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.
Is there nothing unusual about this year as far as you're concerned? In previous posts, you exclude numbers as they relate to Japan, because Japan was an anomaly, right?
But do you consider Japan as a reason to consider this entire year as anomalous?
Were we really due for a mega-quake so soon after the one in Chile?
Has this year been anomalous in regard to anything (mass animal die-offs, earthquakes, volcanoes, sink-holes, fissures, tornadoes, floods, droughts, space weather, etc.) you pay attention to in the sciences? There is much going on....it seems...
I am not here to argue causes. But something seems to have changed drastically since the beginning of 2011. Everything (it seems) has been kicked up by a notch or two. The most reputable posters on ATS have avoided noting any such change in the climate or atmosphere.
What do you think, PuterMan? Is this a big year for science? Or just a big year for deluded conspiracy theorists?
Once Greenland thaws out
many reputable sources say
The political concerns of mankind are probably more pressing (maybe) but those too seem to be nothing new in the grand scheme of things.
But when I hope that my intuition is wrong. And that (natural) catastrophe is not around the corner, I will remind myself that you, being obviously wise and informed, believe that nothing is out of the ordinary.
But, and I hope you are not offended at this, I will still continue with my emergency preparedness. Nothing drastic. Just, you know, the basics...
DATE
07/08/2011
ORIGIN TIME
17:11:57.9 UTC
LOCATION
53.154 -4.770
DEPTH
11.9 km
MAGNITUDE
0.8 ML
LOCALITY
CAERNARFON BAY
DATE: 11/08/2011
ORIGIN TIME: 03:26:16:8
LAT: 53. 199
LON: -2. 752
DEPTH: 7.5
MAG: 1.1
REGION: CHESTER,CHESHIRE
10KM EAST OF CHESHIR
Beware. The minute this column runs there will probably be a response ghostwritten by a public relations firm, possibly from overseas.
(...)
Armchair experts should base arguments on real evidence, writes Bernie Napp, a senior policy analyst at Straterra.
(...)
Columnist Tracey Barnett alleges that fracking fluids are "potentially carcinogenic" with no evidence presented, and that these fluids are "laced with chemicals". Well, so are coffee, tea, beer and wine, for goodness sake.
Just to make it absolutely clear, the toxic BTEX chemicals, which include benzene and toluene, are not used in fracking in New Zealand.
The next concern is that fracking causes earthquakes. This comes from a report prepared for the European Parliament of June 2011. The reference for the Blackpool earthquake is a newspaper article, and that for earthquakes in the Fort Worth area are unpublished, making these difficult to assess at this distance.
The reference for the Arkansas earthquakes is the local geological survey which has been recording earthquakes in that area for more than 100 years, including swarms of earthquakes that occurred before fracking in the area started. The present swarm may or may not be connected with fracking. Granted, more work on this may be needed.
Your columnist says of Arkansas that "drillers had put so much residual water, sand and chemicals back down old wells it would have created the equivalent of a 12ha underground lake". That implies a huge hole filled with fluid has been created underground.
Think, rather, of rock underground being like a sponge. Filled with fluid or not, rock is rock.
The $60 million project in Switzerland referred to by your columnist had to do with geothermal energy, not fracking.
Then there is a Russian paper, which says with no evidence that in 1963 the filling of a hydro dam in India caused a magnitude 7 earthquake nearby. The paper does say hydros and oil and gas wells can change the state of stress of rocks underground and that small earthquakes can result in response, and that may be relevant for Arkansas.
But any seismic activity as a result of fracking or hydros would be a different phenomenon than earthquakes caused by the massive forces of nature such as have occurred recently in Christchurch. To conflate the two would be highly misleading.
Now to the specular issue of residents in the United States setting fire to their tapwater.
Official investigations in Colorado and Pennsylvania have shown that affected water bores had been drilled through shallow coal seams and that the lining of the bores have corroded. As a result thermogenic methane migrated from the coal into the drinking water.
This has nothing to do with fracking.
(...)
Armchair experts should base arguments on real evidence
Well Mr Napp you should read your own advice.
Armchair experts should base arguments on real evidence
There is plenty of evidence but armchair experts like you choose to ignore it. Why not stick to analysing policy and butt out of things you do not understand
Sorry Puterman....do not mean to sound as if I am a scare monger or anything
neic.usgs.gov...
mb = 6.0 (355) ML = 5.9