Banner
    Japanese Earthquake Causes 'Supermoon' Concern
    By Hank Campbell | March 11th 2011 10:16 AM | 219 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Hank

    I'm the founder of Science 2.0®.

    A wise man once said Darwin had the greatest idea anyone ever had. Others may prefer Newton or Archimedes...

    View Hank's Profile
    Astrologers are feeling pretty good today.   Because it's made up and not science, anything happening anywhere near a date they predict can be attribution, so talk of a 'supermoon' - a new or full moon at 90% of its closest perigee - followed by an earthquake in Japan makes them seem prescient.

    Well, are they?   The supermoon which will occur March 19 will be at its closest to Earth in elliptical orbit (lunar perigee) and closer to Earth than it has been in 18 years.    How close is that?  Only about 2 degrees so unless astrologers have the kind of measurement instruments no one outside NASA has, they can't detect it.   Which means it isn't causing huge waves or earthquakes.

    Astrologer Richard Nolle, who first coined the term 'supermoon' in 1979, believes that lunar perigees do cause natural disasters on Earth.   'Supermoons have a historical association with strong storms, very high tides, extreme tides and also earthquakes,' he told the Daily Mail.   But this is not possible.  Instead, he and believers only count the ones that happen during supermoons - and their timeframe is ridiculously broad.   The earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand?  Supermoon!  Even though it was three weeks ago.   That's what confirmation bias is - the tendency to find patterns to reinforce things we already want to believe.

    tsunami earthquake japan supermoon
    Whirlpool due to currents from a tsunami near Oarai after an earthquake off the north-eastern coast of Japan today.   Credit: AP via Daily Mail

    What astrologers don't know is that if such a thing were possible there would be hundreds of earthquakes and volcano eruptions, not one or two big ones.  And the Moon orbits us every 29.5 days so most months it reaches perigee more than once. As that orbit changes so does the distance between Earth and the moon but on March 19 it will only be about half a percent closer than it ever is every 18 years.   What gets astrologers excited is that is combined with a full moon.   What geological significance is that?  None at all, but it's pretty.   

    Certainly you want to go have a look but there is no material effect from it.



    Obviously if you are reading this site you are not living your life by astrology - they are contending the 2004 tsunami was related to a supermoon also, even though the tsunami occurred two weeks earlier.  So if supermoons are important they can't be responsible for something happening two weeks earlier or we would have had hundreds or more by now.

    It certainly did not cause the 8.9-magnitude earthquake that hit Japan.

    What is a tsunami?

    Tsunamis are giant waves caused by earthquakes or volcanic eruptions under the ocean. When tsunami waves travel inland, they get larger as the depth of the ocean decreases.   If you know your fluid dynamics you know why the speed of tsunami waves varies with ocean depth rather than the distance from the earthquake. 

    How fast?   As fast as an airplane in some cases, slowing down only in shallow waters.  The largest tsunami was also in Japan,  Ishigaki Island in 1971. It was 278 feet high (that is a 30-story building) and carried a 750-ton block of coral 1.5 miles inland.

    Sadly for astrologers, that was 3 years before the supermoon in 1974.

    I'm not saying the world can't end, I am just saying a supermoon won't be the reason for it.   'End of the world' stories should always be in the future so rather than look stupid predicting something next week, predict something almost two years from now, like the Norse or Mayan calendar.   Those have as much geological legitimacy as a supermoon.

    Comments

    If you're saying that there's no co-relation (0,00%) between Super Moon and the earthquake, you're not a scientist.

    Scientists should never say 0% chance of anything. You're just a reporter....

    You don't know all the possible effects of a Super Moon, nor do me, but the events might be linked.

    Hank
    I can make an argument even more ridiculous than yours; "If you're saying that there's no co-relation (0,00%) between THE WHITE WITCH IN NARNIA and the earthquake, you're not a scientist.  Scientists should never say 0% chance of anything."

    See how easy that is?  I could also have inserted that there is not a 0% chance a bunch of Chinese people did not jump up and down at the same time to screw with the Japanese.   Or even Godzilla finally showing up.

    I can't disprove a negative because it can't be done.   If you want to believe something ridiculous, go for it.   But don't look for anyone except astrology kooks to agree with you.
    Sure you can! You're just a journalist!

    A 10% closer moon MAY produce some effects in tidal and in the inner earth (altering the magma flows for e.g.). Are you 100% sure that is impossible?

    You just couldn't say MAY in your entire article, you just wrote it to ridicularize one theory.

    It makes me wonder if you have ever studied (for real) the universe and it's effects on planet earth. In the end, you don't look different than you "friends" astrologists at all.

    Hank
    A 10% closer moon MAY produce some effects in tidal and in the inner earth (altering the magma flows for e.g.). Are you 100% sure that is impossible?
    Yes.
    I can't say that the moon has indeed some influence in the event.

    You can't say it doesn't.

    Hank
    Yes, I can.   The Moon is not causing earthquakes from 220,000 miles away.  Not now, not ever.
    OK. Good luck with your blog, infallible man.

    Gerhard Adam
    Hank ... does that mean you really might be the pope?
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hank
    My dear friend Bertrand Russell could certainly prove it...
    Perigee 363,104 km (0.0024 AU)
    Apogee 405,696 km (0.0027 AU)

    There is approx 10% difference. That is quite a huge difference. You might recall Newton's law of universal gravity where the force is dependant of distance squared.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_law_of_universal_gravitation

    Hank
    The moon's orbit being elliptical did not happen this week.  Of course there is a difference, it is has been known for hundreds of years.   And the moon is closer on March 19th than its average - but do you remember Wrath of God cataclysms in 1995?  Frogs from the sky, dogs and cats living together, that kind of stuff?   No, because an opportunistic astrologer and his fellow snake oil salesman just sell stuff to gullible people.   

    The earthquake was not caused by global warming, as some leftwing kooks are contending, nor was it caused by the Moon being 221K miles next week instead of the usual 225K, as even kookier leftwing kooks are contending.    As I said in another comment, if only rightwing kooks would blame the Japanese tsunami on high taxes or James Hansen, we would have idiocy on both sides of the spectrum.
    Your dear friend Bertrand Russell?? Mr. Russell has been dead since 1970 and, based on your picture, Hank, I'm not sure you were even born yet. Reading his books doesn't make you a personal friend.

    Hank
    In any long time community of science writers inside jokes will crop up over time and that was one.  I am impressed you read that far down in the comments, though!
    False name-dropping is a pretty standard ruse and is often deflected (as sexual harassers often do) as a "joke." It's designed to fool fools. What exactly ARE your science credentials anyway?

    Hank
    Wait, Bertrand Russell is guilty of sexual harassment???  I have no credentials in your moonbeam cult if I dispute that??   It is clear responding to you is not really a constructive dialogue.  By all means continue to believe the earth is going to be ruined by the Moon.   If that is too big, believe a tennis ball in your neighbor's yard is going to tear down the wall of your house
    Nice number . . . quite humorous to see you once again running off down a crazy narrative with your knickers around your neck in order to divert attention from a real question. What exactly is your background in any science field?

    Hank
    I have degrees in quantum paleontology and theoretical phys ed.  You?
    Oh my, you are more easily trainable than those pigeons they have undergrad Psych 101 students train to turn around at the stimulus of a green light. Give the boy a couple of reese's pieces and he transforms into a veritable chicken little running around the barnyard. You've provided enough entertainment already, which is all your website is designed to be in the first place.
    I am actually a licensed psychotherapist in the business for 27 years. It's been fun to plumb your psyche. Have a good one, mate.

    Hank
    I am actually a licensed psychotherapist in the business for 27 years.
    This explains your belief in astrology.
    logicman
    Does anyone still believe in operant conditioning these days?  Other than a conspiracy theorist, I mean.
    Gerhard Adam
    Actually when you link to it ... it was titled "Uranus Rising" ... a title that is simply too good to pass up and I certainly couldn't improve on it :)
    Mundus vult decipi
    then what is?

    Well you may be right in saying that no one person can prove within a shadow of a doubt that the moon has something to do with earthquakes and tsunamis, however, I believe that one can say without a shadow of a doubt that you are a Cooko-munga!!

    Wow. You are pretty arrogant. You begin by stating astrologists are feeling pretty good today? Really? ya think? No one is feeling good today. What an insult. But I continued reading because I don't beleive in the supermoon theory and wanted intelligent discussion about it. Instead, I find someone who seems to be writing a political column for fox news! You have a chip on your shoulder, or what?

    No one can say they know 100% anything. This is science. While it is unlikely that the moon could penetrate the density of earths crust and mantle to affect the magma, it is certainly not 100% disproved.You can't prove a negative with doubt and superficial scientific knowledge that you get from a google search. The convection from the magma moves plates. One can never be certain, but certainly debate is welcome.

    You should have shown a little more humility in your response to people and you may have had an intelligent exchange of ideas. Instead, YOU ARE A TROLL on your OWN ARTICLE.

    tsk tsk

    Hank
    No one can say they know 100% anything. This is science. 
    This is why you believe in astrology.   In fact, there is a 100% chance if you jump off a building, you will fall.  And there is zero percent chance the moon had anything to do with this earthquake.   That is not arrogance, any more than 'science' is some meaningless philosophical colloquialism that you made into a subjective definition of 'anything is possible'.  
    I don't believe in astrology. You are a fecking moron but worse than that, you are rude. Arrogance needs to be earned. You have not earned it.

    There's 100% chance you have few friendfs

    Hank
    Arrogance needs to be earned. You have not earned it.
    How do you know?  What I do know, and you seem to want to believe anyway, is that the moon did not cause this earthquake.   
    Gerhard Adam
    This is science. While it is unlikely that the moon could penetrate the density of earths crust and mantle to affect the magma, it is certainly not 100% disproved.
    There's nothing scientific in your statement.  It is simply speculative nonsense. 

    However, the whole point of scientific knowledge is to be capable of providing predictive power based on experimentation and the formulation of theories to explain phenomenon.  Therefore once something is described scientifically, then BY DEFINITION, other possibilities cannot occur (unless they have been specifically accounted for or excluded by the theory) and therefore represent 100% knowledge.

    I can be 100% confident that the electrons that produce electricity will NEVER become water pouring from an outlet.  I can be 100% confident that gravity will not turn off tomorrow or suddenly repel objects.  
    But I continued reading because I don't beleive in the supermoon theory and wanted intelligent discussion about it.
    That statement makes absolutely no sense.  What "intelligent" discussion can occur around a phenomenon that doesn't exist?  More to the point, what does your belief or disbelief have to do with science?  It seems that you are confusing quite a few concepts here and aren't clear on what any of this means.

    Mundus vult decipi
    Lots of folk say you can't prove a negative, but you can. They do it all the time. For instance, Tater can prove there ain't no integers p and q so that (p/q)^2 = 2.

    Hank
    Lots of folk say you can't prove a negative, but you can. 
    I said you can't disprove a negative.   To wit, you cannot prove I cannot disprove a negative.   See how that works?   
    "That's what confirmation bias is - the tendency to find patterns to reinforce things we already want to believe".

    Is that like the "Global Warming" Hoax ???

    You people crack me up........

    Hank
    Thanks for your comment - I track the political motives attributed to my articles by the audience which means, with your insightful dissection of my personality and work after reading one sentence in one article, "you are a global warming denier" is still leading "you are a commie liberal chasing funding" but now by only 52% to 48%.
    Hank, I agree with you. Also, people should try using their mind more than their mouth.

    A question, and a quibble:
    "The supermoon which will occur March 19 will be at its closest to Earth in elliptical orbit (lunar perigee) and closer to Earth than it has been in 18 years. How close is that? Only about 2 degrees"
    I don't understand the reference to degrees as a measure of distance between the earth and the moon. Could you explain? Also -- what I remember from astronomy class is that tidal forces are stronger at full moons -- and also at new moons -- because the tidal forces of the sun and moon are additive, and the moon and sun are lined up at those times. Thus, it wouldn't be insignificant that the perigee came at full moon, for someone who thought that tidal forces affected earthquakes (not that I am one of them). A tsunami coinciding with a particularly high tide would also, presumably, be that much more damaging.

    Hank
    Hi Barry,

    First, the full moon tidal effect would not add more to a tsunami any more than the motion of dog inside a car would add to the impact of the car getting hit by the train.  There is a very real difference between a direct physical effect and a long-distance gravity one.

