Is it just me or did anyone else have the same thoughts?

Natural disaster in a coincidental area or divine retribution for the abuse of religion as weapon of death. Not being a religious personage, I tend towards what we sow, we reap.

I am not big into karma, but the devastation of natural disasters could be mitigated by having more money that is not tied up in military expenditures.

Is it just me or did anyone else have the same thoughts?
.No. I thought, a natural and periodic consequence of movement along thrust faults arising from the subduction of India beneath the Asian craton at an average rate of 1.6 inches per annum. If you live on a flood plain you will occasionally get flooded. If you live in the shadow of a volcano you'll occasionally get erupted over. If you live near a plate margin you will occasionally experience a devastating earthquake. End of story.

lighten up oh moth eaten one, or was that an enlightened reply ;)

I tend to think by Ophiolite's way, with a tragic feel of course.

These recent serious earthquakes could be signs of a deeper problem.

One that comes to mind is the melting of the ice caps and the affect this will have on the angular momentum of the Earth's spin.

Any axial realignment generates very large precessional forces.

Can our crust take the changes. Time will tell.

These recent serious earthquakes could be signs of a deeper problem.The amount of melting that has occured so far has had no significant effect on the distribution of mass. The serious earthquakes are a sign that we have always had serious earthquakes. The effects of the serious earthquakes are a sign that there are many more of us to be effected, and more efficient media to tell us about them.

Is it just me or did anyone else have the same thoughts?
I'm sure its not just you, but I am certainly not one of the nuts that had such outlandish absurd thoughts.

locked

Warning to all those new to science and interested in learning more, please be aware that the previous post is by an indiviual, who to put it kindly, is operating with one subduction zone short of a full tectonic plate.
Dwayne, what is it you derive from posting this nonsense?

Edit: The post referred to has been deleted. Trust me: it was a beauty.

HAARP! :p

- N

Probally one of the most interesting events of this is the motion of the moon, given the vaules that the atmopshere has in moving the moon closer to earth, being some 105 miles, the magnetic pole reversal and the ionzation of the earths crust will have a greater effect, it is therefor appreant that during a magnetic pole reversal that the moon will come very close to the earth, meaning that the earth wil recapture the moon

Where oh where do you come up with this stuff? Do you actually believe in what you are saying in this sentence? I'd like you to prove any of this please, or is this something only you theorize that will happen?

Anyway, to take it onto a somewhat dodgy line of argument, the earthquake could be taken any way-
as Divine retribution for not being sufficiently religious
-as Divine retribution for supporting irreligious fanatics
- as divine retribution for being of the wrong religion
- as a means of testing your submission to gods will

and so on. Given that there is no way to test any of them properly, they are merely speculations, and have nothing to do with the simple fact that a tectonic plate moved.

:bugeye:

This is a random remark. Thursday and Friday night I had nightmares that an earthquake ravished where I live and everywhere around it. It was a dream when you feel like you're first hand experiencing the trauma and fear. I woke up and told my boyfriend as usual when we share interesting dreams and then he informed me of the quake in pakistan. I'm not going to jump to a conclusion and say I had a preminition but this 'dream' effected me unusually. Tell me your thoughts. I found this dream a rather interesting coincidence.

can in addition cause the moon to move a distance of 105 miles closer to the earth

According to NASA's own figures the Moon is - leaving the Earth actually - not getting closer.

First you need to understand why the moon is moving away from the Earth. It is due to the Tides. As the Moon creates tidal bulges on the Earth, these bulges are pulled forward by the Earth's rotation. As the Moon tries to pull the bulges back into alignment, it produces a torque which slows the Earth's rotation and transfers angular momentum to the Moon. As a result, the Moon is pushed into a higher orbit. Now, for the Earth to do the same with respect to the Sun, the same mechanism would be involved. Now the Earth is 81 times more massive than the Moon, so for that part, its tidal effect on the Sun would be larger. But the Earth is also 400 times further away from the Sun than the Moon is from the Earth, and tidal effects fall off by the cube of the distance. Thus the Relative tidal effect of the Earth on the Sun is much smaller than that of the Moon on the Earth, so Earth's recession rate would be much smaller than the Moon's. But let's say, just for the sake of argument, that the Earth receded at the same rate as the Moon, 4cm a year. At that rate, in 1 million years, the Earth would be 40 km further away from the Sun than now. That increase would be to its average distance. Since the Earth already travels around the Sun in an ellipse, its distance from the Sun varies by 5 million kilometers over the course of a year. A 40 km increase in average distance would not be noticeable. (Especially considering the fact that the even the 5 million kilometer variation has a negligible effect on Earth's temperature. The Earth is actually closest to the Sun during the Northern Hemisphere's winter.) In fact, the Earth varies it's distance from the Sun by a few thousand km every few weeks, as it and the moon do their monthly waltz around their mutual center of gravity. 40 km over 1 million years would be a drop in the ocean.

The moon will not actually leave Earth orbit, once the Earth Rotation has slowed to the point that it matches the period of the Moon's orbit, the Moon will stop receding.

That pakistan government spends so much money on its nuke program, while its people are some of the poorest in the world.

This is the problem with so called third world countries or whatever you want to call them, their people live in "poor" conditions without many of the facilities we in the west take for granted. Yet these same governments can afford nukes, jet fighters, tanks, guns, bullets, palatial residences, trips to conferences all over the world etc etc. They get nothing from me, so called charity begins at home, let their own governments stop wasting money first, then I will help.

But, on the other hand, what exactly is poverty? I saw a kid in South Africa in the tv in a news item, walking along the Johnanisburg street, in raggy clothes, but carrying/using a mobile phone!!

locked

:bugeye:

This is a random remark. Thursday and Friday night I had nightmares that an earthquake ravished where I live and everywhere around it. It was a dream when you feel like you're first hand experiencing the trauma and fear. I woke up and told my boyfriend as usual when we share interesting dreams and then he informed me of the quake in pakistan. I'm not going to jump to a conclusion and say I had a preminition but this 'dream' effected me unusually. Tell me your thoughts. I found this dream a rather interesting coincidence.

The east coast of the USA is in for a major earthquake someday, certainly--the rocks there are a lot older and harder, and therefore more brittle, so they don't deform like the younger, comparitively softer rocks of the west coast.