Page 3 of 10
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:34 pm
by Sarahnn
Sava700 wrote:Well many seismologists are also saying the more that happen the more pressure put on the larger plates such as the ones at San Andreas that could cause the big one to be more powerful and more likely in the near future or within the next 10years!
Well, clearly, my seismologists and your seismologists should talk.

Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:39 pm
by Sava700
Sarahnn wrote:Well, clearly, my seismologists and your seismologists should talk.
Well I've never heard of one that can predict a earthquake..but they all say "The Big One" will hit Cali at some point in the near future....not if but when!
There are so many others that will give way and build intense pressure when that happens that you will see a planet wide amount of destruction not to mention a tsunami wave much like shown in the 2012 movie.
Its coming.. maybe not in our lifetime but its coming.
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:46 pm
by 24giovanni
Sava700 wrote:Well I've never heard of one that can predict a earthquake..but they all say "The Big One" will hit Cali at some point in the near future....not if but when!
There are so many others that will give way and build intense pressure when that happens that you will see a planet wide amount of destruction not to mention a tsunami wave much like shown in the 2012 movie.
Its coming.. maybe not in our lifetime but its coming.
Cali as in california or cali, colombia?
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:59 pm
by YARDofSTUF
Sava700 wrote:Well I've never heard of one that can predict a earthquake..but they all say "The Big One" will hit Cali at some point in the near future....not if but when!
Seismologist Roger Musson: Haiti Quake Was the 'Big One'
People talk about waiting for the Big One in California. Was this a similar earthquake for this fault?
This was the Big One. The fault has been more or less locked for 200 years. Seismologists were unsure as to whether it would produce one Big One or several smaller ones. We seem to have the answer.
Read more:
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packa ... z0hR6tAfc1
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packa ... 65,00.html
So I guess not
ALL say that.
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:08 pm
by Sava700
ALL that I've heard talking about Earthquakes then.... this is mainstream news outlets too,journals, history channel discussions etc... I'm convinced. Don't forget that when I say "The Big One" I'm talking about the one that will shake the hell out of California and push it into the ocean!

Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:09 pm
by Sava700
24giovanni wrote:Cali as in california or cali, colombia?

Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:29 pm
by jeremyboycool
Sava700 wrote:Well I've never heard of one that can predict a earthquake..but they all say "The Big One" will hit Cali at some point in the near future....not if but when!
There are so many others that will give way and build intense pressure when that happens that you will see a planet wide amount of destruction not to mention a tsunami wave much like shown in the 2012 movie.
Its coming.. maybe not in our lifetime but its coming.
"Well I've never heard of one that can predict a earthquake..but they all say "The Big One" will hit Cali at some point in the near future....not if but when!"
That is interesting that you contradicted yourself all in the same sentence.
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:40 pm
by Sava700
jeremyboycool wrote:
"Well I've never heard of one that can predict a earthquake..but they all say "The Big One" will hit Cali at some point in the near future....not if but when!"
That is interesting that you contradict yourself all in the same sentence.
Your trolling again... and I didn't contradict myself, I said I've never heard of one that can predict a earthquake - that means OHH HERE IT COMES IN 5Mins 43seconds!!!!
I also said I've heard em all (those that I've seen on mainstream news and so on) say that "The Big One" will hit cali at some point in the near future...not if but when!
See..you didn't obviously understand and your obviously trolling with nothing to add to this thread.
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:40 pm
by TNATireFryer
you guys dont worry - someone will pull 100 million plus $$ out of their - wait this is America we are talking about right?

Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:57 pm
by jeremyboycool
Sava700 wrote:Your trolling again... and I didn't contradict myself, I said I've never heard of one that can predict a earthquake - that means OHH HERE IT COMES IN 5Mins 43seconds!!!!
I also said I've heard em all (those that I've seen on mainstream news and so on) say that "The Big One" will hit cali at some point in the near future...not if but when!
See..you didn't obviously understand and your obviously trolling with nothing to add to this thread.
"those that I've seen on mainstream news and so on "
And if it is on the news then it must be true, right?
Could you provide us with the source of your information? What news outlets say the Big One is going to happen and on what information do they base this prediction?
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 8:01 pm
by Sava700
jeremyboycool wrote:
What news outlets say the Big One is going to happen
CBS evening news, CNN morning XM discussions, not sure of exact dates and times.
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:32 pm
by jeremyboycool
Sava700 wrote:CBS evening news, CNN morning XM discussions, not sure of exact dates and times.
So you have not done any actual studying on it? Just whatever you have gathered from the news.
I suppose the best thing would be a trip to the library. But this really just seems be the typical overreacting masses again and I don't feel threatened enough to care yet. Although, I would not mind learning something about seismology.
But, Sava, you really should provide links that back up your claims. Not "O I saw it on this news channel, at some time that I am not sure of." Such a wishy washy post will make people think you're full of it.
One more thing, you can take your childish troll/derailing comments and chew on it. I mean really, grow up for the love of Zeus.
Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:25 pm
by ThaDude
Sava700 wrote:....Don't forget that when I say "The Big One" I'm talking about the one that will shake the hell out of California and push it into the ocean!
I generally stay quiet when you go on about your doomsday scenarios, quite humorous to read really, but this rubbish about California being pushed or falling into the ocean is just laughable.
"Will California fall into the ocean?" See links for answer.
http://seismo.berkeley.edu/faq/california.html
http://www.usgs.gov/faq/faq.asp?id=152&category_id=10
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 12:27 am
by Humboldt
*quiet*
(sorry, can't help it)
As a California resident it's a bit of a disturbing statement, given the smiley following it.
To heart I know Save is kidding though.
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:18 pm
by Sava700
Superman will keep it from happening!!

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:27 am
by cammy96tears
The country of Turkey was hit by a 5.2 mag. earthquake, see.....? like i said , its going to be like a domino effect , I wonder which country is next.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:53 pm
by Sava700
cammy96tears wrote:The country of Turkey was hit by a 5.2 mag. earthquake, see.....? like i said , its going to be like a domino effect , I wonder which country is next.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/ ... bsCarousel
5.9 according to new reports.. and to think just in the last year alone I've heard of more large earthquakes than in the last 20years!!! Something is going on... something big!!
The Kandilli seismology center said the 6.0-magnitude quake hit at 4:32 a.m. near the village of Basyurt in a remote, sparsely populated area of Elazig province. The region is 340 miles east of Ankara, the capital.
The U.S. Geological Survey listed the quake at 5.9 magnitude.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:58 pm
by Humboldt
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:58 pm
by brembo
Sava700 wrote:
There are so many others that will give way and build intense pressure when that happens that you will see a planet wide amount of destruction not to mention a tsunami wave much like shown in the 2012 movie.
I too use fictional movies to make sweeping predictions about the plate tectonics. Dante's Inferno is quite the treastie on mantle dynamics as well.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 4:12 pm
by Sava700
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 4:48 pm
by Humboldt
Sava700 wrote:

I can't help but wonder what you mean by that.
No, you won't read the other thread?
No, you don't agree with the USGS?
I'm sure if you know something they don't they'd be glad to hear it, otherwise you're just tooting your own horn
The article
flat out explains why it seems like there's more earthquake activity even though there isn't.
What's to

about?
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:10 pm
by Sava700
Humboldt wrote:I can't help but wonder what you mean by that.
No, you won't read the other thread?
No, you don't agree with the USGS?
What's to

about?
You believe what you read and hear and I'll believe what I read and here..

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:11 pm
by Humboldt
Sava700 wrote:You believe what you read and hear and I'll believe what I read and here..
Have you read the article jbc and I posted?
Even read it?
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:15 pm
by YARDofSTUF
Sava700 wrote:You believe what you read and hear and I'll believe what I read and
here..
Watch out for Brembo...
agrees
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:47 pm
by cammy96tears
I agree 100% Sava700, and I believe its the gravitational pull of the other 7 planets as they are moving in a direct line for December 21, 2012. I am eeeeeeek scared !!!

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 6:01 pm
by Sava700
Humboldt wrote:Have you read the article jbc and I posted?
Even read it?
I've read alot of articles, you believe what you want and I'll believe what I want.

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 6:08 pm
by Humboldt
Sava700 wrote:I've read alot of articles, you believe what you want and I'll believe what I want.
For Christ's sake Sava, it's a yes or no question.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:03 pm
by Sava700
Humboldt wrote:For Christ's sake Sava, it's a yes or no question.
I don't wish to answer your question. Sorry. However I do believe that we are having more earthquakes and they are a lead up to something bigger at some point in the earth's future

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:21 pm
by Humboldt
Sava700 wrote:I don't wish to answer your question. Sorry.
If you read the article, you'll see why I'm arguing against you.
Nothing personal, just that you're wrong and the article points out why.
It's not my logic, it's the USGS's.
In my eyes, their opinion holds more value than yours. MUCH more.
All I can guess is that you won't read the article because you'll see you're wrong and, heaven forbid, that can't happen. You invested too many pages of OMG THE WORLD IS ENDING to admit being mistaken.
The earth is not flat Sava, regardless of if you read the memo or not.

