6.2 off Oregon coast (updated to a 5.9) 7.0 in mexico right after

reply to post by Gerizo


i think it's pretty obvious they are happening more frequently. and am i the only one that's noticed there is no actual new news, just trayvon which is old news........it seems very likely to me anyway they are doing this on purpose, possibly because they don't wan't the public to know whats going on, or it could be they don't have a clue what's going on.

Wish it would kick off already. I've been hearing about earthquakes for about 25 years now and they just seem to roll in at a pretty steady rate.

I mean, if it is going to kick off this year (2012), you'd expect more than the average number of big quakes. But here we are, 3.5 months into the year and there's been very little to talk about. Instead, people are posting about EQs in the 6+ range to keep the posts up.

Maybe there'll be some more big ones (like the 8.5 or whatever it was the other day) before the end of the year.

Not that I want anyone to be hurt of course.

Shame ATS once again failed to predict the timing and location of these quakes, and all the 188 day people seem to have gone totally quiet. Seems that was a scam that didn't pan out.

Hopefully its not the start to something.

reply to post by Damrod


I agreed with the part of the post I quoted. I know that man has lived in the most dormant period of geologic history on the planet as far as current science knows. I see no need to argue the point with those that haven't studied the actual geologic history of the planet. Including the climatic extremes that we are not even close to reaching. However, that is another topic all together.

Two hours ago, a double (10 minutes apart) 3.8 and 3.4 EQ in the Atlantic Ocean East of Cape Cod and South of Nova Scotia. It's being reported as a 'Canadian' EQ. Very odd location, that.

Just as an aside, I live directly east of that Oregon coast quake; I'm about 100 miles inland. Didn't feel any shaking but a very rare thunderstorm came in off the ocean at that time.

I'm friends with the kid on FB who predicted the Japan tsunami..... and is claiming he will predict the California tsunami soon to come.

Here is what his opinion is:

Question... I'm not a geologist or know anything about earth quakes or EQ history so is Southern Cali always rocking like this?:

Thursday April 12 2012, 19:32:04 UTC 4 minutes ago Southern California 1.1 11.3 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 19:17:12 UTC 19 minutes ago Southern California 1.4 6.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 19:11:52 UTC 24 minutes ago Southern California 2.5 7.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 19:11:52 UTC 24 minutes ago Southern California 2.5 7.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 19:09:29 UTC 27 minutes ago Southern California 1.4 7.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 18:56:44 UTC 40 minutes ago Central Alaska 1.5 50.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 18:53:01 UTC 43 minutes ago Southern California 3.5 5.9 USGS Feed Detail

Obtained from: quakes.globalincidentmap.com...

Can someone factually tell me if this is normal patterns for Cali or not? And I'm not talking about "yea the earth always has EQ so yes its normal". I'm talking about actual patterns for quakes in that specific area. I'll try and see if I can find something also.

reply to post by Fockewulf8

I'm no geologist either but I think thats normal for cali.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
I never realised there were so many small quakes here in BC until i started checking my EQ app. I'm noticing almost daily there are 2.9 quakes near Princeton, or Allenby BC. I see Port Hardy a lot as well.

I think it's a case of once you start checking, it looks like a lot.

reply to post by signalfire


Weird I live in the Albany/Corvallis area and I too noticed really strange weather. I don't know if its just spring time or what.
Oregon weather can vary a lot from where you live, we had no thunder or lightning just crazy hail for 5 minutes and nonstop rain, which is pretty common :p.

I'm certain that these EQ spikes are normal given a period of time. And considering that we have the technology now days to not only monitor these EQs world wide, but also report on them as soon as they happen...Well...people can make all sorts of ridiculous conclusions on this without having to look back...not just decades, try the last three or so hundred years. That's like a mere second in the history of the earth.

Originally posted by Fockewulf8
Question... I'm not a geologist or know anything about earth quakes or EQ history so is Southern Cali always rocking like this?:

Thursday April 12 2012, 19:32:04 UTC 4 minutes ago Southern California 1.1 11.3 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 19:17:12 UTC 19 minutes ago Southern California 1.4 6.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 19:11:52 UTC 24 minutes ago Southern California 2.5 7.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 19:11:52 UTC 24 minutes ago Southern California 2.5 7.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 19:09:29 UTC 27 minutes ago Southern California 1.4 7.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 18:56:44 UTC 40 minutes ago Central Alaska 1.5 50.0 USGS Feed Detail
Thursday April 12 2012, 18:53:01 UTC 43 minutes ago Southern California 3.5 5.9 USGS Feed Detail

Obtained from: quakes.globalincidentmap.com...