    On degrees, sorry about that.   Here is a quickie primer and you can tell me what still isn't clear.  The moon is orbiting around us, so imagine 360 degrees.   So dividing 360 by the average number of days it takes the Moon to orbit is an average motion of 13.2 degrees each day but the motion is elliptical.  As our movement changes, and so does the Moon's, its orbit distance can vary a little.

    The benefit to using degrees (or minutes) is because it allows for people in varying cultures and places to understand size.   If you live in a place where the Moon is ordinarily the size of a tennis ball, for example, what would distance mean?

    But using angular distance lets us have a common metric: Degrees = (sizeX57.29) / distance).  Here is a handy online calculator.   If your Moon looks like a tennis ball at 24 feet, I can pretty much tell you where you live using angular distance and using degrees tells you how it is different to you.

    If you are in the US and want to use miles, the March 19 'supermoon' will be 221,567 miles whereas the much more common perigee is 226,425 miles.   For astrologers to imply that the 5 miles every few years is creating earthquakes is okay for people who want to believe in astrology, but not for people who accept science.  Now, to be fair you want to add in the pull when the Sun and Moon are in line, like a new or full Moon happening March 19th and it is there but not the kind of 'there' to be geologically significant.  Better surfing, sure.
    Surely a two degree change in 'size' depends on how far away the object is. This barely changes depending on where you live (radius of Earth, 6000km, distance to moon, 380,000km).

    I'd suggest a better metric is the ratio of the difference in min and max distance to the average. This is completely neutral to both culture (why even bring that up? Not an argument) and place.

    Finally, although I agree those astrologers are full of it and have no idea of the stresses in the crust and are opportunists jumping on a bandwagon, the Earth actually measurably deforms between peak tides and trough tides. It does have -some- geological significance.

    Hank
    I used the word culture because some cultures use metric and some use standard.    I guess I could have left out degrees entirely and used miles but degrees seemed like a measurement-agnostic way to go.

    I conceded there is some difference - as I said, having the Sun and Moon line up during perigee will mean better surfing.   It will not mean earthquakes.
    Hank
    Wow, that didn't take long.  A rather well-known leftwing blogger blames the earthquake on global warming.   Now, if only the right wing would blame the earthquake on high taxes we would have idiocy all across the political spectrum.
    Mr. Campbell, I am a "right winger" and even without some idiot claiming high taxes caused the earthquake, I can 100% assure you without producing any evidence, there is in fact idiocy all across the political spectrum.

    really appreciate your insightful posts, keep em up

    I hadn't heard of the Ishigaki tsunami before, so I went looking for more information. I was puzzled that I could have missed such a spectacular event happening in my lifetime.

    Apparently, there's a good reason I missed it; it happened 2 centuries earlier: http://www.ishigaki-japan.com/blog/8thFeb2010.

    According to that article, the estimated height was 15-30 meters, which is well short of 278 feet. Still a very impressive event, though, and not one that I'd want to experience first hand. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, and for letting the air out of the supermoon puffery.

    Hank
    No, your blogger had a typo.  It was 1971. 

    Here are a few links since one of them is a journal and you may not have access:

    Voyage of the Odyssey - PBS
    National Geographic
    GeoJournal 



    Sorry Hank but your date of 1971 is not correct on your source sites. If you go to the NOAA site you can search their database.

    http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/nndc/struts/form?t=101650&s=70&d=7
    The date is 1771-04-24

    Hank
    It seems they are even wrong on other NOAA sites - http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/tsunami.html   What is odd is they get the month wrong, the year wrong and the size by 200 ft.   

    There was no way to accurately measure anything in 1771 whereas in 1971 it was quite easy.  I am curious to know why no one caught this mistake before.
    logicman
    There was no way to accurately measure anything in 1771 whereas in 1971 it was quite easy.  I am curious to know why no one caught this mistake before.

    Sorry Hank, what about proxies!


    The nearest to a 1971 tsunami at Ishigaki that I can find is 1972 - height 5 cm - yes, five centimeters!

    "... the 1771 Meiwa tsunami,which was one of the largest tsunami disasters in Japanese history,according to radiometric dating [Suzuki et al. 2008; Araoka et al.2010], ..."

    Radiocarbon dating of Porites coral boulders cast ashore by paleo-tsunamis at southern Ryukyu Islands, Japan
    Araoka et al.

    Many other papers refer to proxies which show that the Meiwa / Ishigaki tsunami of 1771 was a real biggie.
    Hank
    No, I get that but 100 ft. to 300 ft. is a heck of a confidence interval.  Why the NOAA is printing urban legend about a nearly 300 ft. one in 1971 whereas studies show the 1771 was 100 ft. is the oddity.
    logicman
    If I wasn't busy keeping up with the nuclear emergency, the cryosphere and the need to ban food1, I'd track down some error bars for you.

    The run-up height of the tidal waves which struck Ishigaki's east coast has been the subject of much debate. Even conservative estimates indicate that it must have been at least 15m high but many scientists believe that boulders such as the one found at Ohama provide evidence that the largest waves may have reached a height of 30m.

    http://www.ishigaki-japan.com/blog/8thFeb2010

    [1] - forthcoming article - 'Why we should ban food'.
    Hank
    Right, 100 ft.  I accept that even though we know it will not be as accurate as measurements in 1971. Again, my confusion is how the NOAA was wrong by 200 years and 5 months and almost 3X on the size, and the fact that the 1771 tsunami hit the island and the 1971 (if it occurred) did not.
    Hi Hank,

    I'm Richard, the Brit who runs the website about Ishigaki island. I noticed that somebody had linked to my may page via this site. The date was definitely 1771, hence why information regarding the height of the tsunami is often disputed. The boulder which I am standing next to in the picture is the largest one which was carried inland, however, I've also heard that there is a smaller boulder which was carried to a far higher altitude.

    Estimations of the size of the tsunami which hit the island vary pretty wildly from around 20 meters all the way up to 85 meters. I'm guessing that the distance between the edge of the reef and the shorline, which varies along the coast, could have led to some variation in height.

    It was a pretty devastating event for the island, with the final death toll being around 13,000 - a pretty incredible number given the estimated death toll for Friday's tsunami.

    I can say, in my personal opinion, that I'm really sick of everyone trying to relate events that couldn't possibly have anything in common. Like you said, you can't relate something that happened three weeks ago to something that will happen over a week. That's an entire months difference. Not only that, but it's obvious the moon coming a little closer to the earth in OVER A WEEK has nothing to do with three weeks ago, since the moon was it's usual distance away. So, thank you for being someone with some common sense. It's sorely missed these days.

    Sorry, Hank, but I think your references are all reproducing someone else's bad information, and you're reinforcing it.

    Here are 2 scholarly papers that give the date as 1771, and a line from the official tourism site for Ishigaki island (also the location of the blog entry I posted earlier).

    Historic 1771 Meiwa tsunami confirmed by high-resolution U/Th dating of massive Porites coral boulders at Ishigaki Island in the Ryukyus, Japan

    Source Fault Model of the 1771 Yaeyama Tsunami, Southern Ryukyu Islands, Japan, Inferred from Numerical Simulation

    In 1771 an earthquake off Ishigaki's east coast caused one of the largest tidal waves in recorded human history

    Hank
    The tourism site you link to goes back to the same blogger as its source.   No one is disputing that tsunamis happened at others times, like in the papers.   Ishigaki is sort of famous for getting overrun.

    The NOAA has been fooled by this urban myth also, if that is the case.   I am intrigued that the NOAA not only got the date wrong by 200 years and 5 months, but also the size by a factor of 3.
    Thanks for the response re degrees. I'm still not clear on where the 2 degrees comes from. If you're thinking of degrees out of the 360 degrees in the moon's orbit, that wouldn't be a measurement of the distance from the earth to the moon (though there would be some relationship between the two). If you're thinking of a change in the angle subtended by the moon as at gets closer, then something's seriously amiss: the moon only subtends about half a degree, and increasing that by "only 2 degrees" would require it to get much, much closer! Perhaps you were thinking of minutes?
    Oh, and the reference to high tides and their effects on tsunamis: I assumed that the height of the tsunami gets added to the height of the tide, the same way a storm surge is worse if it comes at high tide. I don't think we're in the realm of dogs-inside-cars here.

    Thanks for another 'candle against the darkness', good article. I wish I could say it was fun, but this unfolding tragedy belies that use of the term. I am thankful for the science and technology that has given us better architecture, seismographs, warning systems, etc... If not for that, far more lives would be lost. Science for the win!

    Hank
    Right, a monstrous earthquake like what they had can't be a light issue but at least we can keep opportunists from capitalizing on it and selling ridiculous 'end of the world' books.
    Well hank, I just heard about the supermoon thing. While it's true that the mood does effect the earth, personally I don't think it will cause any more than a little flooding. Please google h a a r p causes japan earthquake. This is real, it exists, it's used (without telling the public) and can cause everything that is happening and there is evidence that haarp was used just before it happened. If you really believe that the moon is going to be so much more for us on the 19th, stay away from all women..............the full moon affects them too..................................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    I personally think the release of Mars Needs Moms is a significant factor in what happened.  Think about it.   A movie exposing a Martian conspiracy to kidnap mothers, is pretty radical, so I suspect this is a not-so-subtle message from Mars (or whoever is living there these days) that there could be consequences. :)
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    In  my younger days it was -

                                                         Moms need
    Hank
    In mine it was Mars Needs Women.  Basically, that planet has been jacking us around for far too long.



    Gerhard Adam
    You'd better watch your words or you'll end up with an "Angry Red Planet".  :)
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    You'd better watch your words or you'll end up with an "Angry Red Planet".  :)
    Most likely Hank already has the Holst CD.  :)


    comparing haarp to a candy bar is a tad childish. You obviously don't know what haarp is. Check it out, another thing to worry about.........but then, we can't do anything about it. So Gerhard, what do you think caused the earthquake? Or do you think it was just a "natural" disaster?...................................................................................................................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    Well, let's consider that the choices are either "natural" or "manmade".  To date, we have absolutely no evidence that humans are capable of invoking such forces.

    In particular, I think it's important to remember just how much force is involved in a quake of this size.  As I mentioned in another post, the most powerful nuclear weapon made comes in at about 25 megatons (or 1600-1700 times the Hiroshima bomb).  Krakatoa (in 1883) generated 13,000 times that force or about 191 megatons.

    A 9.0 earthquake (I just heard it had been upgraded) delivers about 474 megatons of energy when making such a comparison.

    I think it's important to consider that such energies aren't invisible.  They are detectable and they have effects.  So if you're proposing that such energy was unleashed by HAARP, then you have to consider how much energy had to be generated to translate into such energy output.

    In the first place, if such a transformation were possible, it would solve all of our energy problems since the up-tick in energy consumed versus energy produced would be nearly miraculous.  However, despite the claims of activities that the U.S. is engaged in, it seems that most people overlook the fact that there are many countries that would love to catch the U.S. in such activities.  The public relations coup that such an announcement would have for countries like China and Russia would be unparalleled by anything we could've ever achieved during the Cold War.

    Therefore, there is no suggestion that HAARP is capable of such actions because:

    (1)  No major powers in the world would allow themselves to be held hostage to such power.
    (2)  If someone had such power and used it in the fashion suggested, they'd already be shouting it from the mountaintops.

    The fact that such stories gain traction within the one society where it is claimed to be a secret strongly suggests that it doesn't exist.

    NOTE:  Real conspiracies are notoriously difficult to sustain because there are too many competing interests that want to "tell someone".  Once such information was confirmed and in the public arena then, as I said, the competing political powers that would love to have that kind of leverage would provide some much needed credibility.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard, I am impressed with that whole post. You seem to be well educated. Fact is, the U.S. isn't the only one who has haarp. Fact is, check the net and there will be historoy and pictures of the sites. Also, if that massive haarp energy was focused on a fault line, or weakness.........or it just punched a hole, you would have cumulative effects of the energy of haarp and the energy that it unleashed. Am I sure that it was haarp? All I have is that there were "trails" leading from alaska to japan. That they have sensors there that detect haarp and, just before the quake the sensors went wild (detecting haarp energy). So, in closing ......... There is proof that haarp was used. Proof from alaska to japan. There are several haarp sites around the world so Major governments have them, they just are keeping quiet. As far as the energy produced.........they probably couldn't productively use it (like harnessing the energy of an atom bomb "as it's happening") One thing sure, the u.s. government isn't going to admit to it. But your well worded/constructed post was very good..............how many megatons does a hydrogen bomb have? You know yourself that the military cooks up stuff that we don't know about till years later. .......................................................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    Then let me point out the next stage of the problem this presents.

