Magnitude 7.0 - HAITI REGION

reply to post by prof-rabbit


What is there to demonstrate? Look at the depth data. You will hardly find a repeat, other than 10, even within the same region.

Originally posted by harrytuttle

And 6 days ago, before this Haiti quake, all these dead fish starting showing up in the Gulf of Mexico (the same tectonic plate where Haiti is on):
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Strange stuff.

Haiti is on a different plate.

The Gonave microplate is a 1100 km long strip of oceanic crust formed by the Cayman spreading ridge within a strike-slip pull-apart on the northern transform margin of the Caribbean plate with the North American Plate.

About 8,000 per day
2.0-2.9 Minor Generally not felt, but recorded. About 1,000 per day
3.0-3.9 Often felt, but rarely causes damage. 49,000 per year (est.)
4.0-4.9 Light Noticeable shaking of indoor items, rattling noises. Significant damage unlikely. 6,200 per year (est.)
5.0-5.9 Moderate Can cause major damage to poorly constructed buildings over small regions. At most slight damage to well-designed buildings. 800 per year
6.0-6.9 Strong Can be destructive in areas up to about 160 kilometres (100 mi) across in populated areas. 120 per year
7.0-7.9 Major Can cause serious damage over larger areas. 18 per year
8.0-8.9 Great Can cause serious damage in areas several hundred miles across. 1 per year
9.0-9.9 Devastating in areas several thousand miles across.
1 per 20 years
10.0+ Epic Never recorded; see below for equivalent seismic energy yield.
Extremely rare (Unknown)

(Based on U.S. Geological Survey documents.)[5]

Great earthquakes occur once a year, on average. The largest recorded earthquake was the Great Chilean Earthquake of May 22, 1960 which had a magnitude (MW) of 9.5.[6]

The following table lists the approximate energy equivalents in terms of TNT explosive force[7] - though note that the energy here is that of the underground energy release (i.e. a small atomic bomb blast will not simply cause light shaking of indoor items) rather than the overground energy release; the majority of energy transmission of an earthquake is not transmitted to and through the surface, but is instead dissipated into the crust and other subsurface structures.
Richter
Approximate Magnitude Approximate TNT for
Seismic Energy Yield Joule equivalent Example
0.0 1 kg (2.2 lb) 4.2 MJ
0.5 5.6 kg (12.4 lb) 23.5 MJ Large hand grenade
1.0 32 kg (70 lb) 134.4 MJ Construction site blast
1.5 178 kg (392 lb) 747.6 MJ WWII conventional bombs
2.0 1 metric ton 4.2 GJ Late WWII conventional bombs
2.5 5.6 metric tons 23.5 GJ WWII blockbuster bomb
3.0 32 metric tons 134.4 GJ Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb
3.5 178 metric tons 747.6 GJ Chernobyl nuclear disaster, 1986
4.0 1 kiloton 4.2 TJ Small atomic bomb
4.5 5.6 kilotons 23.5 TJ
5.0 32 kilotons 134.4 TJ Nagasaki atomic bomb (actual seismic yield was negligible since it detonated in the atmosphere)
Lincolnshire earthquake (UK), 2008
5.4 150 kilotons 625 TJ 2008 Chino Hills earthquake (Los Angeles, United States)
5.5 178 kilotons 747.6 TJ Little Skull Mtn. earthquake (NV, USA), 1992
Alum Rock earthquake (CA, USA), 2007
6.0 1 megaton 4.2 PJ Double Spring Flat earthquake (NV, USA), 1994
6.5 5.6 megatons 23.5 PJ Rhodes (Greece), 2008
6.7 16.2 megatons 67.9 PJ Northridge earthquake (CA, USA), 1994
6.9 26.8 megatons 112.2 PJ San Francisco Bay Area earthquake (CA, USA), 1989
7.0 32 megatons 134.4 PJ Java earthquake (Indonesia), 2009

12 January 2010 earthquake (Haiti)
7.1 50 megatons 210 PJ Energy released is equivalent to that of Tsar Bomba, the largest thermonuclear weapon ever tested.
7.5 178 megatons 747.6 PJ Kashmir earthquake (Pakistan), 2005
Antofagasta earthquake (Chile), 2007
7.8 600 megatons 2.4 EJ Tangshan earthquake (China), 1976
8.0 1 gigaton 4.2 EJ Toba eruption[citation needed] 75,000 years ago; the largest known volcanic event
San Francisco earthquake (CA, USA), 1906
Queen Charlotte earthquake (BC, Canada), 1949
México City earthquake (Mexico), 1985
Gujarat earthquake (India), 2001
Chincha Alta earthquake (Peru), 2007
Sichuan earthquake (China), 2008 (initial estimate: 7.8)
8.5 5.6 gigatons 23.5 EJ Sumatra earthquake (Indonesia), 2007
9.0 32 gigatons 134.4 EJ Lisbon Earthquake (Lisbon, Portugal), All Saints Day, 1755
9.2 90.7 gigatons 379.7 EJ Anchorage earthquake (AK, USA), 1964
9.3 114 gigatons 477 EJ Indian Ocean earthquake, 2004 (40 ZJ in this case)
9.5 178 gigatons 747.6 EJ Valdivia earthquake (Chile), 1960 (251 ZJ in this case)
10.0 1 teraton 4.2 ZJ Never recorded by humans.
13.0 108 megatons = 100 teratons 5x1030 ergs = 500 ZJ Yucatán Peninsula impact (causing Chicxulub crater) 65 Ma ago.[8][9][10][11][12]

reply to post by np6888


Maybe, just maybe, this is because the depth displayed by the USGS is more an estimate. It takes some more calculations to come up with an exact depth so in a few days you might see that they correct the depth at which these quakes occurred.

