[Closed] At the current rate of deterioration in the global weather systems patterns!

Loum I have no idea, you want to help with me investigate our solar system and beyond?

OK junkyard good points you are also the winner!

Can we get back to researching now?

Are all of these from the same website? and are we currently experiencing a period of reduced or nominal sunspot activity?

You know, there's a pattern here.

kaesae: wild unsubstantiated theory.

STW collective: actually, here's a load of well researched proof as to why that's implausible.

kaesae: *ignores that completely*, here's another wholly unrelated wild unsubstantiated theory.

STW collective: here's yet more proof, we took a while looking this up so we're sure it's right.

kaesae: Yes, but what about (something else entirely)

Repeat ad nauseum.

I put it to you, sir, that you are either a troll or a loon. And my money's on the former. You have no interest in learning anything, you just like wasting people's time. And for that reason, I'm oot.

Do you want to know about sunspot activity or the suns output as they are not the same thing

Yes same website
http://www.skepticalscience.com/

This can be viewed as ether impartial science or pro global warming if you wish.
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml

for sun spots but they have minimal affect on TSI Total Solar Irradiance

Please just use google

At the left side of the sunspot page on wikipedia there is a reconstruction of sunspot activity

"Analysis of tree rings has revealed a detailed picture of past solar cycles: Dendrochronologically dated radiocarbon concentrations have allowed for a reconstruction of sunspot activity dating back 11,400 years, far beyond the four centuries of available, reliable records from direct solar observation"

at about 9,000 to 10,000 bc there is an exceptionally high amount of sunspot activity, is that what the graph means?

Its solar activity and not sun spot activity they have measured and they are not the same thing.
We nned to look at the sun for the later but we can use proxy measures [ ie dendrochronology] for the former

EDIT:Whilst there is a relationship between sunspots it is not the case that they affect output in the sense I think you mean and they are interrelated but separate things
Say floods and rain we could have no floods and yet have more rain than last year when we had three floods- same with sun spots - sun spots does not necessarily by itself indicate solar output any more than flood measures tell us how much rain we have had this year.

Junkyard, what if we say that the effects that we are seeing on earth in our atmosphere could be caused by stellar forces.

If this is or is not the case, should be able to be answered by evaluation and then inclusion for further analysis or exclusion due to elimination.

To me the characteristic of sun spots are similar to that of a tornado, hurricane, or any other wind based vortex. However they are magnetic in structure.

Firstly I would like to better understand sun spots, is a sun spot or is it not a vortex of magnetic energy that passes through the sun? or does it only exist within the sun?

[quote=kaesae]At the left side of the sunspot page on wikipedia there is a reconstruction of sunspot activity

[quote=kaesae]however it is not hard to prove anything these days and wikipedia will simply say what ever is popular.

It's laughable.

Really, are you actually serious.?

I have no idea what you mean by stellar forces but the second graph above is about comic* radiation and how it is declining but temperature increasing,

EDIT: *I mean cosmic but it seemed like a good typo to leave in for this thread 😀

Cosmic forces, energy fields, magnetic or electromagnetic waves or fileds, stellar forces, any force that is out there in the universe,

stellar stel·lar
? ?[stel-er] Show IPA
adjective
1.
of or pertaining to the stars; consisting of stars.

Forces
Is this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force

*checks in*

Where did we get to on the "several world floods"...

Oh.

Never mind.

*checks out and goes to bed*

Sides with Cougar - you must be a troll 🙄
Yes i know what Stellar means and I know what force means my only confusion is WTF you mean when you use them together.
See above graph ...leaves thread

Grahams we are waiting for a response from Edukator , since edukator has knowledge of geology his input would be very valuable and make any research much more easy, however if we don't hear from him because he is too busy or doesn't want to be involved, then we can continue without him, all be it at a slower pace.