    On this point I want to explain that I'm being extremely serious now, because I would like you (and others that feel like this) to really consider the ramifications of these ideas.

    If we assume that your allegations are correct, then from a purely philosophical perspective, we (the U.S. or any country that possesses such technology) would be worse murderers than anything that occurred in the Holocaust and we would also be the world's worst type of terrorists.  In that respect, terrorists would have more ethics because at least they claim they are fighting for an ideal (regardless of how strange it might be regarded).

    At this point, you may well consider my view naive, but I think it's something that bears some thought.  I think that people are quite glib about declaring conspiracies and blaming all manner of actions on governments/corporations.  In this instance, I think it bears more careful thought, because if this accusation were true, then who would be the bigger criminal ... the agency that perpetrates the action, or the citizen that isn't prepared to foment revolution to undo such evil?

    I realize that my explanation is probably well beyond what you envisioned, but I think its important that people realize that leveling such serious allegations also carries with it very serious responsibilities and the potential for action.  As I said... if true then it would be everyone's (or at least those that know this to be true) responsibility to take whatever action is possible to destroy such evil (including open warfare).

    After that perspective, am I naive or is the idea of a conspiracy a bit overstated?

    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard, I would never "call" you naive. It's just that you haven't gone over what I have. There are videos of all I have said. Sad to say, but the u.s. military lost it's "goodness" during the 2nd ww. Since then they have stolen technology, used experimentation and much worse that we don't know........and aren't supposed to know. You are right about the gravitiy of the situation (murder, destruction). But the military has it's own agenda, like chess, many moves ahead. I hope that it isn't a weapon but know it is. What do you think that the average joe could do to expose this. The average joe would dissappear and so would any he told. Japan detected the haarp energy. The world is getting to be such an awful place (and that's just the people/governments) Kinda tired of talking about this tonite. Enjoyed the conversation. Check out what I have asked and then you will be in the same position. What then, will YOU do....Len

    Gerhard, again I'm impressed with your words. But........haarp is detectable, and was just before the quake. It is also visual........funny lines/contrails with color, it was actually sighted in Iran and boiled the sea, utube has the dolphins to prove it (boiled). Now the energy that you mention as impossible. Take haarp, firing 1 billion watts to a fault in the earths crust which in turn causes a tsunami. So if you add the power of haarp, add an earthquake, plus a tsunami and I am thinking you are talking the kind of energy that could mess up japan. As far as "giving it to the world" goes, when does the "military" give the public anything good. What would happen to energy companies? It's economics. You have to research it Gerhard. You deliver as a very intelligent man but you don't know about what is on even utube re:haarp. You wouldn't have written that post then nor used the same words as last time. It is visual, detectable, and it's effects have been seen at point of impact. Sooo many others have watched the sky and saw. Please go to utube and you'll see all this.....ok.............Did you believe what you saw on tv on 9/11?................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    In my last comment, I wanted to convey a sense of the seriousness that such an allegation creates.  I hope you (and others) appreciate that, so I would ask:

    What information do you possess that would constitute proof of your allegations?  I certainly hope that it isn't web links or articles.  In short, to substantiate such accusations would require actual verified first-hand information.

    It would be like accusing your neighbor of raping his daughter and then saying you saw a movie that made you think it is possible.  Such charges are not games and they are not to be taken lightly.  So ... where is the first-hand, confirmed evidence (please note ... no secondary sources, no web links, etc.)? 

    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard Adam
    Take haarp, firing 1 billion watts to a fault in the earths crust which in turn causes a tsunami.
    I do hope you realize that one billion watts is a tiny amount of energy compared to the Earth.  As an example, a single lightning strike can produce 1000 times more power than that for a few microseconds.
    Mundus vult decipi
    To date, we have absolutely no evidence that humans are capable of invoking such forces.

    Er...i think your wrong there... check out http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:vRg20YinIkAJ:www.stockton.edu/... and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/4434400/Chinese-ear...

    Gerhard Adam
    Didn't see anything in these links that suggested otherwise....
    Mundus vult decipi
    this is just an extract from the first link...

    Rocky mountain arsenal near Denver
    "
    Completed to 3671 meters on September 11, 1961
    • Injection began on March 8, 1962

    – Average rate was 5.5 million gallons per day
    – Earthquakes began shortly thereafter

    • Pumping stopped for technical reasons from September 1963 to
    September 1964

    – Earthquake frequency declined

    • Pumping resumed and so did earthquakes"

    i'm not much into this field of science so i may be misunderstanding this though....

    Gerhard Adam
    Earthquakes began shortly thereafter
    This statement is ridiculous on its face.  Obviously earthquakes occur on a regular basis and have done so throughout Earth's history. 

    Even if true, correlation is not causation.  This is a purely unqualified statement.
    Earthquake frequency declined
    Once again, based on what?  How many earthquakes were predicted/expected and how many occurred.

    This isn't about having expertise in geology or even possessing knowledge about earthquakes.  This is about being gullible an accepting such simplistic statements as evidence despite having no understanding nor explanation about how this purported phenomenon is supposed to work.

    You can't just make shit up and call it science.

    Mundus vult decipi
    well actually i'm not that gullible....the link i posted was the first one i could find in a hurry....i have the data in some books lying at home, but i cant find them right now...
    give me a day and i'll come back with some numbers...

    From what I can tell there were two different tsunami, the Meiwa Tsunami and the Great Yaeyama Tsunami, one hit Ishigaki and one went past?!

    What should be noted is the combination of many conditions that may lead to a specific event. In other words, maybe a "Super Moon" in of itself doesn't affect anything noticeable. However, throw in the combination of a "Super Moon", a Solar Maximum (coronal mass ejections from the Sun), the possibility that the Earth's core is physically changing (magnetic field), etc., and you just might have a recipe for a historical event. Just saying. Whenever something major happens in the world, it seem's that two spectrums of behaviour can be observed. One, you get a slew of doom & gloomer's, and two, you get those who mock the doom & gloomer's. Personally, I believe the arguments are well founded on behalf of the doom & gloomer's. My prediction? We will see more MAJOR earthquakes here shortly. Scientist can say whatever they want about the "historical record" - but I would argue that it's possible, just possible that the earth could be entering into an unknown phase (i.e., something totally new and never seen before). If that's the case, then no one is an expert. It will all come down to chance.

    Hank
     Just saying.
    This is a fine belief.  If you want to believe Mayans are causing the earthquakes, or the Queen of Narnia, or any 'well founded' arguments you have read about solar flares, supermoons and geomagnetics, it's okay by me.  Diversity is what makes humanity fun and far be it from me to want to homogenize everyone into accepting things that are actually possible, or even logical, much less based on evidence.

    The one thing end of the world people have in their favor is, statistically, they have to be right eventually.

    Now, if you'll excuse me, Hitler has been holed up in his Antarctic fortress plotting the Fourth Reich all this time and I have to go stop him from taking over the world.   
    Gerhard Adam
    ... but I would argue that it's possible, just possible that the earth could be entering into an unknown phase (i.e., something totally new and never seen before). If that's the case, then no one is an expert.
    Yes, it's true. 

    The Lord of the Nazgul returned to Mordor in 1980 and gathered the others to begin preparing for Sauron's return. The Nazgul captured Minas Ithil in 2002 and it was renamed Minas Morgul. From Minas Ithil, the Nazgul obtained the palantir called the Ithil-stone, which was later transferred to Barad-dur for Sauron's use.

    In 2050, King Earnur of Gondor went to Minas Morgul in response to a challenge from the Lord of the Nazgul and was never seen again. From that time on, the Stewards ruled Gondor in the absence of a King.


    http://www.tuckborough.net/sauron.html
    Sorry, I'm just distracted by the "unknown phase" we're entering into.
    Mundus vult decipi
    On another note, say what you will about other's opinions being half-baked or otherwise, but can anyone say that the Pacific Ring of Fire is something that should be ignored? Just take a look at what's been happening or should I say "accelerating"? Personally, I believe that if the moon can influence tidal movements (it's freaking water for heavens sake), then surely if a major fault line has reached a "trigger point", who's to say what outside influences are or are not involved? Well, let me put it to you this way. The 19th (next week) is the "Super Moon" day of so called reckoning. I'm throwing down a five hundred dollar bet that the New Madrid rears it's ugly head. I personally believe those earthquake swarms in Arkansas are indicative of something besides "drilling" or "fracturing". If there is anything to this "moon theory" and "sky is falling" mentality, then let the New Madrid be the "mother of all shaker's. On a final note, I hope my home State of Illinois get's wiped out. Afterall, this is a State that produces more corrupt politicians, loser leaders, bankrupt & immoral business owners, oh, and yes, it produced Oprah (gag ), and Obama (more gag), so let the shaking begin. I'm calling for a 10.0 "Super Quake" on March 21st, 2011. You heard it hear first folks. Tinfoil hat & bottled water is optional.

    Hank
     I'm throwing down a five hundred dollar bet that the New Madrid rears it's ugly head. 
    I can understand why you would want to be anonymous.   You don't want Rahm Emanuel coming after you if you cause some Mayan God to wreck your home state after that comment.    I'll have a poll to see which charity your $500 can go to - you can pay in the little 'buy advertising' box on the right.  I'll even give you a week as the over/under.
    Ok my friend, you can sit on your lonely throne (website) and play the role of a King passing judgement. I will play along.
    As far as my wanting to be anonymous? If you get to my stage, you don't really care anymore. It's a matter of semantics. But let me share something with you. A true "mind" is never closed. It's like a 24 hour all you can eat diner. I will take your bet, and raise you another $500.00
    How do we arrange the transaction? The rules stipulate that I'm claiming a 10.0 earthquake on the New Madrid or somewhere on a fault line somewhere in the world. What are you claiming? I would venture that you are claiming nothing will happen on the 19th. Based on that, maybe we can make a bet here. I say 10.0 earthquake for a thousand (somewhere in the world), but give me a thirty day handicap. You say a nothing 0.00 earthquake ? Based on the bet, it's a 10 to 1 wager. I lose, I owe you a thousand. You lose, you owe me Ten Thousand. If you agree, I will come out of the shadows. Be careful my friend, I study every angle, every trend, including mass human behaviour (collective predictive). I'm giving you great odd's youngster, the chance of a 10.0 earthquake is unheard of.
    By the way, I only except cash. No paypal, no whatever.

    Gerhard Adam
    Be careful my friend, I study every angle,
    Yeah ... you're a con.  Those are not only horrible odds, but you're cheating to boot.
    A true "mind" is never closed.
    ... well perhaps you wouldn't mind handling our perpetual motion patent department.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hank
    There are 10 earthquakes a day so I am not sure what he is getting at when he says a 0.0 - but it isn't geology.
    Gerhard Adam
    Even if there weren't it makes no sense why two supposedly "random" events should differ by 10:1 odds.  Especially when he's tried to turn it into two separate bets for two different events.  In other words, you aren't betting against him, you're betting on a 0.0 quake.  That way, when he loses, he'll owe $1,000, but correspondingly you'd owe him $10K, so he'd make a $9K profit.

    God I hate bloody amateurs.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hank
    I guess I need to create the post of Science 2.0 Consigliere and appoint you.
    Gerhard Adam
    Now that would be cool :)
    Mundus vult decipi
    Should he change his nickname to Hank Almighty ??
    I think it would be appropriate.

    He knows mother nature better than anyone.
    I'm starting to think he's indeed a scientist!

    Hank Almighty? I'm not sure how that parameter is set up to become an Almighty? Is that similiar to becoming a President like Barrack O'Bama? In that case, it doesn't require too much. But regardless, how about an Anonymous telling you that Mr. Science is full of it? The original scope of this article was along the lines of tinfoil hats yelling out that "earthquakes" are coming because the moon is close. The author of this webpage would have you believe that the world is flat because he say's so, and he probably can get payed to say that as well. Mr Website would like to have you believe his version, because it's his website. Anyone else is an intruder. Ok, now I can ask, who do you belive? I sthe world flat? Does the moon influence tidal changes and fault lines? Does Charlie Sheen know what day of the week it is?
    Personally, I blieve website owners and bloggers are frustrated job seekers that can't get hired by major Corporations.
    Not to say they don't have talent. But let me ask you this. How many unemployed porn stars do we need to get this economy going? Dr. Science can blow buffalo chips out his orifice 24 X 7 all he wants. But people, who you going to love:? Dr. No? Or Dr. Earthquake is a coming? I think the people is going to love me, Dr. Doom & Gloom.
    Yo, Flock you asswipe.............

