More earthquakes

reply to post by PuterMan


where is the proof of elenin passing by other bodies and not disrupting their orbit?

is that from nasa?

and i would hope, as everyone is saying you're one of the top quake guys here, that you would put more consideration into such a pattern relationship forming between quakes and alignments....

as i had to tell people in another thread... there is no special magic "date" such as march "15th" when it will instantly be in a "conjunction"...

i would have thought you would know this..

really not trying to be rude, but if you're wanting to talk rational, please think deeper into this.

march 15 was Only what NASA (Never A Straight Answer) is capable/willing to publish in an orbital diagram as the "most aligned" day out of MANY DAYS where our earth is inbetween the sun and elenin. sure NASA has concluded (if you think they are 100% correct) that this day will have the best alignment, but things move very slowly on the cosmological scale. elenin doesn't just appear march 15th morning and leave that night. it takes a long time for it to completely pass through an alignment, creating a "window" of alignment.

now, when considering that elenin could be a dwarf star with tens of times the mass of jupiter for example, the earth would experience a "pinnacle" point of releasing it's momentum/pressure that was built up while orbiting the sun up until it came between the sun and elenin.

as soon as it reaches this "pinnacle" point of alignment, the tectonic plates move to relieve this pressure, causing quakes obviously.

please, quit listening to people shouting out specific days, none of them have proof..

but as far as the nasa orbital diagram shows us, earth was Entering a Slow Alignment on march 10-11.. and exiting today, the 20th.

now, you know there was a 9.0 on the entering of the alignment, and some blatantly odd quake activity that continued through that window and is still even happening today.

please take these facts into consideration before you try to "debunk" the entire theory by saying "no 9.0 on march 15!!!"

look at the diagram. scroll back to the 8.8 chile.

scroll forward in 2011.

the simple conclusion is this:

if this pattern continues, later this year we will see Many more geographical changes.

Originally posted by kermithermit111
reply to post by PuterMan

 

where is the proof of elenin passing by other bodies and not disrupting their orbit?

is that from nasa?

No it is from Leonid Elenin.

and i would hope, as everyone is saying you're one of the top quake guys here, that you would put more consideration into such a pattern relationship forming between quakes and alignments....

And indeed I do when it is a conjunction that is worthy of consideration. however the mass of Elenin, unless she is indeed a brown dwarf, is too small to be taken into consideration. Since I have already explained that there is little possibility of Elenin being a brown dwarf then I do not think that the comet had an effect on any earthquakes. Indeed in the article I linked above the discoverer of Elenin was asked just that question and replied that:

LeonidOS:
Март 11, 2011 в 13:27
I’m as scientist not relate this tragedy with my or any other comets.

Translated from Russian by Google. Text in link provided above.

as i had to tell people in another thread... there is no special magic "date" such as march "15th" when it will instantly be in a "conjunction"...

i would have thought you would know this..

really not trying to be rude, but if you're wanting to talk rational, please think deeper into this.

I am not considering you rude. You have a position in this and I do not take the same position. This is not a problem, merely a source of discussion.

march 15 was Only what NASA (Never A Straight Answer) is capable/willing to publish in an orbital diagram as the "most aligned" day out of MANY DAYS where our earth is inbetween the sun and elenin. sure NASA has concluded (if you think they are 100% correct) that this day will have the best alignment, but things move very slowly on the cosmological scale. elenin doesn't just appear march 15th morning and leave that night. it takes a long time for it to completely pass through an alignment, creating a "window" of alignment.

To be honest I have no idea if the date of the 15th March came from NASA or not. It was a much touted date for disaster on ATS. It has passed and all is well. From my own point of view I thought that this would be the case.

now, when considering that elenin could be a dwarf star with tens of times the mass of jupiter for example, the earth would experience a "pinnacle" point of releasing it's momentum/pressure that was built up while orbiting the sun up until it came between the sun and elenin.

OK, first let's go with your suggestion. I am going to make reference to this site

Saturn may have the lowest density but Saturn’s mass is greater than all the planets except for Jupiter. Saturn’s mass is 5.688e+26.

Jupiter’s mass is 1.8986×10^27 kg. That’s as much as 317.8 Earths and is 1/1047 the size of the Sun.

Between May 2008 and April 2009 Elenin was at the closest point to Saturn of the trajectory.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5b271ad7ac05.png[/atsimg]

Changing the scientific and other notation into decimal notation then the massof Elenin compared to Saturn if she was 10 times more massive would be as follows.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/10ac5793be1d.png[/atsimg]

Now I am the first to admit that I am not an astronomer but I would image that even though this is around 105 times less than the mass of the Sun that a mass that is 33 times greater than Saturn would have a serious effect upon the moons of Saturn if not Saturn itself at that relatively close distance. I am not aware of any such changes.

I still consider that there is sufficient evidence to show that Elenin is not anything like that mass and indeed is more likely to be the 4km to 5km across that Leonid Elenin proposes.

now, you know there was a 9.0 on the entering of the alignment, and some blatantly odd quake activity that continued through that window and is still even happening today.

please take these facts into consideration before you try to "debunk" the entire theory by saying "no 9.0 on march 15!!!"

I am assuming that you meant no 9.0 on March 11th. I could hardly make a statement to that effect and indeed have not done so at any time.

the simple conclusion is this:

if this pattern continues, later this year we will see Many more geographical changes.