I don't see how seismic activity can be reducing? we are seeing major earth quakes in very close proximity in terms of time scale to each other.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/10_largest_world.php

Largest earth quakes in the world since 1900, 6 out of 17 earth quakes have happened since 2000, what percentage is that? 2004, 2005, 2007, then 2010, 2011, 2012, so for 3 years in a row we have had major seismic activity in the form of the most powerful earth quakes since 1900. I just don't see how seismic activity can be decreasing?

I just don't see how seismic activity can be decreasing?

Perhaps it's becuase you're ignorant of what a logical fallacy is and can't see just how many you are making? And no, I'm not about to tell you about them, other people have defined them better than I could and put them on the web all you have to do is look.

6 out of 17 earth quakes have happened since 2000, what percentage is that?

Grahams we are waiting for a response from Edukator , since edukator has knowledge of geology his input would be very valuable and make any research much more easy

Okay. Though perhaps if you suggested why you believe there have been "several world floods", (e.g. a source, or evidence or logical reasoning) or clarified what you mean (how many is "several"? when did they occur?) then Edukator would be better able to answer you.

I just don't see how seismic activity can be decreasing?

It's not [i]decreasing[/i]. It's just not [i]increasing[/i].

since 1900, 6 out of 17 earth quakes have happened since 2000, what percentage is that?

About 35% - but the percentage of big earthquakes falling in an arbitrary time period means very little.

From the same figures you could likewise say:
40% of the top 5 occurred in the early 1960s
or 50% of the top 8 earthquakes occurred between 1952-65

If you have read the USGS/BGS links I posted you'll know there are a number of external factors that must be considered when looking at the straight numbers for earthquakes:

- the number of seismographs and monitoring stations has increased exponentially since 1900, and the technology is more refined and sensitive, so more and more quakes of smaller and smaller scales are now recorded (the USGS mention they can even tell when explosives are used in mines!)

- earthquakes in populated areas are more likely to be recorded, so as population grows and spreads we get more reports

- global communications means we are much more likely to hear about earthquakes these days

- the numbers of recorded quakes and tremors takes a steep drop during the periods of the first and seconds world war, because people had other things to attend to.

All that applies to volcanoes too by the way.

But analysis of the data means BGS can happily state:

"Recent devastating earthquakes in Haiti, Chile and China, as well as magnitude 7+ earthquakes in Indonesia and California, might give the impression that earthquake activity is increasing.

In fact, a quick look at earthquake statistics over the last 20 years shows that this is not the case.

On average there are about 15 earthquakes every year with a magnitude of 7 or greater.

As with any almost random phenomena, the number of earthquakes each year varies slightly from this average, but in general, there are no dramatic variations. "

-- http://www.bgs.ac.uk/research/earthquakes/earthquakeActivity.html

Great! Can you tell me who funds the BGS? and are there other sources that can be used preferably ones that have independent funding to varify what is being said?

All of your arguments are aimed at being right

What exactly [i]is[/i] the aim of your "research" kaesae, if you're not aiming to be right?

If you want wrong answers I can give you lots of those too.

I wouldn't bother, he's already got plenty.

If you want wrong answers I can give you lots of those too.

Don't worry about that, he's got it covered already I think.

Right wrong answers you say graham.
So I have two children and one is a boy born on tuesday ....what are the odds that the other child is a boy 😉
Now that would confuse 😛

The aim of my research is to learn and understand, who gives a shit about being right or wrong?

If we go into a situation and learn all that we can, is that not the best way to ensure we get the most out of each situation?

Right and wrong is simply the way fools perceive the world, when you go down the right and wrong, winner or loser road, all you get is egotism fueled idiocy and games of the mind that have no real world benefits!

Junkyard, he's trying to work stuff out, don't take the pee.

Kaesae - what is it exactly that you wish to know about?

Right and wrong is simply the way retards see the world

Molgrips I am not sure he is we keep giving him information and his argument jumps around all over the place

He has no interest in truth therefore he has no interest in learning...why dont you try then?

Can you tell me who funds the BGS?

We do mainly, according to wiki:
"The BGS has an annual budget of £57M, about half of which comes from the government's Science Budget, with the remainder coming from commissioned research from the public and private sectors."
-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Geological_Survey

are there other sources that can be used preferably ones that have independent funding to varify what is being said?