    Gerhard Adam
    Do you mind if I use your post as an example to illustrate how technology is ruining literacy and causing people's brains to melt?
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    I only except cash.

    It follows that all other means of payment are not excepted.

    No paypal, no whatever.

    It follows that all other means of payment are excepted.

    Darn!  And there was me, getting set to bet a zillion quatloos.  !
    its truly amazing how being literate and being paid to talk incessantly about shit they have no idea about think so highly of themselves.
    you 'Mr Journalist' are nothing more than a glorified story teller, stories can be fact or fiction and they can be told by idiots and scientists... the difference is you get paid for it, you do nothing more than spread your 'opinion' you do not spread fact. You made no reference as to why "nothing is possible" but swear by its 'accuracy' when all you did was talk and throw around what you 'think'
    honestly, you should be right on the front line next time a devastating anything happens in this world. There would be no better idiot, *i mean journalist, to capture such an event. Maybe you should try it. And hey, if you dont get it right the first time, there will be more, either by nature or from such 'savants' as yourself.

    **yes there are gramatical and type errors, if you dont like it. copy, paste, correct, repost.**

    Gerhard Adam
    Of course, the feeble-minded invariably think that people write only because they get "paid" to do so.  It never occurs to them that the people writing might actually be correct.  In such a demented worldview, nothing is knowable and all information is subject to being manipulated by any nitwit with a crystal ball.  Bring on the Mayans ....
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    you should be right on the front line next time a devastating anything happens in this world

    Been there.  Got wet.

    I write for the joy of spreading accurate knowledge.  The few bucks I get here doesn't even cover my internet costs, let alone the Rolls-Royce and yacht.  ;-)
    Gerhard Adam
    The few bucks I get here doesn't even cover my internet costs, let alone the Rolls-Royce and yacht.  ;-)
    Ain't it the truth!  I had to sell my private jet just to cover my wireless costs.
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    I had to sell my private jet just to cover my wireless costs.

    You mean to say your horse is cheaper to run than a private jet?  I'm gonna sack my financial adviser!
    Gerhard Adam
    ... your horse is cheaper to run...
    Of course ... my horse runs just because it's sunny outside :)
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    my horse runs just because it's sunny outside :)

    You got a solar powered horse ?  Waay cool dude!
    Maybe the super moon theorists have something, if with all this alignment stuff, a large whale was swimming in just the right place, had eaten some put of date plankton then did one almighty fart just over one of the fault lines then it could have cause a mega-quake, somebody should check this out?!

    The Tsunami that struck Ishigaki Island happened in 1771, not 1971.

    Gerhard Adam
    That wasn't the comment.  The problem is that there was a tsunami in 1771 and in 1971.  The one in 1971 was the largest one on record, which is what was stated in the article.  It didn't do any damage compared to the one in 1771.

    The largest tsunami on record rushed past Ishigaki Island, Japan, in 1971. It was an incredible 84.7 meters (278 feet) high. While it caused little damage, the giant wall of water relocated a 750-ton block of coral 2.4 kilometers (1.5 miles) inland.
    http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/tsunami.html

    Where did the largest known tsunami take place?Natural Disasters

    Ishigaki-shima in the Ryukyu island chain. In April, 1971, the wave roared past Ishigaki-shima, the largest island in the Ryukyu island chain in the western Pacific Ocean. It was not known to cause any damage and dissipated its power in the open sea.
    http://www.funtrivia.com/en/History/Disasters-3997.html
    Mundus vult decipi
    Halliday
    Gerhard:

    Where's the record?

    I just queried NOAA's Tsunami Runup database for all records in 1971, and the country of Japan.  75 events were returned, but none are even as high as a single meter (the maximum is just over a half a meter).

    On the other hand, querying the same database only changing the year to 1771 yields the one with a Max Water Height at MIYARA, ISHIGAKI ISLAND of 85.40 meters (according to that database).

    It looks to me that what we are dealing with is a simple typo (or two digit date error) of 1771 becoming 1971.

    David
    Gerhard Adam
    Doesn't seem plausible that it's a typo since one clearly caused a great deal of damage, while the one listed for 1971 indicates that it bypassed the island with no damage.

    I'll also check around to see if I can find something more definitive.
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    Here are some more sources:

    The highest tsunami caused by an offshore earthquake appeared off Ishigaki Island, Ryukyu island chain, Japan on April 24, 1771 . It was possibly 279 feet high, and it tossed an 830-ton block of coral more than [ 1.5 ] miles inland.
    Guiness Book of Records.

    The above, from an old edition, is now superseded by the Alaska megatsunami.


    The runup height is considered to be 85 m in the Ishigaki Island in the Ryukyu area as caused by the 1771 earthquake ...
    Tsunamis: their science and engineering : proceedings of the International Tsunami Symposium, 1981 IUGG Tsunami Commission, May, 1981, Sendai-Ofunato-Kamaishi, Japan, Volume 1981


    January 25, 1972: 10 hr 06 min. An earthquake occurred on Taiwan, generating a weak tsunami. ...
    A very weak tsunami with a height of 5 cm was recorded on Ishigaki Jima. No other data were available on this tsunami.
    Catalog of Tsunamis in the Pacific, 1969-1982 edited by S. L. Soloviev, K. Kim, CGO Staff
    Not sure about whether it's worth fighting about tsunamis in Ishigaki, if what you are interested in is the largest. Depending what you mean by largest, of course, but if you mean highest, try Lituya Bay, Alaska, 1958. A mere 1720 feet (524 m) high.

    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Wow, are you sure?
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    It was localized at that height.

    See http://geology.com/records/biggest-tsunami.shtml or google Lituya Bay.

    Gerhard Adam
    Technically that wasn't a tsunami (it was only a wave), since it was caused by a landslide and not an earthquake/volcanic eruption.  I suppose that would qualify as a dispute about definitions.
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
     Technically that wasn't a tsunami ...

    But it was! 
    Lituya 1958 tsunami

    Technically, the 1958 Lituya Bay 1720 feet tsunami was a megatsunami.
    This dude twitter.com/mdnostradamus predicted this a few weeks ago

    Well, it certainly could happen that the supermoon is the straw that broke the camel's back, You get things set up right and the littlest change in conditions can set them off. Ain't sayin the astrologers is correct, but your absolute stand is too absolute to be absolutely correct.

    Tater

    Hank
    We'll know in a week, I suppose, and there will still be no cataclysm related to the Moon for the 3 billionth year in a row.   But what will happen is 'anything can happen' people will just say 'it could still happen' - it may take 3 million years but eventually you will be right.   
    No, Tater's right now and he'll still be right a week or a month from now. Point is, a small change can cause a big effect. You set a pendulum straight up, and it only takes a little push one way or the other to get it to swing. Tater agrees with your general point, but when you make your statement absolute, you lose the scientific exactness.

    Hank
    No, I can say with absolute certainly that the Moon 220K miles away did not cause this earthquake any more than a tennis ball in my neighbor's yard pulled down my fence. 
    That's fair, as long as you define "cause" right.

    Tater

    A wise man keeps an open mind.

    Hank
    If 'aliens from Planet X caused this earthquake' were equivalent to 'the Moon did not cause this earthquake' (and they are, if you are truly open-minded) we would still be in the Stone Age.  Science is about explaining the world according to natural laws, astrology is about mapping real events to a belief and inventing correlation-causation arrows.  They are very different things.
    Gerhard Adam
    Would that be by way of the 8th dimension?  I'll bet Buckaroo Banzai would know.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    This October 25th 2010 article from the predictweather.com website asks whether earthquakes can be predicted? I don't know how credible it is, especially as they charge money from big corporations to predict the weather but it speculates about the effects of the solar wind and the moon upon the magnetosphere and changing geomagnetic activity potentially leading to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions :-
    When the Moon is in a powerfully gravitational position, such as perigeal and new, with nodes lining up, perhaps the lunar gravitation also causes the Van Allen Belt to extend enough towards the Moon as to allow-through the charged particles, which produce both auroras, strange lights, weird feeling air, unsettled animals and birds, and geomagnetic activity that can lead to eruptions, volcanoes and earthquakes.
    One thing is for sure it is 100% wrong when it predicted that possibly 'Christchurch may be one of the safest places to live-in for a while, from here on' because 'it would be most unlikely for a massive-size earthquake to revisit the same region so soon'.
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    logicman
    ... most unlikely for a massive-size earthquake to revisit the same region so soon ...

    Yes, and lightning never strikes twice in the same place and God didn't make little green apples.
    Hank
    Psychics charge so I don't see any reason why predictweather.com can't also bilk people in a free market.  Caveat emptor applies to anything that sounds too kooky too be true but if you are going to predict earthquakes and charge for it you basically make your market as big as possible.

    'Do you ever see the Sun?  You could be at risk for earthquakes! But for only a small amount compared to what you stand to lose we can help make sure you know when to expect it...'
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Sorry Patrick, I don't get the relevance of the 'God didn't make the little green apples' link but I've only just woken up and my brain is not yet in gear. Did you read the article? The link doesn't take you straight to it, you have to scroll down to the link 'Can Earthquakes be predicted' Read more... on the RHS. The Van Allen Belt is very interesting isn't it?
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    logicman
    Helen: read the lyrics.  When that song was very popular, the response to any crazy idea was: "Yeah! And God didn't make little green apples."  People are more terse these days.  They just say: "Whatever!" in that sneering, snide, snarky makes you want to commit murder kind of way. :-)
    Gerhard Adam
    Notice the careful use of the word "perhaps" before using "lunar gravitation".  This is always a red flag that pure speculation is to follow.  This is a perfect example of how they crafted a sentence that sounds like it has a bunch of technical/scientific terminology to describe events which is all prefaced by the word "perhaps" to indicate that they have no clue if such a relationship exists or not.

    I'm also not sure how "weird feeling air" or "unsettled animals" leads to "eruptions, volcanoes, and earthquakes".
    It has also been well researched that most shakes occur on new or full moons, and the most severe when the moon is closer.
    http://www.predictweather.com/ArticleShow.aspx?ID=316&

    Astronomer George O. Abell claims that a mosquito would exert more gravitational pull on your arm than the moon would (Abell 1979). Despite these physical facts, there is still widespread belief that the moon can cause earthquakes.* It doesn't; nor does the sun, which exerts much less tidal force on the earth than the moon.
    http://www.skepdic.com/fullmoon.html

    Using syzygy and other factors—such as the number of cats and dogs listed in the lost and found in newspaper classified advertisements—Berkland said he accurately predicted several earthquakes, including the October 17, 1989 earthquake in San Francisco, California. Berkland said the number of cats and dogs reported missing goes up prior to an earthquake.
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/05/0523_050523_moonquake_2.html

    This last one struck me as the best :)
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    There's a great resource on earthquake prediction - science style - here:
    Prediction of extreme events: Fundamentals and prerequisites of verification
    V. G. Kossobokov1, 2, and A. A. Soloviev1
    Prediction of extreme events
    Hank
    It'll be a great help for both medicine and physics when people understand what risk factors are.   Like with the environment or cancer or even earthquakes, prediction does not mean pick a date and if it does not happen you are wrong, but rather probabilities.    With probabilities governments can do an impact analysis and determine what, if anything should be done. 

    Obviously people who think the Moon is causing an earthquake miles under a body of water that would crush many asteroids - because the Moon changes sea level tides - are not going to understand something as complex as the difference between predicting risk and predicting the future.
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Yes Patrick, very interesting link and paper. Within that paper is also an interesting reference to another article (that unfortunately you have to pay to download) called 'Chandler Wobble, earthquakes, rotation, and geomagnetic changes', by Frank Press&Peter Briggs Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Interesting to me anyhow because it claims that :-
    A pattern recognition algorithm can be applied to the seismicity of major earthquake belts, to the amplitudes of Chandler Wobble, to changes in the rotational velocity of the Earth, and to the drift of the eccentric geomagnetic dipole for the years 1901−64. The patterns which emerged suggest that all of these diverse phenomena are related.
    I will try and find it through my university databases which are free but very unwieldy.
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Thanks Gerhard for the interesting links. Yes reports of animals sensing earthquakes beforehand is interesting but obviously difficult to prove. This article by Christine Kenneally called 'Surviving the Tsunami What Sri Lanka's animals knew that humans didn't' explains some of the problems and factors involved quite well I think.
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    There's little doubt that animals may pick up sensory information regarding natural disasters and act accordingly.  What's equally valid is that many humans might be capable of the same thing if it weren't for the sensory overload they experience living in large cities.

