Tuesday, July 17, 2018

Morningstar predicts

James Concannon reports...

        Today, the self-styled "civilian intelligence analyst" and "specialist in photo interpretation, geometric analysis and computer imaging" (who can't tell the difference between a 166-mile wide space station and a 2ft sheet of mylar insulation) posted this prediction:
"Mars' passage close to Earth on July 31st, 2018 will created [sic] super storms like Katrina (again, as it did i 2003), along with volcanic activity and intense electrical storms around the globe. Be ready for something and anything."
We'll be watching.

Update 20th July:
Severe tornadoes ripped through Iowa, partly destroying Marshalltown. Nothing to do with Mars.

A different storm sank a boat in a Missouri lake, drowning 17. Nothing to do with Mars, either.

6.0 magnitude earthquake, Papua New Guinea. Nothing to do with Mars.

Update 21st July:
Scorching (110°F) weather in Texas, persistent drought in the UK. Nothing to do with Mars.

Update 22nd July:
5.9 magnitude earthquake, Kermanshah, Iran. Nothing to do with Mars.
Floods/landslides in Vietnam kill 21. Nothing to do with Mars.

Update 23rd July:
Record-breaking heatwave in Japan, dozens dead. Nothing to do with Mars.
5.9 magnitude earthquake, mid-atlantic ridge. Nothing to do with Mars.
Reports that Germany is running out of beer bottles because of a heatwave. Mars?

Update 24th July:
60 dead in Greek wildfires. Nothing to do with Mars.
Dam collapses in Laos. Hundreds missing. Nothing to do with Mars.

Update 25th July:
Exceptionally heavy rain on the East US coast brings flooding. Nothing to do with Mars.

Update 27th July:
Ambae island in Vanuatu evacuated as the Manaro Voui volcano began spewing ash. Nothing to do with Mars.

Update 28th July:
Severe storm (but not "super-storm") continues on US East coast. 500 buildings destroyed by fire in Redding, CA. Notable (although perhaps not "intense") electrical storm over the North Sea, extending into Germany. Nothing to do with Mars.

Update 29th July:
6.4 magnitude earthquake, Lombok, Inodnesia. 14 dead. Typhoon Jongdarinote 1 caused chaos in Japan. Mars is coming!!! (allegedly)

Robert Morningstar has now written that the effect of close approach will last for "at least three weeks." Clever — he hopes thereby to give himself a lot more time to claim that his predictions were accurate, and to guarantee that everyone will have forgotten his exact prediction by the time his window closes. I'm not buying it.

30th July ======== ZONE OF CLAIMED MARS INFLUENCE ==========
Typhoon Jongdari downgraded to "tropical storm."
California brush fires continued (having begun a week ago). The volcanic sequence in Hawaii continued (having begun 30 April). Some Indonesian volcanoes continued to belch (as they have been doing for a few thousand years).
A fairly impressive belt of lightning persisted over Europe, but electrical activity over the Americas was normal, and that over Oceania and Australasia abnormally quiet.

Lightning map, Oceania/Australasia 30 July 2018. Pretty peaceful.

That's about it for today.

31st July: 
Nothing to report today.

Morningstar reminds me that there's a tropical cyclone over Mexico, but, y'know, it's the season for that. There's nothing remotely unusual about this one.

1st August:
Nothing going on today. No major eruptions or earthquakes worldwide. Even the European lightning map shows much less activity. The Mexican tropical storm developed into a named event, "Hector," but it's a very junior hurricane with winds 35 knots gusting to 45.

======== END ZONE OF CLAIMED MARS INFLUENCE ==========

Now please see Robert Morningstar: FAIL!!! for an assessment.

=======================/ \======================
[1] July and August are peak months for typhoons (a.k.a. Pacific tropical cyclones). Over the period 1959-2015, those months saw average numbers of 3.9 and 5.4 respectively. In other words, it would be highly surprising if there were not any typhoons during this period (ref: Wikipedia).

59 comments:

Two Percent said...

Yeah! Brill!

Google tells me Katrina was in August 2005... But, of course, Mars done it.

I'll expect some more storms anyway, since we've been having them already. For a few million years, I guess.