"Independent funding"? Independent of what exactly?

The aim of my research is to learn and understand, who gives a shit about being right or wrong?

Well personally I prefer to learn and understand things that are actually correct or at least our best theory. YMMV.

Right and wrong is simply the way fools perceive the world, when you go down the right and wrong, winner or loser road, all you get is egotism fueled idiocy and games of the mind that have no real world benefits!

Hmmm.. I find you get informed, factual and reasoned debate that educates and challenges.

Again YMMV - particularly if you are not fond of facts or evidence and have none of your own to offer.

Kaesae,

I've been reseraching stellar forces and I've managed to find the following information

When the moon is in the Seventh House
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars

Could you incorporate this into some sort of theory

I detect a tone of nasty piss-taking on this thread that I do not think is called for.

Yep, play nice richmtb. Harmony and understanding please.
No more falsehoods or derisions.

He called us retards[since changed to fools] and if you search the thread the insults are largely from the person you are defending Molly with the odd piss take when folk are sick of it.

Perhaps you reap what you sow?

Your right Graham

its time to let some sunshine in

I detect a tone of nasty piss-taking on this thread that I do not think is called for.

Whereas, I detect a tone of jocular piss-taking on this thread that I do think is absolutely called for. (-:

With molgrips on this one tbh. A bit of mob mentallity and bullying seems to be developing.

Given the nonsence that Kaesae has been coming out with I think people have been remarkably restrained and that far more derision should be used.

I detect a tone of nasty piss-taking on this thread that I do not think is called for.

You are entitled to your opinion.

Personally speaking though, when someone spouts a load of bollx, and then ignores all form of factual correction he is offered, and just spouts more bollx, then calls everyone retards (then loses his bottle and changes it to fools) I think they deserve a healthy dose of piss taking.

(they don't listen to facts, or answer questions, so what's left ?)

Bullying have you read the thread

Considering the paucity of his argument and his reaction to facts we have been pretty gentle; there is lots of ammunition there

Have you seen how rude he is to those who he disagrees with?

See the last page where attempts were made to explain stuff to him and his reaction.
His debating style is somewhat luid, his ideas ill conceived and poorly explained [ in fact not at all]
He has been treated with kid gloves tbh given what he is spouting

It doens't look like Kaesae is trying to tell you stuff, he's outlining how he sees it and is inviting you to discuss it further. Taking the pee isn't helping. It only seems to serve to amuse you at someone else's expense. This I do not like.

I don't really understand how you can square this:

If we go into a situation and learn all that we can, is that not the best way to ensure we get the most out of each situation?

with this:

Right and wrong is simply the way fools perceive the world

If you're not concerned with what's right and what's not, then what have you got?

he's outlining how he sees it and is inviting you to discuss it further

And when we discuss it he ignores our answers and calls us egoists, fools and retards. 😕

Anyway, if this thread is moving from (partially) informed debate into pointless arguing then I'm out. [i]*flounce*[/i]

To be fair 'grips, I seem to remember a similar thread a couple of years ago where someone who had an idea about the way light travels through glass got a roasting from you and a couple of others. It is nice to see you have a different attitude these days.

I think some of you are being a little hard on the old K'man. You criticise him for not offering an argument when all you offer is contradiction. People shouldn't be so quick to dismiss someone's idea because they think its bunkum. A very quick (literally 5 mins) search starts to show professional researches looking at effects similar to what Kaesae is talking about. For example:

Title: Does the Sun work as a nuclear fusion amplifier of planetary tidal forcing? A proposal for a physical mechanism based on the mass-luminosity relation
Author(s): Scafetta, Nicola
Source: JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC AND SOLAR-TERRESTRIAL PHYSICS Volume: 81-82 Pages: 27-40 DOI: 10.1016/j.jastp.2012.04.002 Published: JUN 2012