    I've personally had experiences where I could predict storms coming, etc (with minimal data) in wilderness areas, simply because I'd become used to the patterns.  There wasn't anything special about it, it's simply that when you're survival depends on such queues, you tend to pay attention to data that modern civilization tends to obscure.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    I've personally had experiences where I could predict storms coming, etc (with minimal data) in wilderness areas, simply because I'd become used to the patterns.
    Gerhard did you feel it in your joints like the article suggested and do you have any reliable witnesses who can confirm that you are a wild animal at heart?

    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    Nothing quite that exotic :).  It was a simple matter of not wanting to be stranded where I'd get wet and cold, so one tends to pay attention.  It certainly doesn't mean that in an objective analysis I might not be wrong an equal amount of time, but it's only the wet and cold times that count :)
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    For me, it was a case of learning to hear the whispering skies that precede a clear air lightning strike in the Punjab.  It's either learn that, or emulate a Wimshurst machine.  I was once only about 12 feet from a strike which hit a power transformer.  Most educational!

    As Queen had it: "... lightning, very, very frightening. Mama mia!"
    I don't understand this: "How close is that? Only about 2 degrees so unless astrologers have the kind of measurement instruments no one outside NASA has, they can't detect it." If we're talking about closeness then we should be talking about kilometers, or percentage of mean distance or something of that order. Also I don't understand the rest of the quoted text. There's nothing mysterious about relative closeness of the Moon. When it's near perigee it's relatively close and when near apogee it's relatively far. Your conclusion, "Which means it isn't causing huge waves or earthquakes," also doesn't follow logically. Whether or not astrologers are correct in estimating the relative distance of the Moon has nothing to do with whether or not a lunation causes earthquakes.

    Anyway, causation is not the same as correlation. The latter can be estimated. Has anyone done it? It's do-able - both for astrologers and non-astrologers.

    Hank
    Hi Axel, I explained my usage of degrees to be neutral among countries that use either metric or standard.   I also explained an easy conversion.  Astrologers obviously don't measure anything but it is easy, using degrees, as I said, for them to do so.

    220K+ miles means the Moon is not causing an earthquake anywhere, ever.  In this instance, the plates are buried under water that weighs almost as much as a small planet so lunar gravity, which can make a slight difference in tides on the surface of the ocean, has no impact on plates far beneath it.    A huckster is trying to create hysteria to sell astrology books and that is unfortunate but opportunists will do that.
    Axel Harvey
    Hi Hank! I am puzzled by your statement that astrologers do not measure anything. What astrological literature have you read?

    Two more points. First, the use of degrees in order to avoid metric or what you call "standard" measure is strange indeed. Distance along the line of sight does not translate to degrees, which are measured across the line of sight. Secondly, can you mention the book in question which is being marketed through hysteria? I am reasonably well acquainted with the astrological community and cannot think of the author you seem to be referring to.
    Do you know what would occur to earth if the moon "suddenly disapear"?
    What would be the consequencies to the axis, orbit and climate?

    (I suggest you not to be so prepotent in your next article, or offend any professionals, because you are no one and specially, you're no better than nobody)

    Gerhard Adam
    Do you know what would happen if the moon suddenly got twice as big?  or perhaps if you disappeared?  Don't be so gullible.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hank
    What does he mean 'offend professionals'?   There are 5 professions - the military, education, engineering, law and medicine.  To my knowledge no one in any of the 5 professions has claimed to be experts in lunar geology.

    I guess the thing that annoys me most is bunch of astrology kooks telling me I don't know what I am talking about because I know actual physics rather than rely on psychic nonsense.  And if I tell them the moon did not cause an earthquake, I am offending professionals.    

    People need to know what words mean before they use them.
    Gerhard Adam
    Well, judging from what most people think an "open mind" means, I can only assume that given the choice, they're not sure it was such a good idea for our ancestors to come out of the trees.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hank
    I have had articles get 20X the readers and no comments.  I don't know why this has a hundred comments and most of them just want to argue anything is possible, even though they can't jump to the Moon.
    Gerhard Adam
    You've attacked their favorite "sacred cow".  There are far too many whackos these days that think that everything must be given scientific credence because unless you validate their particular pet belief, you must be operating with a closed mind.

    Of course, not one of these nut jobs actually even has a working hypothesis of what they think might be occurring, they just want to leave all options open, so that we can invoke all manner of superstitious nonsense to explain their pet "theories".

    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    There are 5 professions ...

    6, actually.

    Hank, you forgot the world's oldest profession - the spreading of false information.  ;-)
    Hank
    NOAA has redone their tsunami website over the weekend, likely due to interest - http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/tsunami.html is still available with the incorrect year and size but this newer page seems to be a lot more accurate - http://wcatwc.arh.noaa.gov/tsustats.pdf

    It's pretty terrific that commenters here were able to fact check the NOAA!

    most damaging tsunamis in history
    Hank, have you researched haarp? So much more credible for causing earthquakes. The evidence is there. Just google anything to do with japan/earthquake/caused by haarp and, although it's hard to believe.......it exists. It is used on very low power (a few watts) to locate oil reserves and pretty well anything else underground/rock. The haarp site uses 1 billion watts. Based in alaska, it can cause all of these events. Thinking that the moon is going to cause earthquakes and volcanos erupt is just plain luny. (pun)..........................................................................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    Oh, it definitely had to be HAARP.  But then again, everything they post there is likely a lie manipulated by the New World Order (NWO)

    Then again, if HAARP is responsible for anything, perhaps it's from sucking the intelligence out of human beings on the planet that seem to believe the stupidest things that a human can imagine.

    At this rate of intelligence loss, it may even make Ray Kurzweil right in predicting that computers will soon be more intelligent than humans.  Quite frankly, at this rate, I'll give it another couple of years before Windows is more intelligent than the average human (perhaps Linux already is).
    Mundus vult decipi
    ok gerhard, it's kinda hard to separate the sarcasm from your opinion. Do you think it was haarp? And, if it was, what would be the motive? You had better research haarp. It is used on a small scale to find oil and gas reserves. They only use from 4 to 30 watts to penetrate the earth. Haarp uses 1 billion watts. It is real and it is secret. There is nobody on the planet that can prosecute the U.S. for it................sad. I have enjoyed most of your posts though. What do you think of the planet x theory?

    Gerhard Adam
    What do you think of the planet x theory?
    There doesn't appear to be any evidence for it.  What are you suggesting?
    http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1993AJ....105.2000S/0002000.000.html
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard Adam
    It is real and it is secret.
    Do you see the problem?
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard, you are so playing on the words on these posts. Must be having a good time. "It's real" (physically the site exists in alaska) Real, in that it is used to penetrate the earth. The U.S. government used this knowlege to create a site that can produce 1 billion watts, is directional and can be aimed, and seemingly has no range problems. So, it can strike anywhere. Back to you Gerhard

    Gerhard Adam
    The problem here that I was alluding to is that it can't be much of a secret if you know it, and its a topic of discussion on the web.

    I know that HAARP is real, but I also know that any "conspiracy" associated with it is based on the implicit assumption that all the data "known" about it is fabricated and an elaborate ruse to mislead or confuse the public.  While I also know that the government and industry are quite capable of such activities, I also know that it is much more difficult to maintain a conspiracy than most people realize.  As a result, such conspiracies collapse rather quickly because there are significant external forces (i.e. foreign governments) that would love that kind of leverage.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard, sure it's secret, as secret as it can get. We know what it is and what it can do, only when they "use" it can there be visual proof. It's because of the net that we know of these things anyway. But what can you do. You'll never get anywhere near a haarp site. Yes, because of the internet there is information and disinformation. The u.s. military have been doing that with ufo's since the 50's. That's how it remains secret. Look at the difference between "our" opinions. You know a bit about haarp, I know a bit more, but we really don't know much. The information is out there gerhard. Instead of bashing one opinion, check on the info, I'm sure you'll have much more to say after the info. You didn't know there were sites in different countries. Do research......hmm, I don't think we can get any farther with haarp until you see it yourself..................................................................................................Len

    MikeCrow
    1 gigawatts is trivial when talking about the earth, the Japanese earthquake was 1.9 +/- 0.5 x 108 times bigger (@ 1.9 +/- 0.5 1017 J, or 600 Million Hiroshima sized bombs).
    Never is a long time.
    Gerhard Adam
    ...is directional and can be aimed...
    BTW, that's another problem.  Any ground-based system that is defined in this fashion must have line-of-sight access to any proposed "target".

    Therefore the question is ... what is aimed?  How is it aimed?  Since there is no line-of-sight from Alaska to Japan, what are you suggesting?
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard, yes it is ground based, but you assume that it needs line of sight? You have not read anything about haarp. You would know how it is aimed if you had. You once mentioned about "us all" being murders if this is in fact the truth. Not if we follow your thinking. Your mind is "closed" on this topic. So on to another. It is predicted that there will be an earthquake near chili/peru approx 7.0, has that happened yet? I am wondering if the "earthquake predictor" is going to be right or wrong.

    Gerhard Adam
    Please don't start with the "open-minded" nonsense.  That is simply an excuse that people use when they have no evidence.

    The point about HAARP makes no sense, since one claim is that it uses a gigawatt of microwave energy while another claims it uses ELF.  Get it straight.

    More importantly you cannot reflect an EM wave off of a surface without some loss of energy since there is no "perfect" reflector available.

    People seem to be freely translating EM waves into acoustic waves regarding their effect (someone actually compared it to a sub-woofer).

    Since the earthquake occurred in the ocean, then you have the problem of wave attenuation (assuming microwaves)  before it can travel far enough to hit the earth's crust.

    There's all kinds of other speculations, such as creating standing waves (although no one seems to explain how such a standing wave is created from EM and translates into shifting the earth's crust).  People then extrapolate that the microwaves would heat the water reducing the friction between plates (although they don't explain how such a huge amount of heat doesn't doesn't cause the ocean surface to boil). 

    It seems that this kind of speculation isn't even grounded in high school science, let alone anything more credible.
    Not if we follow your thinking. Your mind is "closed" on this topic.
    My mind requires evidence and not speculation. You level an accusation that you don't seem to appreciate the seriousness of, and then expect me to simply take your word for it (or the whack jobs that post on YouTube?) .  Newflash - YouTube is NOT scientific evidence.
    It is predicted that there will be an earthquake near chili/peru approx 7.0, has that happened yet? I am wondering if the "earthquake predictor" is going to be right or wrong.
    What's the actual prediction?  Given how active the region is, it would be more surprising if an earthquake didn't occur.
    Mundus vult decipi
    First, the open minded comment is relevent. You are not taking in information, you are rejecting it. I will give you this, there is some confusion about what haarp produces. Yes I've heard of the microwaves, but I've also heard about the low frequency accoustics. (haarp does cause the ocean to boil). So you reject haarp so much you ridicule peoples opinions instead of using your resources to actually find out about haarp. What do you think it is, and does then? Helen had good relevent info on haarp. .................oh, and now your reply..............................................................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    What is it that you don't get?  Science isn't about speculation.  Do you have a theory explaining how things work?  Do you have a basis for explaining how these events are supposed to occur beyond some "wave your arms around" argument that alleges government conspiracies?

    I'm not interested in speculations that don't have evidence.  Yet, despite the claim that this is a super secret government weapons system, every moron with a keyboard appears to know about it and is publishing information.  Doesn't this suggest that perhaps none of it is true?

    If you can't get the basic physics right, then why should I give credence to anything else? 

    I've heard enough from the loons that want to argue about alien life seeding the Earth to the creationists that insist that everything is an elaborate hoax to support a 6,000 year old Earth.  Apparently T-Rex ate coconuts while humans rode dinosaurs around (just like the Flintstones).

