There is a 26% chance of a significant earthquake after an X class solar flare

What would be your take on the increase of earthquakes on Jupiter.

here is a link that shows a relation between Jupiter the moon and a earthquake that occurred


books.google.com... =en&ei=xT-XTbzKJYrf0gHbzu3kCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=jupiter%20more%20earthquakes&f=false

reply to post by THEDUDE86

What would be your take on the increase of earthquakes on Jupiter.

My take would to ask you how a gaseous planet has earthquakes.

here is a link that shows a relation between Jupiter the moon and a earthquake that occurred

Cool, so one "alignment" between Jupiter and the moon caused an earthquake.

Where are the other similar alignments causing earthquakes?

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Again, I chose a criteria because unlike you I want to see some clarity from what we're looking at.

What's the point in looking at quakes a month before a major solar event when you're trying to argue the point that sudden solar disturbances causes earthquakes.

That's just plain stupidity.

Ah, happy to see there are more people interested in the Sun/Earth quake links.

We can't just use data of a sunspot or a CME from the sun; you do find sunspots and CME's without a high magnetic compound. Then again you also find a relative sudden jump in magnetic flux near earth - like today from 5.5nT to 18nT (HINODE). A little strange for this magnetic flux being so unsettled today - we only had one B7 flare yesterday and that was also directed completely away from earth.

Question is exactly what we should look for. We know some of the 'components' from solar emissions; but there are also large portions we do not know what it is - yet.

Solar Flares do NOT cause earthquakes. At best it can trigger an earthquake. In other words, the pressure in the earth crust must already be there, just waiting to be released. At present that is where I see the solar flares most likely do play a role - Releasing trigger.

Originally posted by Chadwickus

Again, I chose a criteria because unlike you I want to see some clarity from what we're looking at.

What's the point in looking at quakes a month before a major solar event when you're trying to argue the point that sudden solar disturbances causes earthquakes.

That's just plain stupidity.

The stupidity comes from those who don't see the link. Before the earthquakes there was already increased solar activity, as of September 27th 2003 sunspot 464 was up to 15 Earth diameters.

Sept 27, 2003
There's a remarkable spot on the Sun this weekend. The active region, called sunspot 464, is about as wide as fifteen planet Earths lined up in a row. This means it's easy to see, but never look directly at the Sun without suitable eye protection.

cse.ssl.berkeley.edu...

If they were warning people not to try to look at the sunspot directly it means it was facing Earth. The first earthquake I showed was on October 1st, which falls within the time frame in which sunspot 464 was forming and growing rapidly.

Again you obviously don't understand that changes/fluctuations in solar activity, not only cmes or solar flares, does affect seismic as well as magmatic activity on Earth, but now we can see that even showing you to be wrong you only resort to insults...nice criteria you got there...

Oh, and btw, just in case you didn't know, even though some other members and I have pointed this out before, the following can happen as well which will affect how solar activity affects seismic and magmatic activity on Earth.

Dec. 3, 2003:Â Earth is surrounded by a magnetic force field--a bubble in space called "the magnetosphere" tens of thousands of miles wide. Although many people don't know it exists, the magnetosphere is familiar. It's a far flung part of the same planetary magnetic field that deflects compass needles here on Earth's surface. And it's important. The magnetosphere acts as a shield that protects us from solar storms.

According to new observations, however, from NASAs IMAGE spacecraft and the joint NASA/European Space Agency Cluster satellites, immense cracks sometimes develop in Earths magnetosphere and remain open for hours. This allows the solar wind to gush through and power stormy space weather.
...

science.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Chadwickus

So, despite the various theories connecting solar flares and earthquakes being thrown about, the cold hard facts and numbers makes me think it's all a load of doo doo

Less than 30% is way too low for any correlation IMHO

Not only is it too low, it's so far below the number of random hits I'd actually be tempted to suggest a correlation in the opposite direction if anything.


According to the data from USGS, there are an average of 150 earthquakes of magnitude 6 or greater per year. So that's a little less than 1 every 2 days. Considering you used a 2-day window for flare impact then we should expect almost a 100% correlation based on random hits alone.

Now I'm assuming some of those big earthquakes aren't randomly spread out (e.g. aftershocks following an even bigger earthquake), but still, seems to me earthquakes following a major flare are suspiciously low. And I didn't even include the 1319 magnitude 5-5.9 earthquakes per year even though you put a 5.5 in your analysis.


Therefore X-flares suppress major earthquakes.


Try and process that one, ATS doomsayers

Originally posted by mc_squared
...
Therefore X-flares suppress major earthquakes.


Try and process that one, ATS doomsayers

Oh boy... Did you corroborate that every one of those flares/cmes were facing Earth, or did you do as poor a job as Chad did?... Did you check to see what the strength of the earth's magnetic field was in the areas affected by the flares/cmes that actually hit Earth, or did you not think about that either?...

Since actual scientists are saying the contrary to what you two are saying i rather believe the scientists who know what they are talking about...