Title: Multi-scale harmonic model for solar and climate cyclical variation throughout the Holocene based on Jupiter-Saturn tidal frequencies plus the 11-year solar dynamo cycle
Author(s): Scafetta, Nicola
Source: JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC AND SOLAR-TERRESTRIAL PHYSICS Volume: 80 Pages: 296-311 DOI: 10.1016/j.jastp.2012.02.016 Published: MAY 2012

Title: Phase lags of solar hemispheric cycles
Author(s): Murakoezy, J.; Ludmany, A.
Source: MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY Volume: 419 Issue: 4 Pages: 3624-3630 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20011.x Published: FEB 2012

All of these are articles that cite a paper which was found through this site:

http://www.nasca.org.uk/index.html

A website which is very questionable.

Kaesae, while I don't agree with many (most) of your ideas or the way you communicate them, I like that you are thinking about things.

Thing is there are actaully far more interesting and weird theories out there that have some actual basis in science

Give [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle ]Holographic Principle[/url] a try.

There is plenty of stuff to debate without just randomly throwing about words like "stellar", "cosmic" and "forces"

To be fair 'grips, I seem to remember a similar thread a couple of years ago where someone who had an idea about the way light travels through glass got a roasting from you and a couple of others.

I don't really remember, but I do try in general (and always have as an adult) to restrict my piss taking to light ribbing. I don't like to properly attack people, although sometimes I am misinterpreted.

I don't think Kaesae is trying to tell us that silly things are actually true though, despite how it appears.

I don't think he knows much about science or how to think about things scientifically, but he's admitted that several times. With that in mind, I can't see how he's trying to persuade us of any facts.

I don't think Kaesae is trying to tell us that silly things are actually true though, despite how it appears.

I don't think he knows much about science or how to think about things scientifically, but he's admitted that several times. With that in mind, I can't see how he's trying to persuade us of any facts.

Agree and agree.

I just felt the tone of the thread had swung from gentle ribbing/massively patronising to bit more like bullying. Which I didn't think was fair.

I have proposed a possible alternative cause for what is happening to this world and solar system.

what?

...to restrict my piss taking to light ribbing

...for their pleasure.

well he is a giver

It doens't look like Kaesae is trying to tell you stuff, he's outlining how he sees it and is inviting you to discuss it further. Taking the pee isn't helping. It only seems to serve to amuse you at someone else's expense. This I do not like.

Ripping the pish out of stupid people isn't big or clever.
It is fun though, and I would just like to thank kaesae for his sterling work in providing such a large and slow moving target

kaesae - Member

The aim of my research is to learn and understand, who gives a shit about being right or wrong?

The aim of my research is to learn and understand, who gives a shit about being right or wrong?

The stupidity of this statement is quite frankly staggering.

You call what you are doing "research"

And yet you say you don't give a shit wether it is right or wrong.

If thats the case, seriously, what you are doing is not "Research" of any kind.

It just called "reading random stuff online"

[img] [/img]

Dumbledore is a liar.

It was Yoda that said that !

Dumbledore is a liar.
It was Yoda that said that !

Level 1 😀

The aim of my research is to learn and understand, who gives a shit about being right or wrong?

If we go into a situation and learn all that we can, is that not the best way to ensure we get the most out of each situation?

Right and wrong is simply the way fools perceive the world, when you go down the right and wrong, winner or loser road, all you get is egotism fueled idiocy and games of the mind that have no real world benefits!

How about if we forget all of the other parts of this thread and say that they were a means by which we could all express ourselves and agree on how we should behave if we want to achieve a stable environment that could potentially lead to progress in researching this?

I have some questions for anyone really but in particular anyone with an understanding of geology.

Is there any body of work that has recorded or indexed signs of excessive flooding around the world left on rock formations?

Also is there any anthropological studies that have focused on mass migrations of humans and their causes?

Is there any other ways that anyone can think of to identify areas of flooding on a large scale?

Also is there any kind of record left in rocks or ancient tree's or anything else for us to be able to evaluate rain fall in certain areas around the world at different periods in history?

Is there any body of work that has recorded or indexed signs of excessive flooding around the world left on rock formations?