    You mentioned "low frequency acoustics" ... what does that even mean?  What is the supposed physics involved?  Don't you get it, that acoustics requires a medium.  If you're suggesting an acoustic wave large enough to generate an earthquake ... how do you get it to your target without destroying everything in its path?  You can't bounce it through the atmosphere, because it wouldn't support a trip into space (since the sound wave would disappear).

    Instead of "researching" all these conspiracy sites, perhaps a few good science books would be your first order of business. 

    After all, if this is how all these "speculators" make "scientifically" based decisions it is little wonder that our political and social systems are as screwed as they are.  You'll believe anything.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard Adam
    ...haarp does cause the ocean to boil...
    This could only happen if the energy was being absorbed locally.  If this were true, then how does the energy get to your proposed target to cause the earthquake?

    Also, where's the evidence that the ocean has boiled due to HAARP?  (Oh boy, maybe another YouTube production)
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard, I give up. If you don't research the topic, you will have questions like this forever. The answers are on the net. I can't make you check it out anymore than I can change your mind. You'd have to open it up to take in the new information/questions that you ask. Yes, it's your favorite "utube". Google "haarp causes japanese earthquake", it will have all your answers there. Truly, people with attitudes like yours will keep haarp in the background and truly unknown. This is how "we" can deal with "mass murder", just deny it. (if you remember your comment on how could people let this go on) ...........I hope that future topics/conversations are more productive than this was...............Len

    Gerhard Adam
    You don't get it.  I do know what HAARP is about and I also know that the physics being described doesn't work.  So directing me to another YouTube video of some guy making stuff up isn't going to be very convincing.

    One of the main guys that keep turning up is Benjamin Fulford.  So you tell me how much I'm supposed to credit someone with this background:
    According to Fulford, a Chinese secret society with 6 million members, including 1.8 million Asian gangsters and 100,000 professional assassins, have targeted Illuminati members if they proceed with world depopulation plans. They contacted Fulford, a Canadian ex pat, after he warned that the Illuminati plan to reduce the Asian population to just 500 million by means of race-specific biological weapons. Essentially, this secret society, with Fulford as their spokesperson, is taking on the Illuminati!
    http://www.reversespeech.com/fulford.htm

    or perhaps this from an interview with Jeff Rense.

    FULFORD: They're not going to have a choice. It's just a matter of time. This is going to play itself out, I believe, probably this year -- we should see the end of Illuminati rule.

    FULFORD: You will see. Events will prove that I am right. This is something that is not my decision; it is a decision by the people of Asia. I'm just a spokesman. This is something that is not in the power of the Illuminati to stop. They cannot. It will not work.

    RENSE: Who is still laying claim, or trying to lay claim to Japan? Is it the Rockefellers or the Rothschilds?

    FULFORD: I think it's now the Rothschilds who are trying to show a nicer face and get back to the traditional, good side of the Anglo-Saxon world. There's a lot of good about Anglo-Saxon culture. A sense of fairness, doing the right thing...
    http://www.rense.com/general80/flf.htm
     
    Mundus vult decipi
    It sounds like you "work" for the haarp program and are doing your best to dismiss it. (your quote) You don't get it. I do know what HAARP is about and I also know that the physics being described doesn't work. Ok, if you think I have been wrong. Please enlighten me on what you think haarp is and does. I await.............................................................................................................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    It obviously doesn't matter what I say.  You could even look in Wikipedia or the HAARP site (
    http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/), but there's no point in suggesting that because you would only claim it was propaganda to keep the public ignorant.

    Of course, you seem to think that any gibberish that someone else posts is scientifically acceptable, so with those standards it is impossible to offer any reasonable explanation.

    You've practically taken the final step in your journey down the conspiracy rabbit hole, but accusing me of working for the HAARP program.  This is inevitable since the only answer you'll accept is one that confirms your conspiracy theories.

    You have been wrong on virtually everything.  You even concede that the physics doesn't make sense but still you persist.  You link to YouTube videos without ever questioning the people that make them.  In short, you have intentionally elected to be gullible and haven't even bothered to consider the science involved.  As I've said, you choose to believe in conspiracies.

    The real problem here is that, like most people that accept conspiracy theories, is that they never question the sources.  They simply obediently follow whatever "logic" is presented and since it is taken as axiomatic that governments/corporations are corrupt, then it must "logically" follow that they are capable of any science fiction type of manipulation that they can imagine.

    Who says ignorance is bliss.

    Well, good luck to you. 
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard, this is laughable...........I didn't admit that the physics didn't work........it was "your quote". I shant berate you for your opinion on haarp (which apparantly isn't anything at all) (oops) but did enjoy this useless banter. Actually I originally thought that you could come up with some additional information given that you give the impression that you are "in the know". Another day my friend...............and another topic........................................................................Len

    "Not likely", was the answer by the scientist Jim Garvin of NASA’ s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

    And you, Hank-NOBODY says it's impossible.

    Hahahahahahaha

    Gerhard Adam
    Impossible is a high standard.

    A fragment of a meteor could enter the atmosphere and travel on a trajectory that causes it to land in your back pocket while you're walking down the street and have enough heat to strike your wallet and melt your driver's license.

    Technically that's possible.  You decide what that means compared to just "not likely".
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Oh, so its not just money that burns a hole in our pockets and wallets, its bits of meteorite as well? I think that as far as HAARP is concerned, which by the way stands for High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, if we are going to do some wild speculating here, then my hopefully completely unfounded concern is that HAARP research could be accidentally causing some problems in the Earth's fluctuating and protective magnetosphere, which could somehow have far reaching but accidental knock on effects such as somehow triggering earthquakes?

    Just as if you had never seen a tiny pin prick and burst a balloon you would probably never have anticipated that it could do that, maybe some of the tectonic plates are poised and ready to slip and very small but strategic energies can then trigger that slippage, like the straw that broke the camel's back?

    According to Wikipedia Some of the main scientific findings from HAARP include:
    1. Generation of very low frequency radio waves by modulated heating of the auroral electrojet, useful because generating VLF waves ordinarily requires gigantic antennas
    2. Production of weak luminous glow (below what can be seen with the naked eye, but measurable) from absorption of HAARP's signal
    3. Production of extremely low frequency waves in the 0.1 Hz range. These are next to impossible to produce any other way, because the length of a transmit antenna is dictated by the wavelength of the signal it is designed to produce.
    4. Generation of whistler-mode VLF signals which enter the magnetosphere, and propagate to the other hemisphere, interacting with Van Allen radiation belt particles along the way
    5. VLF remote sensing of the heated ionosphere

    Research at the HAARP includes:
    1. Ionospheric super heating
    2. Plasma line observations
    3. Stimulated electron emission observations
    4. Gyro frequency heating research
    5. Spread F observations
    6. High velocity trace runs
    7. Airglow observations
    8. Heating induced scintillation observations
    9. VLF and ELF generation observations
    10. Radio observations of meteors
    11. Polar mesospheric summer echoes: PMSE have been studied using the IRI as a powerful radar, as well as with the 28 MHz radar, and the two VHF radars at 49 MHz and 139 MHz. The presence of multiple radars spanning both HF and VHF bands allows scientists to make comparative measurements that may someday lead to an understanding of the processes that form these elusive phenomena.
    12. Research on extraterrestrial HF radar echos: the Lunar Echo experiment (2008).
    13. Testing of Spread Spectrum Transmitters (2009)
    14. Meteor shower impacts on the ionosphere
    15. Response and recovery of the ionosphere from solar flares and geomagnetic storms
    16. The effect of ionospheric disturbances on GPS satellite signal quality
    Just because we don't have any proof that there are any negative knock on effects from HAARP research doesn't mean that people shouldn't be entitled to speculate about the possibility that they could exist, without then being publicly ridiculed. Wikipedia claims that HAARP  does try to be very transparent which I find reassuring :-
    According to HAARP's management, the project strives for openness and all activities are logged and publicly available. Scientists without security clearances, even foreign nationals, are routinely allowed on site. The HAARP facility regularly (once a year on most years according to the HAARP home page) hosts open houses, during which time any civilian may tour the entire facility.
    Wikipedia also claims that there are other related HAARP like facilities outside of Alaska :-
    in America, there are two related ionospheric heating facilities: the HIPAS, near Fairbanks, Alaska, and (currently offline for reconstruction) one at the Arecibo Observatory Link text in Puerto Rico. The European Incoherent Scatter Scientific Association (EISCAT) operates an ionospheric heating facility, capable of transmitting over 1 GW effective radiated power (ERP), near Tromsø, Norway.[13] Russia has the Sura Ionospheric Heating Facility, in Vasilsursk near Nizhniy Novgorod, capable of transmitting 190 MW ERP.
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    ...people shouldn't be entitled to speculate about the possibility that they could exist, without then being publicly ridiculed.
    Publicly ridiculed is being nice.  If I was going to be serious I publicly head-slap them.

    Idle speculation has no room when thousands of people have died and hundreds of thousands impacted.  This isn't some parlor game where people can sit around and level accusations that are tantamount to murder and not expect to be called out on it.  This is something that requires SERIOUS evidence and not simple rumor-mongering by people that are safely located thousands of miles away.

    At the very least, have some respect for those that died, by compiling serious research and serious evidence to support such charges.  If you don't have that, then it's the epitome of irresponsibility to speculate about something that had such devastating consequences for no better reason because it is chic to assume that governments are simply murderous bastards.

    It's one thing to believe that politicians are corrupt or that our systems need a major overhaul.  It's quite another to accuse them of murder and essentially attacking civilians with a ground-based weapons system.

    As I said in the beginning regarding public ridicule.  They're lucky that's all they get.  Perhaps before people run their mouths about such rubbish they might imagine how they would like putting forth those theories to the families of those that died.  Up for it?
    Mundus vult decipi
    Helen, I am impressed with your research. I guess gerhard thinks haarp was developed to make pretty colors in the sky. I was wondering why he was so against the possibilitiy. I am guessing that you also saw the videos and other information on the net? I just googled "haarp causes japan earthquake". Now, what about this earthquake prediction for chili for the 16th of march?.......................................................................................................................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    ... then my hopefully completely unfounded concern is that HAARP research could be accidentally causing some problems in the Earth's fluctuating and protective magnetosphere, which could somehow have far reaching but accidental knock on effects such as somehow triggering earthquakes?
    Helen, do you really think that this occurs when someone turned on the equipment and went, "Oops, my bad ... I accidently destroyed Japan"? 

    I'm not suggesting that things can't ever go wrong and the events surrounding the nuclear plants both in Japan and elsewhere are ample evidence of how such things occur and how they manifest.  There have been biological blunders by the introduction of species to areas where they shouldn't be.  We've seen it with killer bees, etc.  We see it with drugs and medicine.  There are always things that have gone wrong and the public is right for being skeptical about reassurances (just look at Sascha's recent post for a good review of this).

    The public should also be less gullible in believing every scare tactic that is sent their way.  Now, if only people would actually investigate the science instead of the rumors, then they might actually be able to learn something.

    Whether you like it or not, most of the technology we use today is not trivial and doesn't lend itself to a 10 minute Google search.  Why would you have a concern about HAARP?  Are you telling me that this is something that just occurred to you as soon as you heard about the research, or is it something that was fostered by all the conspiracy theories?

    Of course, one of the posters, thinks that if HAARP doesn't have any sinister qualities as a weapons system, then apparently all its good for is generating pretty lights.

    It is clear that none of these people are thinking about the real issues and research necessary regarding global communications and researching the upper atmosphere.  Oh, that would be far too ordinary, when we can imagine a James Bond particle weapon that is been commandeered by the evil George Bush and his mini-me sidekick George W. 

    Of course, , er, I mean, SKULL and BONES, er I mean, NEW WORLD ORDER, er I mean NARNIA ... are obviously all behind this.

    I guess there's only one solution .... "Destroy the ring, Frodo!!"
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Gerhard, I do not in any way believe in these conspiracy theories or that anyone has deliberately caused any life threatening earthquakes in Japan or anywhere else OK? I have always had concerns about accidental effects of HAARP, particle colliders, nuclear reactors and the neutrino experiments which I expressed as soon as I arrived at this site 6 months ago. Unfortunately when Eric Diaz left Science20 he deleted all his articles where I had voiced many of my concerns about HAARP and the LHC. I am afraid that I am too upset about what is happening to the people in Japan at the moment to write any more on this subject at present.
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    I do not in any way believe in these conspiracy theories or that anyone has deliberately caused any life threatening earthquakes in Japan or anywhere else OK?
    You're not understanding.  Your speculations (even saying you're not an expert) has already garnered more people supporting those fringe ideas because of your "research".  Whether you realize it or not, and whether you like it or not, what you write makes a difference.  No one is looking at your credentials to determine whether you are an expert in these areas.  Instead people look for confirmation about what they already believe.