Can someone factually tell me if this is normal patterns for Cali or not? And I'm not talking about "yea the earth always has EQ so yes its normal". I'm talking about actual patterns for quakes in that specific area. I'll try and see if I can find something also.

Yeah Cali has quakes like that daily, even a 6 magnitude isn't uncommon. We don't really feel the small ones though.

reply to post by gunshooter


USGS Live earthquake map

The global rate of M≥8 earthquakes has been at a record high roughly since 2004, but rates have been almost as high before, and the rate of smaller earthquakes is close to its historical average.

Global risk of big earthquakes has not recently increased

This cluster of great earthquakes seems to signal an anomalous increase in their frequency, but does it really? In their paper, “The global risk of big earthquakes has not recently increased,” Shearer and Stark (1) present a quantitative assessment of that perception. Their analysis tests three different attributes of the earthquake catalog against the null hypothesis: That the observed seismicity is a plausible realization of a Poisson process (1). None of the three tests allows the Poisson assumption to be rejected with high confidence, which leads them to the conclusion that the recent spate of large earthquakes is not anomalous (1).

How many great earthquakes should we expect? (full version not yet freely available)

The above were found searching google scholar for "earthquake activity on the rise."

A generic google search yields mostly blog and forum entries for "earthquake activity on the rise."

Massive DECREASE in seismic activity in 2011 worldwide!!

Would be interesting to see the same set of graphs for this year to date.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Gerizo


Well sparky since you made the claim that they are not happening more frequently why don't you provide the data that proves your statement?

I did, several times, in this thread.But here they are again:

www.foxnews.com...

www.livescience.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca...

need more?

I do not need to read any quotes, I have done my own research and I can see with my own eyes. Besides no evidence I provide will change the opinion of a close minded individual.

Well, if you wont read the links I provide, then you clearly have no interest in facts and data.
n if you've done your 'own research', then by all means, show it. I have no problem being proven wrong. PROVEN being the key term. Your opinion dressed as fact with snarky comments is not proof.

edit on 11-4-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)

Well remember that the USGS for whatever reason is removing earthquake data from the "official list" released to the public. Research it on your own on the web and you will find that some EQ data has been removed for whatever reason. So some of the total official EQ numbers may have been reduced. I read the links you provided and I do not consider Fox News and Wikipedia as reliable sources. Just because I disagree with your opinion does not mean I do not have interest in the data nor does it mean that I did not read it. See there is that closed minded thing again. Since the data below will PROVE you wrong remember what you said above. My opinion is dressed with letters and truth. Here's the data from "my own research" that you claimed I did not do. Is that snarky enough for you sparky?

Earthquake Facts and Statistics Worldwide 2000 - 2012

Years - 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

5.0 to 5.9 - 1344 1224 1201 1203 1515 1693 1712 2074 1768 1896 2069 2276 490

Difference - n/a -120 -23 +2 +312 +178 +19 +362 -306 +128 +173 +207 n/a

Total EQs in 2000 for 5.0-5.9 range = 1,344 EQs
Total EQs in 2011 for 5.0-5.9 range = 2,276 EQs
Difference = 932 EQs
Therefore in year 2000 for this range there was a total 1,344EQs, in the year 2011 there was total of 2,276 EQs.
1,344 < 2,276
Which means there are more EQs in the 5.0 - 5.9 range in the year 2011 then there were in 2000. Im sure the other ranges with have some variation but overall there is an increase in the total amount of EQs.

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Originally posted by solongandgoodnight
reply to post by Gerizo

 

i think it's pretty obvious they are happening more frequently. and am i the only one that's noticed there is no actual new news, just trayvon which is old news........it seems very likely to me anyway they are doing this on purpose, possibly because they don't wan't the public to know whats going on, or it could be they don't have a clue what's going on.

Its obvious if you care and are paying attention. I have noticed that too that there is no actual news, just silly distractions or irrelevant topics. I would have to agree with you on the last point as well. I think its a little of both, however, I believe we should be told the truth and be able to choose for ourselves instead of being cradled by the unknown.

reply to post by iunlimited491


Yeah I'm moving there in a month HA!

Originally posted by dedpope
reply to post by Gerizo

 

could you link a few , not saying your wrong just would like to look over it I think they are on the rise also just need more info for a video I'm putting together

I linked one for you. I believe my response fulfills your request for information.