It's widely studied. Geologists are always looking for such evidence, it tells all sorts of stories about what's happened in the past. There was an absolutely gigantic flood event covering half the US Mid-West in one big flood at some point many thousands of years ago, there was a Horizon about it I think.

Also is there any anthropological studies that have focused on mass migrations of humans and their causes?

Er yeah, that seems to be a major topic of anthropology research.

Is there any other ways that anyone can think of to identify areas of flooding on a large scale?

There are loads. Sediment layers are a big one.

Also is there any kind of record left in rocks or ancient tree's or anything else for us to be able to evaluate rain fall in certain areas around the world at different periods in history?

Afaik they do this by looking at distribution of tiny animals and stuff like plant pollen, to identify what was living at a particular spot and thence conclude what the conditions were like.

You need to get yourself down the bookshop, the popular science section, and have a look for books on these subjects. It's all out there.

EDIT not the mid-west, the northwest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_Floods That's the one I was thinking of. However there are more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outburst_flood

Is there any body of work that has recorded or indexed signs of excessive flooding around the world left on rock formations?

It's widely studied. Geologists are always looking for such evidence, it tells all sorts of stories about what's happened in the past. There was an absolutely gigantic flood event covering half the US Mid-West in one big flood at some point many thousands of years ago, there was a Horizon about it I think.

Yeah possibly the largest flood ever known, carved vast canyons in as little as week.

You might also want to take a look at the history of the mediteranean sea. Its been a dry valley rather than a sea at least once in its history. The opening of the straights of Gibraltar and the flooding of the mediteranean is belived to be the foundation of the biblical deluge story.

The opening of the straights of Gibraltar and the flooding of the mediteranean is belived to be the foundation of the biblical deluge story

Yeah although I think that people are looking to find origins where there aren't necessarily any at all. The biblical flood story could have been entirely made up, and the fact that most cultures have a similar stories, even ones that didn't grow up anywhere near the Med.

Looks like large scale flooding is a common occurrence and happens regularly, how much of the polar ice caps have melted and do we know where the water from them is likely to be deposited?

Looks like large scale flooding is a common occurrence and happens regularly

Yep. No sign of those "[i]several world floods[/i]" that are "[i]part of a cycle that our planet goes through regularly[/i]" though?

Hmmm...

I take it I should feel impressed with your response or put off perhaps from posting by the general consensus that I am an idiot for voicing my thoughts, just for the record I am without a doubt everything you think of me and much more.

However I have managed to form a thought in my mind hallelujah! looking at it backwards to the normal view, do we have records of periods in the earths past when the weather was favorable, how regular and widespread are these areas and how long do these conditions normally last?

Ok Kaesae you've probably been asked this already but I'll try again.

There seem to be 5 options, which is right?

a. You really believe the 'non-mainstream theories' you post.
b. You are genuinely confused about these issues and looking for clarification.
c. You are some form of elaborate troll.
d. Sometimes a, sometimes b, sometimes c,
e. [url=

calling orson, this is mork calling orson...[/url]

I take it I should feel impressed with your response or put off perhaps from posting by the general consensus that I am an idiot for voicing my thoughts, just for the record I am without a doubt everything you think of me and much more.

Please don't play the martyr card again. I am not attacking you, only your argument.

You didn't voice a thought, you stated really quite categorically:
"[i]There have been several world floods, it's part of a cycle that our planet goes through regularly..."
[/i]
I'm simply pointing out that some regional flooding is not the same thing as a several global floods.

do we have records of periods in the earths past when the weather was favorable,

Favourable to what? We could use proxy measures for climate but no one can tell you weather on a given day or year.
A number of folk have explained the difference between weather and climate on this thread

Yes I did state and actually believe that we can see flooding that affects the entire world, not as in the whole world is under several feet of water, but flooding that effects all of the major land masses to varying degree's.

We could call this period a world flood or a world storm, after having observed how wet it has been for the past few years, it is not hard to imagine a world where there are large areas under water or when our capacity to produce sufficient food to support the UK's population will occur.