    As a result, when speculation is discussed as if it were as legitimate as anything else, it simply provides more information for those already inclined towards such conspiracies. 

    While you may think you're simply a non-expert asking some basic questions about your own concerns, you're overlooking the fact that by writing on this site, you are minimally taking on the role of a journalist.  Therefore, every speculative idea that you entertain lends credence to others that may share the same view.  Every link you provide creates the impression of "research" that supports those ideas.

    Those ideas and writings have consequences.  What would be the point in writing an article or a blog if no one read it?  As a result, you have to consider that some of those reading it will accept what you say without further verification.  If you have questions then certainly ask them, but not in a way that promotes more conspiracies.

    If you're going to take the time to read links and post sources, then follow up on them to determine if the basic assumptions even make sense.  If you aren't qualified to make that assessment, then do further research or ask someone that is to help you sort out fact from fiction.

    If you recall, Eric also didn't have much patience for this kind of speculation, so I'm not sure why this is persisting.   I also realize that neither you nor I will ever have enough expertise to answer all the questions or concerns that might surface.  Hell, even the scientists involved may not have a sufficient number of answers for every concern, so even asking the question isn't going to provide any particular solution.

    Instead you may have to go with the information we actually have on hand and a fair amount of common sense.

    If you explore the ideas being expressed, consider looking more closely.  First, are man-made earthquakes possible?
    http://news.softpedia.com/news/Human-Activities-That-Trigger-Earthquakes-43723.shtml
    http://geology.about.com/cs/eq_hazards/a/aa033102a.htm
    http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/06/top-5-ways-that/
    http://precedings.nature.com/documents/4745/version/3/files/npre20104745-3.pdf

    After reviewing some of this information, you'll see a pattern emerge which clearly indicates that humans are capable of contributing to, or inducing earthquakes, but on a much smaller scale that indicated here.  In addition, the production of a large-scale earthquake must unequivocally originate by natural processes.

    After this, the question would have to be formed into how a man-made system could create high enough energies to translate into such forces.  However, even if that were possible, you have to consider the precision required to direct such energies and whether the technology exists.

    If you actually read through many of the comments from these conspiracy sites, you'll see all manner of confused thinking ranging from weather caused the earthquake to microwaves to ELF, etc.  More importantly, the really dumb part is that everyone is claiming a super-secret government program is responsible and yet everyone of these people has data, transcripts, etc.  that somehow is magically published all over the web.

    Does anyone really believe that there are no competent scientists or people anywhere that would be capable of interpreting such data if there were a ground-based weapons system involved?  Is everyone corrupt except for these self-appointed internet vigilantes?

    Lousy science is amazingly easy to get an audience for and the more outrageous the more come running to it.  Real science is hard and it doesn't always have all the answers.  It is in that gap that the problems occur, and my point in this long rambling response, is to try to inform you that you also play a role in how this comes out.  You have a voice .... how do you want it used?
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Gerhard, from now on I've decided that I'm going to take your advice and try to stop speculating and asking difficult questions, especially if I am being irresponsible because people might think that I know what Im talking about, even though I repeatedly claim that I don't, and consequently I am inadvertently fueling crazy conspiracy theories. I will however continue to do my own research and if I ever have anything more 'scientific' to report or I will probably write the occasional blog. OK?
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    I think you should definitely continue to write and I do like the way you put together your research.  So, if I were to suggest anything it would simply be to stop trying to solve all of these problems in a single post.  If you have a concern, research it, then post what you've found out. 

    It's like your article on the Geomagnetic Reversals.  It was a great article until you started to undermine yourself.  At this point if you had a concern about the effects of a polar reversal, that would've been a great part 2.  You could research it.  Examine the historical evidence and/or concerns.  Learn something about the physics/energies involved.  Determine what the current research and thinking is (not the conspiracies).  Then post your results.

    Keep in mind that we already know what the conspiracy theories are, so it would be interesting to read whether they have any traction or if the science is completely wrong.

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with that and I hope you continue to write.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Helen, don't be bullied by Gerhard. If you review everything he has to say to all, you'll see a pattern. He rejects and ridicules but doesn't volunteer additional information.......just criticism. It appears he is not on here for information exchange but for his own twisted entertainment. You on the other hand had comprehensive information. Hey, since haarp (the harmless)(as gerhard would suggest) has so many "features" the experiements must be also varied and many. Therefore it could be responsible for a number of "effects". Carry on with this helen. You are the most open, logical, informative poster I've met on here. Gerhard seems to think if he doesn't "know" it, it can't exist. We must continue to explore these "relative unknowns" because we sure aren't going to get the "truth" from the governments...........oh yea, unless we ask gerhard...................................................................................................Len

    Gerhard Adam
    What was it that you wanted us to say was impossible? 

    Well, whatever it was, the reason why nobody said it was impossible, is because it was probably absurd enough to where "not likely" pretty well covered it.  However, if you're actually serious, you could make your claim and if it's not impossible, I would certainly try and explain why it would be of low probability.
    Mundus vult decipi
    The moon will be closest to the earth on 19 March 2011. To be exact is 18 years 11 and 1/3 days. Based on historical data in the past something may happen. I have been tracking this guy Britton LaRoche blog for more than a year.
    He appears to be quite accurate.

    http://www.garagegames.com/community/blog/view/15946/20#comments

    The next big land earthquake should be in the Tokai area. Japan will be devastated.

    Gerhard Adam
    Based on historical data in the past something may happen.
    OK ... so what is the historical data?  What is the accuracy rate?  Were the predictions absolutely accurate or is there some leeway necessary in interpreting the data (in other words would everyone looking at the data agree on the accuracy).
    Mundus vult decipi
    Just read the papers, such as
    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5699/1164.abstract
    before talking about things you do not know.

    By the way, it is an observed fact that moonquakes are triggered by earth's tides. But the moon is solid.

    Hank
    Reading an abstract didn't tell you much - you are contending that the moon can trigger a mag 9 earthquake because an effect of the moon, tides, have been correlated to shallow thrust earthquakes?  Seriously, the comments just make astrology people look even more pseuso-science than they already looked.
    Gerhard Adam
    Just read the papers, such as http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5699/1164.abstract
    before talking about things you do not know.
    Well it certainly hasn't slowed down your posting.  It appears that the lack of knowledge is primarily what drives you.

    After all, why let a little thing like facts get in the way.  One abstract - instant expert.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Larry Arnold
    Oh hasn't everyone forgotten planet X. Now the big unknown unknown there, is how many moons it is dragging with it (Xenu forfend!)

    That is going to be some exciting cosmic billiards.

    (as in a loada billiards)

    And while I am at it, just how does contemporary science deal with the perturbation effects caused by the extra mass inserted by time travellers anxious to get a glimpse of the the end of the world as we know it?

    Call me a cynic, call me a fool, but I can't help that, it was written in the stars.
    Originally I thought that the effect of the "supermoon" would only be higher tides. Apparantly high tides do cause earthquakes.. Well then, this puts a different outlook on things. Japan could get another.........and I agree that would be devistating. So, "beware the ides of march".

    Gerhard Adam
    Apparantly high tides do cause earthquakes.
    They never learn.
    Mundus vult decipi
    You forgot about expanding earth - rejected by the plate tectonic theory.

    If a model have a lack of arguments, and seems wacky, it didn't says it is necessarily false.
    For now the scientific community have his own modern vision of our neighbor environment, but nothing tells this will be right in 10 years.

    There was some sun huge 'X-flares' that should be considered, but with parsimony and finding a true causal-effect relation.

    About the 'End of the earth', science tells us about 4 billion years. For the 'End of earth life' before (will be very warm).
    But for the closest future, except space object 2011 AG5 in 2052 , or human disaster, nothing is concrete.

    logicman
    You forgot about expanding earth -

    a very trivial expansion caused by a constant rain of cosmic dust from the starry, starry night.  Best take shelter for the next billion years or so - it's gonna bury your house!

    Gerhard: They're not listening still, perhaps they never will.  ;-)
    The author's information was accurate in 2005. But more recent research (published by National Geographic) correlates tides with earthquakes. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1022_041022_earthquakes_...

    The Moon's gravity has a statistically significant correlation to the occurrence and severity of earthquakes.

    Gerhard Adam
    Are you being intentionally stupid?
    But all we're really saying is that if earthquakes are gong to occur anyway, [high tides] may be adding a little extra force.  So we might [someday] be able to say that a quake could be more likely during a morning tidal period, for example, but not be able to know which specific morning."
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1022_041022_earthquakes_tides_2.html
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard Adam
    Where ever this enormous vibration ends up it creates extremely low frequency (ELF) waves which travel down to the earth. (It can also send down LF, HF, VHF, UHF) Using this method, HAARP is capable of extremely deep earth tomography: basically "x-raying" the earth. That much is not controversial. Well, what if they tune it to resonate with the geological features of a fault line, causing a violent vibration, which then causes the fault to give way?
    http://current.com/news/89003708_teslas-earthquake-machine-haarp.htm

    Oh goody.  I can't wait to hear how a low frequency EM wave (ELF) gets translated into a resonant vibrational frequency for the earth along a fault line.  I would really like to see that tuner they use, although I suspect it's just a Universal Remote.

    I'm even more interested in hearing why getting an x-ray doesn't vibrate the fillings out of your teeth, but I guess that's too much speculation on my part.  Although I admit that the concern raised by VHF and UHF made me realize how cable television has saved the world by reducing the amount of errant VHF/UHF radio signals to propagate through our atmosphere and instead channeling all that energy through cables to our homes.

    I sure hope they know how to dispose of the toxic bits generated by spurious internet errors.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard Adam
    Some HAARP posts:
    1.  How HAARP is being used to promote Global Warming
    HAARP is a WMD being used against other countries and even our own. Think of Tsunamis, Katrina, more common earthquakes. We are attacking our enemies with the weather and then using HAARP to convince everyone that Global Warming is happening. The movie 2012 talks about water beneath the surface heating up because microwaves from the Sun are boiling it. Predictive programming has been going on for a long time and most blockbusters are just that. Other countries now have similar technologies and are also using it. By 2012 we will create a scenario similar to what happens in the movie but it won't be from the Sun, it will be from our sick, corrupt government officials, corporations, and the banksters. It's all about profit and the love of money. Where are you going to spend it when everything is gone?
    http://current.com/technology/91493574_youtube-1-haarp-decoded-what-or-who-is-the-target-part-2.htm
    2. It's a banking conspiracy
    Formerly a well-traveled Far East correspondent for Forbes magazine, Fulford, fluent in Japanese, is hosting What is This?, his weekly podcast from Tokyo, and alleges "Hazel" Takana, Japan's finance minister, told him in 2007 "a group of American and European oligarchs" threatened to strike the country with manufactured earthquakes unless he ceded control of the Japanese banking system.
    http://milkhouse-mouse.blogspot.com/2008/06/western-bankers-threatened-japan-with.html
    Of course, there's our buddy Fulford again (ridding the world of the Illuminati).
    3.  It could just be a mind control experiment
    In the Washington Post article "Mind Games," Sharon Weinberger writes that she obtained "records that note that the patent was based on human experimentation in October 1994 at the Air Force lab, where scientists were able to transmit phrases into the heads of human subjects, albeit with marginal intelligibility."http://mindjustice.org/wparticle.htm#foia
    4. Then there's the old standby ... weather control
    World renowned scientist Dr. Rosalie Bertell confirms that "US military scientists ... are working on weather systems as a potential weapon.

    While there is no concrete evidence of HAARP having been used, scientific findings suggest that it is at present fully operational. What this means is that HAARP could potentially be applied by the US military to selectively modify the climate of an "unfriendly nation" or "rogue state" with a view to destabilizing its national economy.
    http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/48777-us-haarp-strikes-causing-earthquakes-china-haiti-now-chile-whos-next.html
    I'm not clear on why Bertell, an environmental epidemiologist, would be considered an expert in weapons or weather for that matter, but then ... what do I know.