Originally posted by XtraTL
Maybe there'll be some more big ones (like the 8.5 or whatever it was the other day) before the end of the year.

I HATE STUPID PEOPLE.

Originally posted by Gerizo

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Gerizo


Well sparky since you made the claim that they are not happening more frequently why don't you provide the data that proves your statement?

I did, several times, in this thread.But here they are again:

www.foxnews.com...

www.livescience.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca...

need more?

I do not need to read any quotes, I have done my own research and I can see with my own eyes. Besides no evidence I provide will change the opinion of a close minded individual.

Well, if you wont read the links I provide, then you clearly have no interest in facts and data.
n if you've done your 'own research', then by all means, show it. I have no problem being proven wrong. PROVEN being the key term. Your opinion dressed as fact with snarky comments is not proof.

edit on 11-4-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)

TextI read the links you provided and I do not consider Fox News and Wikipedia as reliable sources. Just because I disagree with your opinion does not mean I do not have interest in the data nor does it mean that I did not read it. See there is that closed minded thing again. Since the data below will PROVE you wrong remember what you said above. My opinion is dressed with letters and truth. Here's the data from "my own research" that you claimed I did not do. Is that snarky enough for you sparky?

Earthquake Facts and Statistics Worldwide 2000 - 2012

Years - 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

5.0 to 5.9 - 1344 1224 1201 1203 1515 1693 1712 2074 1768 1896 2069 2276 490

Difference - n/a -120 -23 +2 +312 +178 +19 +362 -306 +128 +173 +207 n/a

Total EQs in 2000 for 5.0-5.9 range = 1,344 EQs
Total EQs in 2011 for 5.0-5.9 range = 2,276 EQs
Difference = 932 EQs
Therefore in year 2000 for this range there was a total 1,344EQs, in the year 2011 there was total of 2,276 EQs.
1,344 < 2,276
Which means there are more EQs in the 5.0 - 5.9 range in the year 2011 then there were in 2000. Im sure the other ranges with have some variation but overall there is an increase in the total amount of EQs.

earthquake.usgs.gov...

If you actually have this evidence, please provide it. There are several of us that can make use of it and revamp the process. So, do tell.....assuming you are not lying....

Originally posted by Yosemite Sam

Originally posted by Gerizo

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Gerizo


Well sparky since you made the claim that they are not happening more frequently why don't you provide the data that proves your statement?

I did, several times, in this thread.But here they are again:

www.foxnews.com...

www.livescience.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca...

need more?

I do not need to read any quotes, I have done my own research and I can see with my own eyes. Besides no evidence I provide will change the opinion of a close minded individual.

Well, if you wont read the links I provide, then you clearly have no interest in facts and data.
n if you've done your 'own research', then by all means, show it. I have no problem being proven wrong. PROVEN being the key term. Your opinion dressed as fact with snarky comments is not proof.

edit on 11-4-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)

TextI read the links you provided and I do not consider Fox News and Wikipedia as reliable sources. Just because I disagree with your opinion does not mean I do not have interest in the data nor does it mean that I did not read it. See there is that closed minded thing again. Since the data below will PROVE you wrong remember what you said above. My opinion is dressed with letters and truth. Here's the data from "my own research" that you claimed I did not do. Is that snarky enough for you sparky?

Earthquake Facts and Statistics Worldwide 2000 - 2012

Years - 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

5.0 to 5.9 - 1344 1224 1201 1203 1515 1693 1712 2074 1768 1896 2069 2276 490

Difference - n/a -120 -23 +2 +312 +178 +19 +362 -306 +128 +173 +207 n/a

Total EQs in 2000 for 5.0-5.9 range = 1,344 EQs
Total EQs in 2011 for 5.0-5.9 range = 2,276 EQs
Difference = 932 EQs
Therefore in year 2000 for this range there was a total 1,344EQs, in the year 2011 there was total of 2,276 EQs.
1,344 < 2,276
Which means there are more EQs in the 5.0 - 5.9 range in the year 2011 then there were in 2000. Im sure the other ranges with have some variation but overall there is an increase in the total amount of EQs.

earthquake.usgs.gov...

If you actually have this evidence, please provide it. There are several of us that can make use of it and revamp the process. So, do tell.....assuming you are not lying....

Did you bother to read my response? I"m not lying as I just explained myself in the post right above your response. If certain people are too ignorant to read welI then I can't help you.