It's not like a light switch, of course. On for one day... Mars will be "hanging around" for a while. Maybe Planet X Nibiru is hiding in Mars' shadow...

That'll be it, I reckon.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

WND publishes commentary from a large pool of contributing of journalists. The article you cite, reports on what another pundit has commented on. What Rush does in that article, is to debunk the Communists of whom support Russia, like the pot which calls the kettle black. How is what Rush does, any different than what you, Patrick, Oberg, and Robbins, do?

James Concannon said...

It bears no relation to the truth, that's what's different. This and the above comment belong to a different blogpost.

Two Percent said...

James Concannon said...

"This and the above comment belong to a different blogpost."

Hmmm. I'm confused. Which comment do you mean by "This"? Your own (and Orbs' one)?

FWIW, I consider this the perfect blogpost for my own comment. It's in exactly the same league as the original post.


Anyway, regarding your update:

"Severe tornadoes ripped through Iowa, partly destroying Marshalltown. Nothing to do with Mars.

A different storm sank a boat in a Missouri lake, drowning 17. Nothing to do with Mars, either.

6.0 magnitude earthquake, Papua New Guinea. Nothing to do with Mars.
"


This IS the "Mocking Pseudoscience Blog", right?

So, you can prove negatives, Mr Mocker? What's your evidence for your three statements, above? What's your (scientific) proof?

You see, James, the Universe is far, far more complex than we perceive. Maybe more than we ever could perceive. How do you know Mars has no meaningful influence on events on Earth? Because you currently don't know of any mechanism? How can you prove there isn't one?

Scientifically, I mean.

Like, first tell us about Quantum Entanglement, then tell me how you know Mars has no (meaningful) influence on Earth. Obviously, it has a tiny gravitational influence... Some of it's reflected (sun)light falls upon Earth... Some meteorites from it fall upon Earth... (That's only a relatively recent discovery.) Is that the last one we'll ever make regarding Mars' influence on Earth?

I await with bated breath!

James Concannon said...

If those three events have anything to do with Mars, then there's no point in the prediction at all, is there?

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

I'm no big fan of Rush, but all I could see that he was doing was pointing out the absurdity of illogical detractors who make shit up, James. Can you cite any specific statements he made that are honestly false?

James Concannon said...

I'll take this one:

“These people leveling these charges are a making it look like they are recent escapees from asylums and that they need to be sent back."

expat said...

I sometimes wish quantum entanglement had never been discovered. Pseudoscience has clung to it like a drowning man to a lifeboat, yelling "Aha!!! See???? This totally explains remote viewing/NDEs/American soldiers on Mars/Whatever other woo is hard to explain.

I'm not good enough at quantum mechanics to explain it thoroughly, but I do know it applies to photons (and other fundamental particles), not to planets separated by 57.6 x 10^6 km.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ivan Horn said...

The trouble with the "quantum mechanics did it" explantion of anything remotely strange, is that were this level of effect possible, then the universe would likely be too chaotic to be predictable on the physical level.

Wheras the universe around us is pretty predictable (I'm not talking about people... that's something else entirely). A tiny object can make it's through the solar system, guided by Newtonian mechanics, without it's course being swung hither and thither by spooky effects.

After all, why would these quantum effects be limited to creating the occasional "inexplicable" events, of the kind that believers in various kind of woo propose it as the source of. Why isn't the world full of more mundane things that suddenly move\transform etc. etc.

If Mars can have great effects at great distance, why is the glass of beer sitting next me me on my desk, seemlingly unaffected by my presense, or that of the cars passing by outside.

If these kind of effects are responsible for (quakes, eruptions, storms, famines... take your pick) then the world should be even more batshit than it already is.

Hmmm... I wonder if a tendency to believe in nonsense could be a quantum effect?

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

What if principals of Quantum Mechanics could be understood and applied? What if the UFO were actually a transport vehicle, which could be in two places, instantaneously at the same time? The speed of light would be irrelevant.

Saints Catherine de Ricci and Phillip de Neri, were witnessed to be conversing face to face with each other, in both Ricci and Neri, Italy, at the same time; a phenomenon called, 'Bi-Location'.

Two Percent said...

James Concannon said...

