Amit;
1) Can you show me an example of that? 2 quakes of equal mag and location.
Your cycle theory is simply wrong. The moon has nothing to do with quakes.
If it did, you would not have failed my long term test.
2) There are quakes not on plate boundaries but we do know why. Subduction zones for example.
Quakes related to volcanos for another.
Yes, your hits are due to chance. Otherwise you would not have failed my test.
Roger
AND ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS
Roger
OK, As you wish
1)As per plate tectonic theory, 7.5+ quake can occur at same location only after stresses built up again ,may be 50 years , 100 years , you specify
now look at the following quakes
a)7.9 at 10.51 UTC,at 4.5 south and 153.2 East, on 17th December 2016...PNG
b) 7.9 at 4.30 UTC, at 6.24 South and 155.17 East on 22nd January 2017....PNG
c)7.5 at 13.28 UTC at 6.7 south and 155 East on 19th April 2014....PNG
d)7.5 at 1.44 UTC at 5.46 South and 151.8 East on 5th May 2015.....PNG
e)7.5 at 12.58 UTC at 4.08 South and 152.56 East on 14th May 2019...PNG
Do you think 7.5+ quake equivalent stress can be accumulated in one month ?
How do you explain all these with plate tectonics ?
Ok next question
Look at the following quake
7.7 at Gujarat , India ( 23.4 North and 70.2 East) on 26th January 2001 at 3.16 UTC
Do you think there is volcano here
or plate boundary
or Subduction Zone
How do you explain this 7.7 major quake
SO , think out of the box
Old theories are not necessarily correct especially when it says ,it is unable to predict major quakes
Amit
1) Can you show me an example of that? 2 quakes of equal mag and location.
Your cycle theory is simply wrong. The moon has nothing to do with quakes.
If it did, you would not have failed my long term test.
2) There are quakes not on plate boundaries but we do know why. Subduction zones for example.
Quakes related to volcanos for another.
Yes, your hits are due to chance. Otherwise you would not have failed my test.
Roger
AND ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS
Roger
OK, As you wish
1)As per plate tectonic theory, 7.5+ quake can occur at same location only after stresses built up again ,may be 50 years , 100 years , you specify
now look at the following quakes
a)7.9 at 10.51 UTC,at 4.5 south and 153.2 East, on 17th December 2016...PNG
b) 7.9 at 4.30 UTC, at 6.24 South and 155.17 East on 22nd January 2017....PNG
c)7.5 at 13.28 UTC at 6.7 south and 155 East on 19th April 2014....PNG
d)7.5 at 1.44 UTC at 5.46 South and 151.8 East on 5th May 2015.....PNG
e)7.5 at 12.58 UTC at 4.08 South and 152.56 East on 14th May 2019...PNG
Do you think 7.5+ quake equivalent stress can be accumulated in one month ?
How do you explain all these with plate tectonics ?
Ok next question
Look at the following quake
7.7 at Gujarat , India ( 23.4 North and 70.2 East) on 26th January 2001 at 3.16 UTC
Do you think there is volcano here
or plate boundary
or Subduction Zone
How do you explain this 7.7 major quake
SO , think out of the box
Old theories are not necessarily correct especially when it says ,it is unable to predict major quakes
Amit
24 comments:
Amit;
VERY GOOD! That's the sort of response I like to see.
The answer to the first part is that it depends on a lot of things we don't even know about.
Stress migrates around the plate boundary as it is possible, depending on the shape and distance to the next lock point. In faults like the San Andreas, relatively straight, it may be a long time while in areas like you mention it will be much shorter since the total stress is not released by one quake.
I don't know the geology of India so can't answer the next question.
Roger
Amit;
Here's a test for you.
In the period 1973 to 2018 there were 6448 mag 6+ quakes in the NEC catalog.
That calculates out as 12.8 quakes per month or 1 every 2+ days.
So how can your 3 day windows miss so often?
Roger
Roger
We are talking about correctness of existing theory Plate tectonics.