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:42 pm
by Sava700
Humboldt wrote:
If you read the article, you'll see why I'm arguing against you.
Nothing personal, just that you're wrong and the article points out why.
It's not my logic, it's the USGS's.
In my eyes, their opinion holds more value than yours. MUCH more.
All I can guess is that you won't read the article because you'll see you're wrong and, heaven forbid, that can't happen. You invested too many pages of OMG THE WORLD IS ENDING to admit being mistaken.
The earth is not flat Sava, regardless of if you read the memo or not.
Do you believe in God? Did you read it in a article? Are your beliefs strong enough on something such as God that you don't need to read a article or memo? Your saying I can't believe in something just cause I did or didn't read something.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:48 pm
by Humboldt
Sava700 wrote:Do you believe in God? Did you read it in a article? Are your beliefs strong enough on something such as God that you don't need to read a article or memo? Your saying I can't believe in something just cause I did or didn't read something.

Sorry, this isn't about something as abstract as religion or spirituality. Bad comparison.
You can believe whatever you want

I'm just pointing out that in this case you're believing in something that's wrong. Maybe there WILL be increased activity in the future, your belief in that may be fully correct.
Your statement that there is increased activity however, has been disproven, in numbers and graphs.
What gets me is your refusal to look at an article that states, in simple terms that a third grader could grasp, why you're wrong.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 8:50 pm
by Sava700
Humboldt wrote:
Your statement that there is increased activity however, has been disproven, in numbers and graphs.
What gets me is your refusal to look at an article that states, in simple terms that a third grader could grasp, why you're wrong.
I see numbers pointing a increase and you see those showing a decrease... its all good.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 8:52 pm
by Humboldt
Sava700 wrote:I see numbers pointing a increase and you see those showing a decrease... its all good.
It's not me seeing the numbers that way, it's the USGS.
News stories about current earthquakes around the world don't prove there's been an increase.
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 8:55 pm
by Sava700
Humboldt wrote:You're right, the USGS is wrong
naw I think the USGS does a good thing and posts real and accurate data, but I've gone and looked at the data, and based on the last few years we have seen a upswing in large earthquakes vs other "few years" here and there in a 20year spread. But its all good, I understand how you feel about it not being that big of a deal, we can all contend with it in our own ways

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:04 pm
by Humboldt
Sava700 wrote:naw I think the USGS does a good thing and posts real and accurate data, but I've gone and looked at the data, and based on the last few years we have seen a upswing in large earthquakes vs other "few years" here and there in a 20year spread.
Can you post any links to the data that supports your findings, the way I've posted information that supports my opinion?
and you already used the response:
Sava700 wrote:You know how to use Google as much as I do.... look em up for yourself. I just posted a news article about another one, not in the mood to argue statistics with you.
so you can't use it again

Either the supporting data is there or it's not...news accounts about x numbers of earthquakes don't count (and my article explains why

)
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:16 pm
by Sava700
Humboldt wrote:Can you post any links to the data that supports your findings, the way I've posted information that supports my opinion?
and you already used the response:
so you can't use it again

Either the supporting data is there or it's not...news accounts about x numbers of earthquakes don't count (and my article explains why

)
I just look at the data the USGS site has up, view it during various time frames and gain an opinion. Simple!

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:26 pm
by Humboldt
Sava700 wrote:I just look at the data the USGS site has up, view it during various time frames and gain an opinion. Simple!
I value their judgement more than yours.
Nothing personal, it's an experience thing

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:28 pm
by Sava700
Humboldt wrote:I value their judgement more than yours.
Nothing personal, it's an experience thing
I understand, and nothing wrong with that.

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 4:12 pm
by Sava700
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/ ... tml?hpt=T2
[CENTER]
Three strong earthquakes strike Chile in quick succession[/CENTER]
Three strong earthquakes rocked Chile on Thursday, causing significant damage in at least one city, the country's newly inaugurated president said Thursday.
A 6.9-magnitude earthquake hit at 11:39 a.m. local time (9:39 a.m. ET), followed by a 6.7-magnitude quake 16 minutes later, the U.S. Geological Survey reported. A third, measured at magnitude 6.0, came 27 minutes later.
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 4:19 pm
by Sarahnn
Well, wait.....if we have to rely on the short amount of time that earthquakes have been even recorded, that's like less than 1% of the age of the Earth. Truth is, we just don't know if they are increasing or not. The dinosaurs would know but they're gone. (just injecting a little humor) .... I know, I know, very little.