    So, for those of you that are willing to believe virtually anything, here's another list just in case you missed some of these conspiracy theories.  Hopefully the Illuminati won't delete this post before you get a chance to read it, but just in case ... there's a meeting Friday at Area 51.  CYA.
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    Hopefully the Illuminati won't delete this post before you get a chance to read it, but just in case ... there's a meeting Friday at Area 51.  CYA.
    Ta!  I'll definitely be going there - in my magnetic-water-powered car - the one covered in anti-speed-trap-radar clingfilm.
    MikeCrow
    Eww, I once spent a few hours of a long drive ball parking how much I could reduce the range of a police radar gun by putting a plastic 1/4 wavelength wave canceler on the front of a car, there by reducing it's radar cross-section (iirc it reduces the range by about half).

    So, unless you developed your clingfilm before I developed my canceler(early 80's I think), I think there's probably some royalties due.

    I will accept paypal for your convenience ;)
    Never is a long time.
    logicman
    ... unless you developed your clingfilm before I developed my canceler(early 80's I think)

    I see your 1980s and raise you: Saran, Dow Chemicals, 1933.  :)
    MikeCrow
    Hoisted by my own petard!

    Though, I have to wonder how Dow developed anti-radar clingfilm at least a year before anyone had developed radar ;)
    Never is a long time.
    Gerhard Adam
    They obviously had an astrologer on staff.
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    They obviously had an astrologer on staff.

    Nothing so grand.  Only a humble patents office technical assistant.  ;-)

    Before there was pulse radar there was:
    Christian Huelsmeyer 1904


    What always gets me about conspiracy theorists (and superstitious people in general), is that they always put the onus on the scientific community to disprove their (more commonly than not) wild claims. Really, if you are going to start an argument the onus is on you, the protagonist, to bring relevant points to the discussion and not just third party opinions that are not substantiated let alone peer reviewed. I suspect for most people that fall into this category the reason is simply that they have no scientific education (beyond high school – if that) or the ability to even begin acquiring one. Why put in years of effort in learning (or trying to learn) what are intrinsically complex subjects when, with no intellectual effort on your part, you can believe in unsubstantiated claims that require no education and fit with your view of the world?
    So with that in mind, I thank you Hank and Gerhard. I admire your moral fortitude in being able to withstand this constant barrage of willful ignorance without resorting to name-calling. Keep up the good work.

    -Richard

    Gerhard Adam
    Thank you, Richard.  Your comments are appreciated.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Richard makes an excellent point. Ideologues, the very religious and others can be strident in their claims, insisting that since proof hasn't been presented to utterly refute them, the claims are legit. That said, world leaders and scientists have historically followed astrology. Not a majority, presumably, but some (with far greater mental acuity than Ronald Reagan, I would add). A quick Internet search can help you find them.

    Hank, I just watched a video of you in which you suggest the importance of using science in important discourses about world events, and of offering "constructive" commentary.

    Yet here you summarily dismiss and in fact mock an entire field of study. And it is indeed a field of study. Have you ever observed a trained astrologer at work? There is a great deal of study involved. Do you possess the extraordinary insight or have at your disposal a preponderance of reliable scientific evidence that definitively debunks astrology in its entirety? If I seem to be contradicting my first statement saying sometimes demanding proof against a thing doesn't prove its merit, it's because I have on occasion personally been privy to an astrologer friend's predictions -- before, during and after events -- that were very impressive in their accuracy. It's also because, ah, heck, I was born under the sign of Libra, and Librans tend to argue both sides of a thing.

    I wonder what warrants your complete rejection of astrology with such confidence and certainty.

    You might find this article interesting. It's kind of balanced. We Librans enjoy balance, I tell ya: http://biguniverse.co.cc/will-march-19-supermoon-trigger-natural-disasters

    I'm not trying to be wholly argumentative. Librans prefer harmony. I wanted to weigh in because we Librans like it when people are open-minded. We Librans also dislike it when people claim absolute authority without cause.

    Seriously, though, there is far too much trashing of those with differing or positions. It's anything but scientific. Then again, scientists argue all the time. Oh, there I go again with the back and forth arguing. That is such a Libran trait!

    Gerhard Adam
    We Librans enjoy balance
    What makes you so sure you're a Libra?
    http://www.exohuman.com/wordpress/2011/01/horoscope-hang-up-earth-rotation-changes-zodiac-signs/
    Do you possess the extraordinary insight or have at your disposal a preponderance of reliable scientific evidence that definitively debunks astrology in its entirety?
    What you fail to grasp is that science does not have the obligation to debunk every crackpot idea that comes along.  If astrology is legitimate, then it must demonstrate why it should be considered scientific.  I will say that if you can't even get the zodiac right, then it doesn't offer much hope that any of the rest of it works either.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hey hanky Panky:
    You still on for that "bet" I offered? Since your the so called expert, maybe you should go on youtube and put in the keywords:
    Jim Berkland

    Fox news and other news shows had him on. He's former USGS. He predicted the 89 quake in CA. Listen to what he says about the recent ring of fire activity. Listen to what he says about tomorrows "super moon".

    Gerhard Adam
    Oh yeah ... I've been scanning the papers for missing cats and dogs ...

    I do find it interesting that they have to go back to 1989 to find the last one he predicted correctly.  Seems like he missed a rather large one recently.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Hank
    I still can't figure out the bet.  He is saying if there is a 10.0 he pays 10K but unless there are 30 solid days of 0.0 I lose a thousand.   Unlike him, I know how many earthquakes are per day so I am guaranteed to lose.   I can't figure out why people are not complaining about USA Today or any number of other places that have later written the same thing.  I guess they don't have a comments section.
    This has been a hugely entertaining thread. A lot more interest here than in, say, the Higgs limits, or BLEVE stuff. So, to gain a large volume of readers, you simply write something that the 'moonies' and other assorted nut cases can object to. Simple.

    Your patience with the fringe elements is amazing.

    I want to get this in before the supermoon phenom blows my internet connection. Wait. It's HAARP that's gonna do that. Or was it the illuminati?

    Gerhard Adam
    The problem is that if another earthquake should strike, then we'll be up to our ears in people claiming that it was predicted and it's all part of the "supermoon" phenomenon.  Astrologers and conspiracy theorists will be crawling out of the woodwork then.

    Apparently, "coincidence" is not a word in their vocabulary. 

    Hmmm ... wonder if HAARP is up tonight?  Those bastards will probably cause another quake just to mess with our blog postings.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Great article! Also, I'll never understand as to why people want to believe that the world is going to end the next day/week/month/year. I mean why would someone want to ignore science and instead live in a state of constant dread? I don't get it : /

    Weak! l want my 30 secs back

    Hank
    It's the 19th and the world hasn't ended yet - I am hopeful some astrologers will say they held hands and concentrated really hard and held off the world's destruction and they'll have to live unappreciated for it. 

    I am certainly going to get outside tonight and look.   That 1% closer than it might otherwise be probably won't be noticeable to me and any gravity effects are only detectable by NASA but I will still try.
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    It seems like quite a battle of wits may be going on then, if this Youtube is correct, some people may even be praying FOR these earthquakes as a sign to show atheists the power of God. Hopefully, she can't be real, but I think the guys at the end are, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcikNCsilHk
    My article about researchers identifying a potential blue green algae cause & L-Serine treatment for Lou Gehrig's ALS, MND, Parkinsons & Alzheimers is at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    I could've gone all day without seeing that video.

    Oh those nutcases (our own Falwell and Robertson) at the end are definitely real.  They've actually said and done much worse.  Unfortunately, whether she's real or not, she sounds like too many that actually feel that way. 

    This is one reason why I can appreciate the desire to be permissive in people's beliefs, inevitably there is a conflict that must be resolved and if religion wins, then irrationality can be the only result.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Aitch
    ...if this youtube is correct...

    guess not....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_szTjTKQsk&feature=related.

    It's been spoofed already

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHN9AWtHYqU&NR=1

    Aitch
    You should do a test and see if you can jump higher too, or see if you weigh slightly less, Lmfao!

    Gerhard Adam
    I don't know ... I see all kinds of things floating around today ... no doubt due to the increased gravitational pull of the "supermoon".  I suppose it could just be the wind.
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    I suppose it could just be the wind.

    Have you tried magnesium hydroxide?  ;-)
    Well it's full and I haven't seen anything more unusual than average on the innerwebs. Still a few hours to go here in the midwest tho.

    I took a good long look at the moon and I can't tell that it's any larger than it was last month. Uncalibrated eyeballs I suppose.

    Hank
    My brother took some nice pictures last night and it looked bright but, I agree, I didn't feel like I could jump higher and our chairs were not sucked toward the moon.    Thus, it is impossible ("but nothing is impossible to reeeeeeal scientists") the moon's gravity was causing tectonic plates under billions of tons of water to move.
    Gerhard Adam
    The problem is that people don't have any real sense of probabilities.   When someone comes along with predictions that occur over a sufficiently large period of time, then it ends up looking like something phenomenal occurred.

    From extreme coastal tides to severe storms to powerful earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, the entire natural world surges and spasms under the sway of the SuperMoon alignment - within three days either way of the exact syzygy, as a general rule. SuperMoon solar eclipses tend to have a wider sphere of impact, extending roughly a week before and after the actual event. And other lunar extremes (of declination, for example) can extend the geocosmic stress window by a day or two here and there in any case.
    http://www.astropro.com/features/articles/supermoon/
    Just from this explanation, the probabilities already extend from 1:10 to 1:4, so it would be more surprising if something didn't happen given such a liberal prediction criteria.
    Mundus vult decipi
    logicman
    I predict that 9 months hence there will be a statistically significant increase of births among believers in astrological predictions.

    The rationale:

    Such people would form a majority of the people most likely to go out and stare at the supermoon.

    After a while, they would get bored.

    Bored believers in astrology, finding themselves in amenable company, do what bored people do globally.

    etc.
    lol Patrick. I can hardly wait.

    "Just from this explanation, the probabilities already extend from 1:10 to 1:4, so it would be more surprising if something didn't happen given such a liberal prediction criteria."

    About like reading your horoscope in the daily blab.
    (I have a brother-in-law who actually believes the horoscope is written just for him! Thank Zeus he doesn't come around often.)

    Ishigaki tsunami happened in 1771, not 1971.

    I guess you might be interested on this about supermoon and the prediction of a 7.0 monster that really did happened yesterday that hit Myanmar

    …we are having on the 19th of this month not only the full moon, but within an hour the closest approach of the moon to the earth until the year 2016. The next day is the equinoctial tides. So you’re bringing together three of the maximum tide raising forces. We know about the ocean tides. But there is also an Earth tide. And there is a tide in the ground water. All of these help to release sudden, built up strain, and cause earthquakes… what I call a seismic window, this top seismic window in years is developing between the 19th and 26th of this month. And this was 7.0 monster and it says geologist had warned about it. And a week earlier, the they were talking about the tides, not to worry about the really tides coming up. I think there is worry here too…

    here's the link

    http://www.getxnews.com/2011/03/supermoon-bad-moon-rising-predictions-as...

    Gerhard Adam
    Interesting, except for the fact that it's complete nonsense.
    ...it is scientifically proven that SuperMoons were seen and documented in the years 1955, 1974, 1993 and 2005.
    http://www.getxnews.com/2011/03/supermoon-bad-moon-rising-predictions-astrology-scientific-evidence-and-memes-of-an-imminent-monumental-global-disaster/
    Which simply isn't true, but even more interesting is this:
    Clearly there's a lot of confusion about what's really a SuperMoon. I know, because I created and defined the term in an article published over 30 years ago. When I see people misrepresenting the idea, not really understanding it at all, I feel impelled - not compelled - to try and set the record straight. Words mean things, after all . . . For example, referring to the date of the last SuperMoon as 18 years ago - as several media reports are doing lately - is completely wrong. There are 4-6 SuperMoons a year on average. The one on March 19, 2011 is in fact the closest SuperMoon of the year, but it's not by any means the first one in 18 years, nor even the first extreme SuperMoon in 18 years. The truth is, March 19 will be the second SuperMoon this year, and we only have to go back to January 30, 2010 to find the last example of an extreme SuperMoon; as revealed in my tables published in the last century.
    http://www.astropro.com/features/articles/supermoon/

    Mundus vult decipi