" If those three events have anything to do with Mars, then there's no point in the prediction at all, is there?"

While I don't entirely disagree, that's entirely not my point, which was that it's hypocritical to attempt to demolish pseudoscience with false science, or scientific fallacy, if you will.

Just because 'everyone' thinks there's no influence don't make it right; that ain't scientific.

Nice attempt at side-stepping the point, but not nice, really, as a (scientist?).


expat said...

" I sometimes wish quantum entanglement had never been discovered. Pseudoscience has clung to it like a drowning man to a lifeboat, yelling "Aha!!! See???? This totally explains remote viewing/NDEs/American soldiers on Mars/Whatever other woo is hard to explain.

I'm not good enough at quantum mechanics to explain it thoroughly, but I do know it applies to photons (and other fundamental particles), not to planets separated by 57.6 x 10^6 km.
"

I agree that Quantum Entanglement (likely) wouldn't account for Mars influencing major environmental effects here on Earth, again, as for James, that's not my point.

Of course, I also entirely agree, it's complete pseudoscientific bollocks to say QE explains Remote Viewing / NDEs / etc - without some pretty good evidence to support the statement(s). But, just like my (& Orbs') discussion about the Moon influencing Earthquakes on Earth (which I suggest there is evidence to support), it's very difficult to prove a negative - that the Moon doesn't influence earthquakes down here. Same goes for Mars. (Not necessarily in relation to Earthquakes, but 'events' in some currently undetected manner...)

I mean, who can say that the entire Solar System isn't in fact just an atom (or an electron, or something equivalent) in some much greater Universe? In that scenario, Mars and Earth might be very tightly bound in some way.

We don't know all the answers, though pseudoscientists would like us to believe that they do. Funny really, when you understand that we can't even see the edge of the Universe, in any direction. All we can see is the Observable part of it, within which, there is much that is invisible.

I'm just trying to uphold scientific standards here, which are very prone to slippage.

Two Percent said...


Not Sure how you get away such Off Topic posts, but never mind.

Joining in:


THE Orbs Whiperer said...

" October, 1988, I encountered... "

May I suggest a reframe or two? Don't you mean: ... observed...??? Or, do you really mean encountered? Think about it! ;-)


" ... but of course, way beyond the horizon."

How do you know that? Why not 'quite close', <5 miles, say?


" ... through binoculars, it was gone."

... not visible?

Did you check the time before AND after this sighting? Do you remember?


" ... perhaps it functions in accordance to principals of Quantum Mechanics?

Self-evident?

I mean, what doesn't? (Ah, James - Yes, perhaps in the field of Physics that we haven't yet discovered, as in Newtonian -> Relativistic -> ???)

But I understand what you mean - maybe it utilizes Quantum Mechanical techniques to achieve its capabilities, but again, I suggest, "It (virtually) has to!" It's just not practical to do those things, in the ordinary matter-based 'dimension'.

Imagine how much power you'd need to be able to accelerate a solid-matter ship to, say, c/2. A piffling 1/2 light year/year. You'd 'never' get anywhere interesting. The Universe would be an old man by the time you did. (Not to mention, how long you gonna live, what ya gonna breathe, eat, etc?)

Then, imagine slowing down again... The same amount of energy to lose... Put your ship into 'Reverse' - where's that energy going to go?

Besides, imagine what would happen if you collided with a space pebble, at c/2. (Actually, I don't really know how to imagine that. You would only be about 15% heavier, time 15% faster (back on Earth), but the forces involved in the collision... Whew. I don't know what would happen, but there would definitely be some sparks! If there isn't a Quantum-Mechanical interaction, that pebble is going straight through. Either way, not too good for your ship, or you...)

Therefore, long distance, high speed space travel must be achieved at the Quantum (or some other non-Newtonian) level.

Two Percent said...


Coincidentally:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/chinese-researchers-achieve-stunning-quantum-entanglement-record/

James Concannon said...

"Nice attempt at side-stepping the point, but not nice, really, as a (scientist?)."

In case you hadn't noticed, I'm just trying to establish a baseline of disaster so that the prediction can be judged fairly when the time comes.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Two Percent said...

James Concannon said...