As far as I am concerned the simple conclusion is that Elenin will almost certainly have no effect whatsoever upon planet Earth. Now if you have 'evidence' rather than assertions to prove me wrong than I would be happy to look at it.

reply to post by PuterMan


the fact is: neither of us have any evidence of anything.

we are simply discussing limited observations.

as for saturn: you're basing your entire conclusion that elenin is not a bigger mass than published off of the fact that you have "found no evidence" that saturn was effected.

first: where would you even find that evidence, is there a site or source for seismological activity on saturn or it's moons? a site other than nasa would be nice too..

second: saturn obviously has the lowest density in the solar system, so wouldn't it physically be the least affected anyways?

third: the "scientist" leonid elenin has had little evidence of even existing as an individual in the first place, how are you sure his quotes aren't posted by someone else?

fourth: i never once said anything related to the "doom" events predicted for the specific date of march 15th, and was not worried about that day more than any other day in the window of alignment.

now, you say there is little possibility for elenin not being a dwarf star, what variables are you basing this upon?

it would be very hard to find enough solid evidence on elenin so far to come to anything near that conclusion, so if you have, what is it?

you say that elenin will almost certainly have no effect on earth as it gets nearer, but you have no evidence other than the mass posted on nasa's jpl site, and the mass "leonid elenin" is estimating.

as of right now, there is no "evidence" of it being any certain size.

all we can do is observe. and so our observations stand as the closest thing to "evidence" that we can collect.

and with that, I do see elenin as having been in alignment when the past two >8.0 earthquakes occurred on this planet.

so if that is not observable evidence to base a future alignment's events upon, i don't know what you're looking for.

Originally posted by kermithermit111
reply to post by PuterMan

 

as for saturn: you're basing your entire conclusion that elenin is not a bigger mass than published off of the fact that you have "found no evidence" that saturn was effected.

first: where would you even find that evidence, is there a site or source for seismological activity on saturn or it's moons? a site other than nasa would be nice too..

I assure you that if Saturn or it's moons had been perturbed it would have been spread all around the astronomical world and probably even in the MSM. This has nothing to do with seismology but with astronomy and celestial mechanics. The evidence in this case is the lack of evidence otherwise.

second: saturn obviously has the lowest density in the solar system, so wouldn't it physically be the least affected anyways?

As I understand it that would make it more susceptible to an object as massive as 10 times the mass of Jupiter.

third: the "scientist" leonid elenin has had little evidence of even existing as an individual in the first place, how are you sure his quotes aren't posted by someone else?

One could counter that by saying are you sur thay are posted by someone else. Indeed what evidence do you have that Leonid Elenin is not "Leonid Elenin". From my perspective after all he is just a 'real' as you.

fourth: i never once said anything related to the "doom" events predicted for the specific date of march 15th, and was not worried about that day more than any other day in the window of alignment.

What is the hang up with this? I never said that you did not could we leave that out of the equation?

now, you say there is little possibility for elenin not being a dwarf star, what variables are you basing this upon?

I think you mean that I consider there is little possibility of Elenin being a dwarf star, and this is for the reasons I have stated. You on the other hand have offered nothing to suggest why Elenin might be a dwarf star.

it would be very hard to find enough solid evidence on elenin so far to come to anything near that conclusion, so if you have, what is it?

If I was to agree with you on this, which I do not as I believe there is sufficient reason to believe Elenin is not a dwarf star, then I would have to say to you that in the light of a lack of evidence as you put it how can you come to the conclusion that Elenin is a dwarf star?

you say that elenin will almost certainly have no effect on earth as it gets nearer, but you have no evidence other than the mass posted on nasa's jpl site, and the mass "leonid elenin" is estimating.

I was not aware that NASA had posted any figure for mass. Perhaps you could point out where?

as of right now, there is no "evidence" of it being any certain size.

all we can do is observe. and so our observations stand as the closest thing to "evidence" that we can collect.

and with that, I do see elenin as having been in alignment when the past two >8.0 earthquakes occurred on this planet.

so if that is not observable evidence to base a future alignment's events upon, i don't know what you're looking for.

I think we will just have to leave it at that since I am not looking for anything, you are. You have presented no evidence to show that Elenin has sufficient mass to have an effect at the current distance, or previous distances, upon the crust of the Earth. One or two circumstantial apparent 'coincidences' do not prove the hypothesis. If you consider that Elenin has sufficient mass present the evidence that allows you to determine that these alignments are anything other than circumstantial.

It is not sufficient to say that there was an earthquake since the mass of which you are speaking has to be explained and you will need to present a case as to why that mass has affected nothing else.

If Elenin was a brown dwarf it would be visible now to even the smallest backyard telescopes. It is not visible other than with a large telescope and certainly is way beyond the limits of the average hobby telescope. That alone should indicate that your theory is probably incorrect.

This will of course be resolved when Elenin passes by the Stereo B satellite.

reply to post by PuterMan


under nasa's orbital diagram you can find the comet's total magnitude.. this can be translated on another nasa table to find it's diameter in km

reply to post by kermithermit111


Mm, interesting. I did not know that.

Thanks.

Just to add to my post
I have added a new post of the Africa line of Quakes
earthquake.usgs.gov...
and it seems that the quakes are starting to become more frequent and larger
have a look at this link I made and would appreciate any info you guys can bring up on the last years worth of quakes in this area
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I just noted a new big quake earthquake.usgs.gov...
in the ocean off japan as i posted this by the way 23.42 GMT time

keep me up to date guys