Regarding my theory ,you have already given your opinion that it is useless
So ,let plate tectonics be correct first.
We will talk about ,what you believe correct and show how it is not correct or complete
Amit
Amit;
You may prove that I am wrong but that does not prove that you are right.
We may both be wrong and in fact, I have already shown that you ARE incorrect.
Roger
Roger
I am sorry
Nothing personal.
We are taking about exesting plate Tectonic theory. It is nothing yours or mine
Amit
Amit;
No, you're right; this is not personal and I hope I have not offended you.
Roger
Roger
Ok
we will not talk of existing plate tectonics ,since you say it may not be correct
Now for the test you have thrown open for me.....
Amit
Here's a test for you.
In the period 1973 to 2018 there were 6448 mag 6+ quakes in the NEC catalog.
That calculates out as 12.8 quakes per month or 1 every 2+ days.
So how can your 3 day windows miss so often?
Roger
This is because , 6+ quakes have a cluster on prone dates , they are not equally distributed ,so tat you can say 6+ quake every third day
Here is a proof
Take Japan quake of 9.5 on 11th March 2011
now between 10th March to 13 March 2011 , can you imagine how many 6+ quakes all over word
46
46 numbers of 6+ quakes in one window
There are 6+ quake spike and concentration on major quake day/prone dates
That is why taking average and saying there is one quake(6+) on third day is not correct
Amit
Roger
sorry....typo mistake...
between 10th March to 12th March 2011
Roger
Correct way,I think ,is...
to take one 6+ quake per three day window, even if ,there are more than one 6+ quake on given date
Amit
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1137945/earthquake-sea-tides-trigger-tremors-tectonic-plates-fracking
Watch out ,this is what may theory says
On the date when tidal pull is maximum , low tide and high tide both are extreme.
When it is high tide below crust it breaks open fault and hence quake
However ,when low tide below the crust there are splitting pull on fault and hence quake.
The reason shown here, water weight over crust is not correct.
Water weight of say 100 MTR is not compared to 100 km crust weight
Amit
Hello, you used to write excellent, but the last few posts have been kinda boring...
I miss your super writings. Past few posts are just a little bit out of track!
come on!
Your mode of telling everything in this paragraph is
truly good, every one be capable of simply know it, Thanks a lot.
Hi to every body, it's my first go to see of this weblog; this blog contains amazing and really good data designed for visitors.
I am not sure where you're getting your information, but great
topic. I needs to spend some time learning more
or understanding more. Thanks for excellent information I was
looking for this information for my mission.
Hello to every one, as I am actually eager of reading this web site's post to be updated regularly.
It contains fastidious information.
Hello.This post was extremely fascinating, especially because I was browsing for thoughts on this subject last couple of days.
I rarely drop comments, but i did a few searching and wound up here "Two questions raised by Roger and Answers".
And I do have 2 questions for you if it's allright.
Is it only me or does it look as if like some of these comments come across like
coming from brain dead folks? :-P And, if you are writing on additional places, I'd like to keep up with
everything fresh you have to post. Could
you list of the complete urls of your communal sites like your linkedin profile, Facebook page or twitter
feed?
Hey! This post could not be written any better! Reading through
this post reminds me of my old room mate! He always kept talking about this.
I will forward this page to him. Pretty sure he will have a good read.
Thanks for sharing!
Only wanna input that you have a very decent site, I like the design it really stands out.
Estaba buscando esta comunicacion hace mucho ciclo en internet y no la encontraba.
Estoy de convenio con lo que indicas. Gracias es un gran aportación. Un saludo.
Hi there, I enjoy reading all of your post. I like to write a little
comment to support you.
I rattling thankful to find this web site on bing, just what
I was searching for :D as well saved to bookmarks.
Great article, exactly what I was looking for.
I don't even know how I ended up here, but I thought this post was great.
I do not know who you are but certainly you are going to a famous blogger if you
are not already ;) Cheers!
Post a Comment