" In case you hadn't noticed, I'm just trying to establish a baseline of disaster so that the prediction can be judged fairly when the time comes.

Aaaahhh!!! So THAT'S what you are trying to do. A Baseline! A few, subjectively selected items, over a few short days prior. Of course, the effect may already have begun...

Glad you didn't say "... assessed objectively / calculated statistically ..." or anything scientific like that!

Anonymous said...

So the "Orb Drooler" "knows" what it is saying. Perhaps a candid chat with its therapist and a change of meds is in order?

expat said...

Aggressive comment from Theadora disallowed. Plus two of [her] UFO experiences deleted—I'm not going to let this blog become a database of UFOs, no way.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

Prepare for potentially devastating Earthquakes between now through the first week of next month. La Palma, Canary Islands, might create mega-tsunami 1,500 feet high, engulfing the entire Atlantic coast lines. Delete this message and everybody's blood will be on your hands.

Two Percent said...

James,

Appreciate all the disaster updates...

But, it seems like quite an extraordinary chronicle of catastrophe.

Have you done any analysis to establish whether this is "normal" for this time of year, or is the Mars Effect already in full swing? I mean, if you're going to be scientific about it. Otherwise, what's the point?

..

James Concannon said...

High temperatures in July in the Northen hemisphere are hardly new, but the parching of the UK is being compared to 1976, which really was an outlier. I don't think the earthquake pattern is unusual.

If the Mars Effect is already in full swing, there's no point in AM*'s prediction is there? I'm going to give him one day either side of next tuesday. If within those three days some disaster occurs that clearly outlies my UNscientific chronicle he gets a hit.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

La Palma, of course, is in the path of the, Blood Moon, Eclipse, on the 27th.

Trekker said...

La Palma has been in the path of ANY lunar eclipse that has occurred when such an eclipse was visible from there. How is this one any different?

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

Which other eclipses do you specifically, refer to?

Higher and lower tides of this Super Moon, full eclipse, create greater weight of water that shits to and fro over tectonic plates which are as springs under pressure, like the lid of a, jack-in-the-box. The Jakarta 9.2 quake induced near instantaneous, mile high uplift along half the length of the undersea fault line. That's what caused the tsunami.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Two Percent said...

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

"... might create mega-tsunami 1,500 feet high, ..."

https://www.reuters.com/article/indonesia-earthquake-sumatra/aftershocks-rock-indonesia-after-massive-quake-calls-for-calm-idUSKCN0W41JC said:

"A 9.15-magnitude quake opened a fault line deep beneath the ocean on Dec. 26, 2004, triggering a wave as high as 17.4 metres (57 feet) that crashed ashore in more than a dozen countries to wipe some communities off the map in seconds.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

" The Jakarta 9.2 quake induced near instantaneous, mile high uplift along half the length of the undersea fault line. That's what caused the tsunami.

A mile high, like 5,280 feet? Some feat!

expat said...

Two long, discursive comments from Theadora disallowed. Not even [his|her] own work.

Long copy/pastes may be the norm on the Hidden Mission Forum, but not here.

Chris said...

The Orbs Whisperer: "Higher and lower tides of this Super Moon, full eclipse, create greater weight of water that shits to and fro over tectonic plates"

I don't think so. The effect of being near or at perigee is negligible compared with any effect from normal daily and weekly tidal activity.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...


La Palma,
Tide Chart.

Two Percent said...

Anonymous Chris said...

" I don't think so. The effect of being near or at perigee is negligible compared with any effect from normal daily and weekly tidal activity."

Can you back up your thinking with actual science? I don't think so.

Perigee [= closer to Earth, therefore stronger gravitational forces], plus syzygy [in this case, Full Moon = opposition, so pulled from both sides], is surely gonna have a larger than 'normal effect' (your words). Whether the 'effect' produces any 'result' is the question.

The difference may appear negligible, but remember, the tectonic plates are repeatedly being subjected to "testing" forces. That they don't break proves they can withstand the tests. (Disregarding the dynamics, that other forces change due to magma movements, etc...) Maybe they can withstand 98% over and over again, but another 2% may prove to be the straw that breaks the camel's back. That's when anything breaks - when its limit is exceeded. Even if only ever so slightly.

