PDA

View Full Version : AncientSkyman Awakens



AncientSkyMan
2003-May-28, 12:15 PM
I was bashed right off this board with my Solar Typhoons hypothesis, as I suggested that there was a connection between intense solar activity and geological displacement, specifically how the interplay of the magnetic forces of the solar wind and the magnetosphere cause Earth core and mantle instability.

It seems we are now in the middle of such an event and I want to know how the BA folks respond. Region 365 on the Sun continues to show unprecedented activities and M and X class flares are being emitted, which is highly unusual for this period in the cycle. All of this as the solar cycle continues its 'second peak' which is also something never seen before. All of this might make you shrug, but what about the incredible earthquakes we've had in exactly the same period, with tragic loss of life? As a matter of fact, during the lull in our disagreement, nature has provided proof after proof as solar activity is being tied to our bizarre current weather patterns and extremely rare earthquakes in places like Missouri and South Dakota. Serious investigation is now being taken to see the linkages between solar weather and earthquakes by the USGS. This is all new stuff, but happening none-the-less.

With all this solar activity, AncientSkyman says look out beautiful auroras, more earthquakes, and dangerous volcanoes.

Peace and Fortune,

ASM

kilopi
2003-May-28, 01:31 PM
With all this solar activity, AncientSkyman says look out beautiful auroras, more earthquakes, and dangerous volcanoes.
I hadn't noticed your post AncientSkyMan when I posted to the sunspot thread (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=93070#93070) about sunspot 10365. I'm going to go out and look at it right now. I'm not so sure that the earthquake activity is all that unusual, here is some info from the BA about that (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planetx/nutshell.html). On the other hand, I do think HUb' could use the help.

frenat
2003-May-28, 05:18 PM
The second peak is not uncommon. I don't have a link for it but I'm sure someone else will post it. It has been posted here before. As for earthquakes, they are not more common either. Just the opposite. The only difference is the areas that get hit. If in a sparsely populated area then you won't hear much about it. If in a densely populated area, then of course there will be more loss of life. Also the level of technology of the area that is hit will affect the number of casualties as well.

Comixx
2003-May-28, 05:20 PM
...snip...All of this as the solar cycle continues its 'second peak' which is also something never seen before....snip...

Sorry, this bit of information destroys your credibility...a 10 second Google search yielded this NASA page (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/18jan_solarback.htm) which disproves your statement.


Solar Max eleven years ago was much the same. A first peak arrived in mid-1989 followed by a smaller maximum in early 1991. In fact, if the ongoing cycle proves to be a double, it will be the third such double-peaked cycle in a row.

The rest of your theories were summarily dismissed as lacking any kind of proof beyond theories and conjecture...furthermore, those who had the understanding of weather, solar activity, and magnetic fields completely disagree with you. Those who study earthquakes for a living say we're on schedule so far with normal random activity which is NOT above average yet.

Show some math, some science, some evidence that any of what you say is anything more than taking a bunch of unrelated facts and twisting them to fit your pet theory.

DStahl
2003-May-28, 08:18 PM
AncientSkyMan: "Serious investigation is now being taken to see the linkages between solar weather and earthquakes by the USGS."

I'll have a bit of a Google to see if I can get some info on what he USGS is doing, but if you have a link it would make it easier... ;)

DStahl
2003-May-28, 09:24 PM
Um, I hope this isn't what you were referring to:

"Space Weather Affects Earthquake Program"

"Modern technology creates new vulnerabilities for society. Space weather, such as electromagnetic storms generated by solar flare activity, can seriously impair satellites and other communications and navigation systems. The USGS is one of four agencies in the Space Weather Program, along with NASA and NOAA (which make satellite observations), and the National Science Foundation (NSF). The USGS Geomagnetism Program is responsible for ground-based monitoring of this newly recognized hazard."

"A very large eruption from the sun's corona on January 6, 1997, generated a huge, very intense cloud of plasma that surrounded and passed beyond the earth on January 10-11. The intense cloud of charged particles distorted the earth's magnetic field, disrupting satellite and other communications signals, especially in the polar regions. On January 11, the ATandT Telstar 401 communications satellite (original cost $200 million) failed and has been written off by ATandT as lost. Although most of the satellite's business had been U.S. domestic television transmission, it was also the carrier for the near real-time earthquake data for the USGS National Seismic Network. Until alternate satellite service was found, the USGS Earthquake Program was forced to slow its reporting of smaller quakes, though response times for larger ones were successfully maintained through the crisis."

From this USGS site (http://www.usgs.gov/themes/FS-188-97/)

This kind of stuff says absolutely nothing about a causal link between geomagnetic storms and earthquakes; it says that geomagnetic storms can knock out satellites, which screws up communications and makes it harder for the USGS to report earthquakes.

aurorae
2003-May-28, 09:43 PM
and extremely rare earthquakes in places like Missouri and South Dakota.

Extremely rare? How many and what magnitude? What basis do you have for making that claim?

There are usually a few small quakes from time to time in most places.

The largest earthquake ever in the US took place in Missouri (in the 1800's), I guess you could say that was rare. Earthquakes have been measured before in South Dakota, certainly.

All I see here is some unvalidated claims.

sarongsong
2003-May-29, 01:40 AM
There were 12 Eathquakes over 6.0 so far in May:
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_uibe.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_ugbd.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_ugah.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_ugbq.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_ubbj.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_tzbd.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_tzar.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_tuag.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_tkar.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_tkbx.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_tjav.html
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_tjae.html
Regions defined:
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/epic/fer.html

DStahl
2003-May-29, 01:56 AM
On average, there are 139 earthquakes of magnitude equal to or greater than 6.0 per year. (There are 800 of magnitude 5.0 to 5.9.)

139 per year works out to one every 2.63 days. Today is May 28th. On average, therefore, we would expect to have seen 10 or 11 earthquakes of magnitude 6.0 or greater so far in May (the average is 10.6, but you can hardly have 0.6 of an earthquake... ;) ).

12 so far in May is just a little above average. Not much, though.

These stats are from this page (http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eqlists/eqstats.html), and are based on earthquake observations since 1900.

Note: sarongsong's list above includes earthquakes of 6.0 and above; or at least it includes one earthquake of 6.0.

sarongsong
2003-May-29, 02:14 AM
"...On average, there are 139 earthquakes of magnitude equal to or greater than 6.0 per year. (There are 800 of magnitude 5.0 to 5.9.)..."
Whew, thanks DStahl, that's a relief (I think)!
Guess it just seems more than normal, these days,
No wonder Elvis was All Shook Up.

Comixx
2003-May-29, 03:26 AM
A very comprehensive table was drawn up by one of our members in this thread (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=93170&highlight=#93170) which goes into detail about this subject. To whit: we are not experiencing any abnormally high activity, evidence may show a bit less than normal activity when taken as an average and compared to other years.