Perhaps we do not need to worry about the weather or earth quakes, maybe an eruption or two, the human race is so powerful that we need concern ourselves with nothing but amusing ourselves.

On the other hand perhaps we are a race going through the evolutionary equivalent of puberty and will wake up to the current situation and threats that we face!

not as in the whole world is under several feet of water, but flooding that effects all of the major land masses to varying degree's.

Right! See I'm not sure I'd call that a "world flood", but yes if we continue to see melting of the polar ice caps then more water will be released into the world's oceans potentially causing the sea levels to rise and [i]some[/i] areas to be flooded.

Another issue is that the introduction of lots of fresh water might alter salinity levels potentially endangering some sealife and altering natural currents.

But the oceans are very large so it really depends how much ice cap we lose.

There is a possible feedback mechanism whereby the melting glacial ice causes trapped greenhouse gases to be released whilst also providing less "white" to reflect back the sun.

Which would be bad.

My understanding is that all the water here is all the water we have ever had so I am not sure where we get the water from for a massive world flood - by which I assume you mean a worldwide flood with lots of areas flooded but not the entire world underwater

If you have flooding that effects the entire world, how would you describe that event?

World flood, is being used as that's how those who experienced it in the past described it, as well as a world storm which is also handy because it gives us an incite into the cause of the flooding.

We as a lot of you have mentioned previously have a record of great floods caused by rain or storms, the floods from the Bible or Torah and an exodus of animals and plants in a ship, however both of those records are translations of a much older Egyptian text in my opinion.

It is not possible for us to determine how accurate those accounts are, however we can say that those floods were caused by torrential rain fall that lasted for a prolonged period.

If we are seeing rain of biblical proportions now, how much would we estimate would fall in the time scale mentioned in the bible? also if we use our current rain / water levels now and then increase them over a suitable period until they are in line with those time scales mentioned in the bible, how long do we think we have at the current rate of deterioration until the situation becomes untenable?

As for seismic activity, recently there have been quite a few major catastrophic events for our race and although events like these happen more regularly than I would like, those of recent years have been quite unrelenting and large in scale, even compared to other similar events in the past.

Not only are we seeing activity from Iceland's volcanoes but we are also seeing activity from Etna as well, I personally have to give my own experiences priority over what I am being told, having been affected by flooding and an active volcano recently our country needs to start asking questions.

Also when I look at the earth quake that affected japan, japan is constantly being hit with earth quakes, they are a simple way of life over there, all of their defenses, strategies and counter measures are formed with earth quakes in mind. Yet look at the magnitude of the earth quake that hit them and the amount of devastation it caused.

http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/1229-japan-earthquakes-surprising-rupture-110420.html

What we are seeing is several earth quakes worth of energy being expelled, over a prolonged period. However in my opinion conditions exist in this same area for a much larger quake, not only is it possible, I would consider it a matter of time before we see a greater more devastating quake strike Japan, in the near future.

After skimming a few answers: I haven't got time to check the detail as the MTB club rides out shortly:

Given the climatic zones a world flood from regular weather is nigh on impossible. A big meterorite landing in the sea might evaporate enough water to produce rain over the whole planet.

The Med dried up and filled a few times as evaporate deposits indicate. Quite recently in geoligical terms but before man turned up a couple of million years ago.

Glaciation cause sea levels to fall and the sea level is currently rising. Sea level changes are on the scale of tens of metres for smaller glaciations and more than 100m for the really big ones. If what's left of the ice melts then we'll lose a lot of coastal cities and the coast line will change but not much when viewed from space. The last glacaiation wasn't a particularly powerful one so sea levels didn't drop more than a few tens of metres. Plates rebound when the weight of ice is removed so some areas rise.

Plate tectonics build mountains and create ocean trenches. These changes are very slow taking place over tens of millions of years. Plates crash, mountains rise and trenches form, the mountains are eroded and the sediment dumped in the seas leveling things out. Even in the calmest tectonic periods there's still a lot left sticking out though.