That's why we have Materials Testing Labs. They have special testing machines, purposely designed to slowly increase the relevant forces while carefully recording them, until the test sample breaks.

And that's why we have earthquakes, right? Because the plates' strengths are exceeded, and something breaks.

The extra 2% is not, therefore, negligible. (Accidental pun, but a good one!)

Chris said...

TP: "Can you back up your thinking with actual science?"

With respect it's not for me to do; it's for TOW to support the claim that a perigean spring tide is significantly different to a spring tide in respect of tectonic impact. I reckon that the effect is already negligible as a factor of normal tide action and even more negligible as a factor of spring tide action, and that in all cases stuff going on under the ground has a much greater impact than tides anyway. Bottom line being that no, supermoons aren't going to cause earthquakes.

Two Percent said...

Hi Chris,

I beg to differ.

If this blog wants to uphold the standards of science, and scientific analysis and criticism, isn't it hypocritical to stoop to the same level as those we attack?

But I agree, if Orbs were (was?) to present correlations between perigean spring tides and earthquakes, that would certainly help to justify/argue the notion.

"Bottom line being that no, supermoons aren't going to cause earthquakes."

I don't know if anyone is claiming that the moon (or a supermoon) "causes" earthquakes - any more than a mouse touching the trigger plate on a set mousetrap "causes" the trap bar to descend rapidly upon its neck. They (EQs) are the result of a combination of pre-existing stresses and forces being released, but they may be triggered off by the additional contribution made by the moon's gravity, [combined with the sun's], in certain positions. (The sun's effect being far less than the moon's, as I'm sure has been previously discussed somewhere here... Searched but not located.)

But what makes your statement (quoted) any better than Orbs'? Isn't it really a red herring, not a bottom line?

expat said...

Gravitational attraction Sun-Earth: 3.6 x 10^22 newtons
Gravitational attraction Moon-Earth: 0.0189 x 10^22 newtons

First quoted here:
https://dorkmission.blogspot.com/2017/04/robert-morningstar-predicts-again.html

The same blogpost includes a link to the article from Nature describing the coastal effect of spring tides.

Chris said...

TP: "...but they may be triggered off by the additional contribution made by the moon's gravity, [combined with the sun's], in certain positions."

The Moon's gravity at the sublunar point on the Earth's surface is in the order of 1/10,000,000th of the Earth's gravity at the same point and that's where the perpendicular force is greatest. Already it's so staggeringly low, compared with the Earth's own gravity and forces going on under the ground, that it's negligible. But we're not even talking about that force. We're talking about the *difference* between that force during a spring tide and the same force during a perigean spring tide, ie a tiny fraction of the already tiny 1/10,000,000th.

The huge mass of continents means they can experience this overall force as a radial force. The oceans experience it as a tractive force away from the polar regions. But in terms of whether it's going to cause an earthquake it's a meaningless percentage of the forces caused by Earth's own gravity, underlying tectonic activity and even centrifugal force. "Supermoon" is a daft term picked up on by the mainstream media and it comes with a load of hype and scaremongering, the idea being that suddenly, somehow, for one night only, the moon transforms into some super powerful extra large extra bright beast, before returning to normal the next day. It's bonkers, but like clockwork out come the predictions of earthquakes and destruction.

And I'm not "attacking" anyone, I'm pointing out the misunderstanding of how the Moon's gravity affects Earth, it doesn't lift water up off the ground nor does it try to rip tectonic plates up out of the oceans. The effcts it has are tiny and they are experienced by Earth, which dwarfs them, every single day of the week without drama.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

Chris says he doesn't think that Syzygy and Perigee increase the Moon's effect on tides, but he offers on data for actual tide results for comparison to forecasts.

Chris said...

TOW: "Chris says he doesn't think that Syzygy and Perigee increase the Moon's effect on tides"

That's not true, in all three replies I've explicitly acknowledged an effect on ocean tides. Compared to daily and weekly tidal activity and plate tectonics the effect is insignificant. The Earth experiences near identical tidal forces every two weeks and much of that every day without drama.

Two Percent said...

expat said...

