you, it is something to truly fear when they take you into a back room and demand you strip naked before they will ALLOW you to board a plane. TSA is to be feared. The fact that you do not understand this or have not experienced it doesn't make the TRN story a "hoax" or "create more unnecessary fear about the TSA."

These are but a quick few examples of the many.

And they have now been refuted.

Incidentally, I am wondering: What news web site do you run? Obviously you must be running one that is oh so much better that you would anoint yourself the arbiter of what's wrong with someone Else's site. Please let us all visit your news site to see the quality and accuracy of your work.

reply to post by InterestedReader

The fact that the London Daily Mail newspaper, the New York Daily News newspaper, the Hindustan Times of India newspaper and the Huffingrton Post website all covered the same story gives credence to the newsworthiness of the material.

The fact that a story is repeated (not the same as covered) assigns no credence to the original story. Multiple repetitions of nonsense makes it no less nonsensical or fabricated. Poor journalism is poor journalism.

In the video, didn't the news anchor call it a "celestial rock?" TRN coverage of the KCRA-TV news video made clear they were interested in whatever was blocking a portion of Venus;

Nothing was blocking a portion of Venus.

When one factors-in the "Anomalous Secular Eccentricity of the Moon" discussed in papers published by well-known Physicists, and mentioned in that article, it is not a leap in any sense to put two and two together; that the "celestial rock" is what has been affecting our moon.

Except that same paper discounts the influence of a planetary body as causing the variation in eccentricity of the Moon's orbit. Of course, you haven't read the paper, have you? You just believe the nonsense.

Since the water in the Pacific Ocean is irrefutably polluted by radiation from the Fukushima nuclear disaster site in Japan, that the radiation in the Pacific water would evaporate with the water vapor and be carried inland is a no-brainer.

How does radiation "evaporate?" Which radioactive substances would evaporate at sea surface temperatures? Cesium? No. Cesium oxide evaporates at 250ºC. That also means it condenses at 249º. Pure cesium, at much higher temperatures, so it's not going to get carried from the ocean to the sky and inland. You know that water is purified by distillation, right? You know what distillation is, right?

Repeating nonsense is nonsense.

reply to post by sled735


My parents witnessed a similar light effect as they drove home through a small town a few years ago. One time, I saw a green purple sphere fall from the sky. Fortunately, there were no major earthquakes after these personal events.

Phage
reply to post by InterestedReader

 

The fact that a story is repeated (not the same as covered) assigns no credence to the original story. Multiple repetitions of nonsense makes it no less nonsensical or fabricated. Poor journalism is poor journalism.

I agree. Yet your analysis does not speak to the core issue: newsworthiness. Whether something is newsworthy or not is a judgment calland TRN judged it newsworthy. That hardly qualifies it as a "hoax." In any event, if you check the other news sites that "covered" the story, you will notice they published BEFORE the TRN story. TRN did not originate the story, they followed the other coverage and delved further into the issue with the interview of "Dr. Norton."

Nothing was blocking a portion of Venus.

That is YOUR assessment. I do not agree. The fact that two people can look at the same thing and not agree about it doesn't make the issue a "hoax."

Except that same paper discounts the influence of a planetary body as causing the variation in eccentricity of the Moon's orbit. Of course, you haven't read the paper, have you? You just believe the nonsense.

Awwwwwww. You were doing so well until you started telling me what I've done or not done. In fact, I have read the $25 Physics Essay by the German Physicist and nowhere in that paper does he discount the influence of a planetary body. What he says is that there was (at the time of his writing) no evidence of a planetary body affecting the moon. No evidence at THAT TIME does not equate to no evidence NOW.

How does radiation "evaporate?" Which radioactive substances would evaporate at sea surface temperatures? Cesium? No. Cesium oxide evaporates at 250ºC. That also means it condenses at 249º. Pure cesium, at much higher temperatures, so it's not going to get carried from the ocean to the sky and inland. You know that water is purified by distillation, right? You know what distillation is, right?

I did not say radiation evaporated. I said water evaporates. Evaporation and distillation are two different things. Evaporation is the process of changing a liquid into its vapor stage. The word “evaporation” is specifically used when the vaporization happens from the surface of the liquid. Liquid vaporization can also happen at the boiling point where evaporation happens from whole liquid mass, but then it is not called evaporation. Evaporation can be influenced by various factors like concentration of other substances in the air, surface area, pressure, temperature of the substance, density, flow rate of air etc.

Distillation is a physical separation method which is used to separate compounds from a mixture. It is based on the boiling points of the components in the mixture. When a mixture has different component with different boiling points, they evaporate at different times when we are heating.

Evaporation is not distillation and therefore no purification takes place.

Based upon your own analysis, you prove my point: Since the radiological pollution boils off at a higher temperature, it would NOT be physically separated from the water vapor, but instead, carried within the water vapor. I hope this makes my position clear.


I didn't join this forum to argue with people. It just galled me how high and mighty some folks in here can be when smearing the work of others. That type of response - from a moderator no less - stifles the free and open exchange of ideas and that's what ticked me off. I consider my views as having been expressed and do not see any reason to continue this particular exchange.

reply to post by InterestedReader

What he says is that there was (at the time of his writing) no evidence of a planetary body affecting the moon.

No. Let's forget for the moment that that stupid TRN "article" claims that the paper is talking about the axial tilt of the Moon (it isn't). What he says is this:

A potentially viable Newtonian candidate would be a trans-Plutonian massive object (Planet X/Nemesis/Tyche) since it, actually, would affect e with a non-vanishing long-term variation. On the other hand, the values for the physical and orbital parameters of such a hypothetical body required to obtain at least the right order of magnitude for e are completely unrealistic: suffices it to say that an Earth-sized planet would be at 30 au, while a jovian mass would be at 200 au.

Here is it. For free:
arxiv.org...

Iorio is talking about the eccentricity of the Moon's orbit, not the tilt of its axis and what he says is that in order to produce the observed change in eccentricity an Earth sized object would have to be somewhere around the orbit of Neptune and a larger object would have to be beyond that. Now tell me, how does that relate to a large unknown object between Venus and Earth?

The object was so massive, it partially eclipsed what appears to be the planet Venus, meaning the object is approaching us from the area of the sun and has now arrived at a point BETWEEN earth and Venus.

Hilarious. You know that Galileo first described the phases of Venus, right? You know what causes the phases of Venus (and Mercury, and the Moon), right?
Nothing was blocking Venus.

Nonsense:

Clearly, this new, rogue planet is already well-within our solar system and is heading in the direction of earth.

Based upon your own analysis, you prove my point: Since the radiological pollution boils off at a higher temperature, it would NOT be physically separated from the water vapor, but instead, carried within the water vapor. I hope this makes my position clear.

Quite clear. You don't know what you are talking about. Water vapor is water vapor. Molecular H2O. It doesn't "carry" anything. Anything with a higher temperature of evaporation is left behind. That's how distillation works.

It just galled me how high and mighty some folks in here can be when smearing the work of others.

The motto here is "deny Ignorance", not "display and promote ignorance." Smearing the "work" of others, not so much. Applying critical thinking, yes.