Plate tectonics flod area

Edukator is it possible for continents or plates to sink and rise or even drift at any kind of decent speed?

Before I forget, think about all of the water released from the ice caps melting but also from the rain forests being cut down, that water will then be incorporated into already existing weather systems.

World flood, is being used as that's how those who experienced it in the past described it, as well as a world storm which is also handy because it gives us an incite into the cause of the flooding.

the world wasn't very big a few thousand years ago. a single village would have been the whole world for those who lived in it - if the village flooded, it would have seemed as if the whole world had been flooded.

the inundation of the black sea would have been a bit scary - but even that can not be described as a 'world flood'

is it possible for continents or plates to sink and rise or even drift at any kind of decent speed?

when continental plates decide to really get a shift on, they can zip around at several centimetres/year.

although earthquakes can cause movement of a few metres, in a few minutes...

http://www.emsc-csem.org/#2

http://www.emsc-csem.org/Earthquake/world/M5/

Can anyone tell me if the moment magnitude scale takes into account the duration of the quake?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_magnitude_scale

If I wanted to study all seismic activity for these large scale seismic events, in terms of the actual quake. how the energy manifested, how long it lasted also it characteristics and then any activity in the area it happened leading up to the quake and then afterwards?

Are there any webs sites or any way to get this info?

The water that falls as rain actually comes from the sea in the first place. So the increase in sea level that would come from all the rain is counteracted by the drop in sea level from the air sucking up the required water.

Re seismographs - you might find some in news sites or something, but probably not for all quakes.

Remember, even if [b]all[/b] of the sea-ice melts the water level will not rise. It's only land-based ice that causes this affect.

is this research for some sort of doomsday cult?

7.4 magnitude quake yesterday El Salvador.

http://www.emsc-csem.org/Earthquake/earthquake.php?id=282957

How much power/energy does something like that have? anyone actually have experience of quakes or eruptions?

7.4 magnitude quake yesterday El Salvador.

How much power/energy does something like that have?

[url= http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+much+energy+in+a+magnitude+7.4+earthquake ]let me google that for you[/url]

Magnitude is a measure of power- think of it like throwing a 5 magnitude stone in a lake or a 7.4 magnitude one in a lake. Which has the most power?
Note also it is a logarithmic scale [ ordinal is 1 , 2 ,3 etc where the gap is always the same with this logarithmic scale
an increase of one step on this logarithmic scale corresponds to a 10 to power of 1.5 or 32 times increase in the amount of energy released, and an increase of two steps corresponds to a 10 to the power of 3 = 1000 times increase in energy.

The magnitude is a measure of the energy at the point of the earthquake just like we could measure the power of the "magnitude stone" thrown in to the water or the moment magnitude.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_magnitude_scale

Had a tremor a few times in the UK but never anything large

Why can't we just measure the earth quake and judge it by what occurs within each second of continuous seismic activity and also apply any other techniques but within that one second segment time frame.

I want to see exactly what is happening in a wave format with all relevant info, every aspect of the earth quake that we can monitor and observe the patterns of, should be monitored.

Surely there is a better way with 40+ years of technological advancement, to monitor seismic activity?

druidh - Member

Remember, even if all of the sea-ice melts the water level will not rise. It's only land-based ice that causes this affect.

Though, the impact on salination levels and currents would still be interesting.

Also, the penguins'll be right pissed off, and I know what I'm more worried about.

kaesae - Member

Why can't we just measure the earth quake and judge it by what occurs within each second of continuous seismic activity and also apply any other techniques but within that one second segment time frame.

I want to see exactly what is happening in a wave format with all relevant info, every aspect of the earth quake that we can monitor and observe the patterns of, should be monitored.

Surely there is a better way with 40+ years of technological advancement, to monitor seismic activity?

That's exactly what they do! You've never seen a seismometer? But you have to summarise that information in order to get usable data when you're dealing with large samples.

Druidh, wouldn't the ice that is above the water level add to our current situation and the more ice that melds the more volcanoes will become active or more active in terms of the ones that are already active.