" Gravitational attraction Sun-Earth: 3.6 x 10^22 newtons
Gravitational attraction Moon-Earth: 0.0189 x 10^22 newtons
"

Many thanks, but those aren't the figures I was looking for.

Wasn't there a discussion about the tidal effects of the sun vs the moon? The sun's tidal effect is only minor, contributing to "spring tides" or "king tides" by a small amount. As I recall, this was explained as mostly due to the relative closeness of the moon to earth, compared with the sun. The difference is that the lunar pull on the near side of earth is much higher than on the far side, whereas the sun's is very similar on (respectively) both near and far sides, meaning the lunar tidal effect is much higher than the sun's. (Does this even make sense? I think not.)

If the tidal effects were directly related to the relative gravitational forces, it would always be high tide just after noon, with spring tides happening at lunar syzygies, but it's the other way around, the moon rules.

You probably know all this, but as I understand it, this is also because of the relatively large mass and closeness of the moon, and the gravitational attraction between the earth and the moon. This causes the earth and moon to orbit each other around their barycentre, which means the earth is permanently off-centre with respect to the moon, with the centre of rotation of the Earth-Moon system closer to the sublunar point. (If the moon and earth had equal masses, they would orbit each other around a point in space, about midway between them. That, I imagine, would result in continual monster tides.)

Anyway, orbiting around their barycentre, the earth is off-centre, which effectively creates a gravitational "low point" at the sublunar point, so the oceans naturally flow towards it, creating, from our point of view, tides. (The tides on the opposite side of the planet are caused by centripetal forces...)

Maybe this is the real reason, or the correct explanation for the difference in tidal effects? Maybe it's only to do with the barycentres, with the barycentre of the Sun-Earth system being very near the sun's centre, resulting in minimal effect on earth's oceans.

Yes, that must be correct. Otherwise, the much higher gravitational force from the sun would cause an overriding once-a-day (midday) tidal cycle, since it would also pull water (almost equally) from the far side of the planet towards the subsolar point.

Yep, that's my 2%

Two Percent said...

Hi Chris,

Much better answer!

But I think you miss the point - one which Orbs plainly appreciates, by his comment.

The gravitational force generated by the moon at the surface of the earth may seem insignificant, numerically, but obviously, it is not. Every minute, it is dragging millions of tonnes of seawater towards the moon. Effectively, it is "holding" those millions of tonnes of water in a "puddle" not far from the sublunar point.

Yes, it leads slightly due to friction (not to mention continents getting in the way), as the earth rotates beneath it. That is not to say that the same water is being dragged along; it's not. Whatever water is nearest to the sublunar point at the time is attracted towards that point, but the water mostly turns with the earth, so it's more like a wave, standing near the sublunar point.

It's the extra weight of these millions of tons of water "sloshing about on the surface (seafloor)" that helps trigger earthquakes in the crust under near-breaking-point stresses. Maybe the difference is not 2%, maybe 0.2%, or 0.02%, but of course, if it's enough to push the crust beyond breaking point, it breaks.

And maybe, the true effect of the moon and the tides is to "work" the plates until they eventually break, so it will be hard to pinpoint when that will happen. It could be at syzygy, or at the mid-point, and statistically, that seems to hold up, but that is not to say the moon is not the primary cause.

No one here that I have seen, is saying the moon lifts "water up off the ground". That's another red herring. As is "try to rip tectonic plates up out of the oceans." These dilute your argument.

One thing I can pretty much say (but cannot prove):

Take the moon away and there would be (almost*?) no earthquakes. That would be, as you say, without drama.

*Global Warming may also be responsible for some earthquakes, as the warmer air and water over the surface reduces heat loss from the core, leading to higher temperatures higher in the crust, causing crustal expansion and potentially, earthquakes.

I do agree with your comments about the media and that the notion that alignments and events such as "Supermoons" somehow cause instant calamity are nonsense.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

Please cite a reference, Chris, of the tide results. All I find are forecasts, but never the measurements of what actually took effect.

