187/188 DAYS ? ---- WOW----Strong 7.9/8m long earthquake shakes Mexico City

Originally posted by CoolStoryMan
Breaking News ‏ @BreakingNews Close
Guerrero state government: Hundreds of houses collapsed in Igualapa, Mexico after earthquake - @cnnbrk

this, after President Calderon said there was no serious damage

I'm not sure if they built their houses to withstand a large earthquake.. I think their building codes are more relaxed.

Ugh what is this thread? Just a bunch of predictions??

Edit:
www.ctv.ca...

Would have been useful if the OP linked something like that....who cares if it's 18X days. The quake was 7.4-6 btw, not 7.8-9.

Originally posted by RicFlair
I love the people saying the theory doesn't take ALL earthquakes. Did they ever stop to think that the theory predicts that in rougly 188 days there will at least be an earthquake of significant magnitude? I'll repeat that...

.....in rougly 188 days there will at least be an earthquake of significant magnitude...

......in rougly 188 days there will at least be an earthquake of significant magnitude....

....in rougly 188 days there will at least be an earthquake of significant magnitude.......

Guess what, those other quakes don't fall within the 188 day cycle, so they're no necessary for the theory. The theory is simply that every 188 days there is going to be a SIGNIFICANT quake. To say they're cherry picking is just a simple way for skeptics to cop out of understanding what the theory is about. To say they cherry picked the first quake is dumb too, because no one noticed the "cycle" until it became more and more obvious that it was actually happening in front of their faces, due to how powerful the quakes have been getting in recent years. But by all means skeptics, go about your day with a closed mind. Have fun bringing up the rear of the pack of enlightenment! Just don't try and hop on the bandwagon!

Also, instead of shooting down the 188 cycle, why don't you come up with your own theory or hypothesis? I'll repeat that too.

why don't you come up with your own theory or hypothesis??

why don't you come up with your own theory or hypothesis????

why don't you come up with your own theory or hypothesis??????

If you can come up with something that makes more sense than what is currently going on, I'd LOOOOOOOOOOOVE to hear it. Seriously, I would....I feel like we all would.

Theory is invalid because it does not specify if earthquakes in between are relevant or irrelevant. Even if you give me an answer to this right now, the theory is still invalid because it would change change completely.

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine


So on the back side of this current planetary alignment we will have March 22nd. I see the same thing going on here we saw one year ago in Japan. Look TF out Mexico ! This could easily be the precursor as we seen in Japan. The 9th to the 11th. The 20th to the 22nd. Interesting ?

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine

 

So on the back side of this curent planetary alignment we will have March 22nd. I see the same thing going on here we saw one year ago in Japan. Look TF out Mexico ! This could easily be the precursor as we seen in Japan. The 11th the 22nd.

As I'm thinking about it, and comparing this to last year, that's exactly what it's beginning to look like... Remember there is a little activity on all sides of the pacific rim right now, excluding the south.

reply to post by Saucerwench


I do too..

Apparently the people in this thread would rather bicker about 188 then answer a valid question

Maybe a bigger earthquake is coming to Mexico or other place.

This week will be intense.

The Mexico City earthquake was very strong but fortunatly there were no big issues like the one in 1985.

In the 1985 earthquakes in Mexico City over 10,000 people die.

Originally posted by ragiusnotiel
reply to post by Saucerwench

 

I do too..

Apparently the people in this thread would rather bicker about 188 then answer a valid question

Considering the title of the thread, our "bickering" is still on topic....

reply to post by ragiusnotiel


Not everyone can answer a valid question. What's wrong with you ? Just kidding but you did notice the title of the thread right Ragius ?

Bickering seems to get things done around here.
Change Rag to Ragius not an appropriate condensation of moniker.

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine


I understand that. Don't get me wrong- I just don't see why no one would want to answer an actual question about the actual earthquake. Because the thread seems like it's about two things. The earthquake and the 188 theory.

All I've really seen is bickering. Forgive a girl for wanting an answer to a question, I thought that was one of the functions of these things.

But then again I'm a noob. So what do I know

Originally posted by ragiusnotiel
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine

 

I understand that. Don't get me wrong- I just don't see why no one would want to answer an actual question about the actual earthquake. Because the thread seems like it's about two things. The earthquake and the 188 theory.

All I've really seen is bickering. Forgive a girl for wanting an answer to a question, I thought that was one of the functions of these things.

But then again I'm a noob. So what do I know

lol you know what, you're right. A large percentage of these posts are just bickering.....

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine


Anyway, lol, back to my question- is it normal wording for the USGS to say the "earth ruptured"? is that just regular wording.. cause it seems quite serious to me..

I thought that earthquakes we're just plates rubbing against each other? Is it common for the earth to "open up" from an earthquake..

Forgive me if I argued to get this question answered.. and it ends up being a stupid question lol

reply to post by ragiusnotiel


First of all I apologise for my inappropriate condensation of your moniker. Please note I ment nothing by it and changed it immediatly.

Can you present your question again I will do everything I can to make sure it gets answered. I 'll use force if have too.

you can believe what you want and say what you will. this is ats, after all. that being said, there are many of us here on ats that do believe in the 188 day rule. nothing scientific about it, but in the past 2 years, events seem to unfold in that manner. just because many of us don't post about it doesn't mean we don't believe. i've been counting the days since last 9/15/11. i was really hoping nothing of this magnitude would hit today. the bigger fear i have is that the 188 day is actually 3/21/12. another big one hits a day later? and how would that affect the gulf? info seems to be gathered much faster here on ats. i hope those living in the affected areas will post as soon as they can as developments happen. hate to say it, but really concerned about the other shoe falling. is that just me?

Originally posted by ragiusnotiel
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine

 

Anyway, lol, back to my question- is it normal wording for the USGS to say the "earth ruptured"? is that just regular wording.. cause it seems quite serious to me..

I thought that earthquakes we're just plates rubbing against each other? Is it common for the earth to "open up" from an earthquake..

Forgive me if I argued to get this question answered.. and it ends up being a stupid question lol

I noticed that, and wondered, but was so caught up in debate that I couldn't stop. lol I been moving back and forth between 4 threads.

That is a very specific, kinda ominous term considering what I was taught in grade school science class. Unfortunately I'm not "well versed" on quakes, so I have no idea why they said it that way.

the earth ruptured? it really said that?

wow like the poster below me said very strange wordding, maybe they couldn't think of the right word, all I know is either EQ's go side by side or up and down

lol on a side note that could be why I never got a job with the USGS.

reply to post by hapablab


Right. Wouldn't that term be more suitable for a volcano related quake?

NOTTTTTT fear mongering, just asking...

reply to post by randyvs


hahahah no harm done. Actually my name means nothing, completely made it up.

I do get where you were going with it though good catch regardless..

"Rupture" is language used by 2 of our EQ experts in this thread as well..

ATS Thread

reply to post by Jepic


Actually what we can say for sure is:

Out of a 376 day cycle we have 2 periods of 3 days, separated by 188 days, when we can say for certain that an earthquake above 7.0 will happen.

More interestingly is the true strong EQ cycle is every 376 days, or very close, where we can go even further and state an EQ stronger than 7.9 will occur.

That in itself is a very curious thing.