According to USGS:

Accurately determining the depth of an earthquake is typically more challenging than determining its location, unless there happens to be a seismic station close and above the epicenter. So generally, errors on depth determinations are somewhat greater than on location determinations.

I really don't think with everything going on right now they are going to bother to calculate the exact depth of an mag.3 aftershock. It will be corrected in the next few days....

Peace

[edit on 13/1/2010 by operation mindcrime]

Originally posted by np6888
reply to post by prof-rabbit

 

What is there to demonstrate? Look at the depth data. You will hardly find a repeat, other than 10, even within the same region.

And this demonstrates a man-made quake how?

reply to post by prof-rabbit


i was using it for his reference not mine, I don't think it was man made!!

reply to post by prof-rabbit


You seriously need me to explain? If it was not by nature, i.e chance, then what else could it be?

Originally posted by starshiner
reply to post by prof-rabbit

 

i was using it for his reference not mine, I don't think it was man made!!

The concept of a man made earthquake is buried in science fiction, the only man-made thing large enough to initiate an earthquake would be a large nuclear blast several miles below the surface directly on a fault line under tension.

The animals always tell you. The horses I was able to really connect with would blow there breath a certain direction and get really uptight before every tornado or hurricane outbreak every time like clockwork.... ONE time the whole in palma de mallorca spain the horses where running in a circle the whole herd bunched together with there heads down lathered with sweat.. someone asked for me to come and I said there will be a tidal wave or something three days later was the giant tidal wave in the east......every time they can tell you!!!!!!!

reply to post by prof-rabbit


Right, but- we know they have the deep tunneling capabilities- so whos to say they havent this dirty little weapon up their sleeves...

Originally posted by np6888
reply to post by prof-rabbit

 

You seriously need me to explain? If it was not by nature, i.e chance, then what else could it be?

That is the point exactly, earthquakes are a natural occurrence that happen around the globe daily since the formation of the Earth billions of years ago.

Originally posted by xynephadyn
reply to post by prof-rabbit

 

Right, but- we know they have the deep tunneling capabilities- so whos to say they havent this dirty little weapon up their sleeves...

So someone has it in for an impoverished nation of 9 million people.

It's the Earth's Crust trying to match the shift in rotation of the Inner Core as it tries to line up with the Galactic planes polarity. Look at how fast Magnetic North is accelerating towards Siberia and has been for a few years.

I believe the spike in Earthquakes is going to continue worldwide along every fault and will be larger as the Earths Crust tries to catch up to the liquid outer core which is already trying to match the Inner Cores change.

The weak faults are going to see the most activity as torsion forces take affect on the crust.

Just my two cents

reply to post by DEEZNUTZ


congratulations i have said this all nite,,, well tried to and got moaned at well done!!!

Lets see if we can break this down a little..

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
It's the Earth's Crust trying to match the shift in rotation of the Inner Core as it tries to line up with the Galactic planes polarity.

Galactic planes polarity

Do you have anything in terms of data to demonstrate this polarity?

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
Look at how fast Magnetic North is accelerating towards Siberia and has been for a few years.

The movement of magnetic north has been documented for over a hundred years.

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
I believe the spike in Earthquakes is going to continue worldwide along every fault and will be larger as the Earths Crust tries to catch up to the liquid outer core which is already trying to match the Inner Cores change.

Please show your data.

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
The weak faults are going to see the most activity as torsion forces take affect on the crust.

Just my two cents

There is no "spike" in earthquakes either in size or frequency, if you believe there is please show your data.

reply to post by prof-rabbit


New Orleans for example during Katrina- Pres Bush used that city as a testing for Disaster Scenario and witheld Fema from entering so that they could monitor how things played out- what people would do- in the worst case scenario.

I could see them doing something like that to Haiti. Testing a new weapon- not losing a whole lot (in their perspective only).

I am personally sickened by this earthquake- but I am never one to doubt what the government- and world government is capable of. I am sure its most likely a natural occurance but i dont think its outside the realm of possibilities for us to consider alternative causes.


[edit on 13-1-2010 by xynephadyn]

reply to post by prof-rabbit


So you don't find it odd at all that the #10 is so prevalent, while the other numbers are unique? At the very least, you could reply with, well, maybe this is where most of the plate tensions are.

reply to post by np6888


news.nationalgeographic.com...
Over the past century the pole has moved 685 miles (1,100 kilometers) from Arctic Canada toward Siberia, says Joe Stoner, a paleomagnetist at Oregon State University.

At its current rate the pole could move to Siberia within the next half-century, Stoner said.

"It's moving really fast," he said. "We're seeing something that hasn't happened for at least 500 years."

Stoner presented his team's research at the American Geophysical Union's meeting last week in San Francisco.

Lorne McKee, a geomagnetic scientist at Natural Resources Canada, says that Stoner's data fits his own readings.

"The movement of the pole definitely appears to be accelerating," he said.

Not a Reversal

The shift is likely a normal oscillation of the Earth's magnetic field, Stoner said, and not the beginning of a flip-flop of the north and south magnetic poles, a phenomenon that last occurred 780,000 years ago.

Such reversals have taken place 400 times in the last 330 million years, according to magnetic clues sealed in rocks around the world. Each reversal takes a thousand years or more to complete.

"People like to think something special is happening in their lifetimes, but despite the dramatic changes, I don't see any evidence of it," Stoner said. "It's probably just a normal wandering of the pole."

reply to post by np6888


Once more...

Accurately determining the depth of an earthquake is typically more challenging than determining its location, unless there happens to be a seismic station close and above the epicenter. So generally, errors on depth determinations are somewhat greater than on location determinations.

Pffffffffffffff........

Peace

reply to post by operation mindcrime


Someone has already shown the depth of this quake and ALL of its aftershocks. Are you telling me they're all off?