There is no Global Warming, 2%. It's Ocean Warming, due to more than two million undersea volcanoes which currently erupt, at the beginning of each, the Age of Aquarius and the Age of Leo. This is when all ice ages occur. There isn't always an ice age, but whenever there is, it's during those ages. Milankovitch Cycles of the Sun, must also transpire simultaneously with those locations along the elliptical path of Precession, when Earth is most distant from the Sun. Micro climates warm up along coastlines, where most major populations reside, so the warmer weather seems to be global. However, record cold temperatures are set inland towards Polar regions, where precipitation from evaporated sea water falls and lowers temperatures. This evaporation, also reduces water weight from tectonic plates.

There was just a formerly devastating, 6.4 Earthquake yesterday in Indonesia.
weather.com/news/news/2018-07-29-indonesia-deadly-earthquake

James Concannon said...

No there wasn't. The earthquake was on the 29th (Sunday), as noted in my chronicle.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

The recent Indonesian magnitude 6.4 quake, occurred withing the (+/-) 10 day seismic window; two days after the eclipse.

James Concannon said...

Theadora, that's completely meaningless. As you've been told here before, +/- 10 days is two-thirds of the entire lunar cycle. It's not a window as much as empty air.

expat said...

Repetitive comment from Theadora disallowed.

Chris said...

TP: "The gravitational force generated by the moon at the surface of the earth may seem insignificant, numerically, but obviously, it is not. Every minute, it is dragging millions of tonnes of seawater towards the moon."

First of all that's not how tides work. The Moon's gravity isn't dragging millions of tons of seawater towards the moon. You just said no-one here is saying that, then went on to say it. Second, you're not following what I'm saying. Take whatever view you want of the Moon and how its forces operate on the Earth; I don't care how right or wrong you are. Call that view X. I am saying that the difference between X at spring tides, every two weeks, and X at perigean spring tides, three or four times a year, is insignificant. Simple as that.

Two Percent said...

Anonymous Chris said...

"The Moon's gravity isn't dragging millions of tons of seawater towards the moon. You just said no-one here is saying that, then went on to say it. "

Go ahead, Chris. Feel free to blatantly misquote me.

What I said was:

"No one here that I have seen, is saying the moon lifts "water up off the ground". "

Dragging water "towards the moon" (or, if you want to be pedantic, towards the point on the Earth's surface called the sublunar point) is correct, relative to the Earth. There's nothing stated or implied about the water leaving "the ground".

The water moves. It moves in the direction that gets it closer to the moon. In other words, although it comes in from all (possible) directions towards the sublunar point, it is still "towards the moon" as all the other direction vectors more or less cancel out.

As for the quantity, millions of tonnes is a gross understatement. It's really billions of tonnes. Imagine a tidal sealevel rise of just one metre, averaged over a circle a mere 1,000km in diameter. Each cubic metre of seawater weighs slightly over one tonne. A volume of seawater 1,000km in diameter and 1 metre deep is pi/4 x (1,000,000 m)^2 x 1m, or 0.7854 x 1,000 billion m^3, which weighs over 785 billion tonnes.

If it's not the Moon's gravity that is responsible for this, what is?

Anyway, getting back to the spring and perigean tides, what are the tide height differences compared with 'normal' tides (or average tide heights, if you prefer)?

Much more than 1/10,000,000th more or less, I'm quite sure.

James Concannon said...

Theadora dear... we already logged that earthquake. Do try and keep up.

Looks bad for your alarmist prediction, doesn't it?

THE said...

I thought it was another one in the same spot, but it was just a different page display. No news is good news. Keep your fingers crossed until after the 7th of August.

Two Percent said...

Chris,

Not sure if you are still monitoring this thread, but nevertheless:

First, thanks for the debate regarding tidal causes. It has helped me clarify my understanding, and maybe yours too?

Second, my apology: I now think you are correct when you say:

"The Moon's gravity isn't dragging millions of tons of seawater towards " ... [the sublunar point].

Yes, it's not the moon doing the "dragging". In reality, it must be Earth's gravity that's doing it. It might be better to forget the dragging and refer to it simply as flowing, in accordance with, I guess, Archimedes' Principle, as possibly the best explanation.

That said, it's still the Moon that's responsible - without the Moon, it wouldn't happen (to anywhere near the same extent).

(Where did you get your figure of 1/10,000,000th, BTW?)

Two Percent said...

P.S.

FWIW, I get 1/295,000th (about 34 times greater)... Not that it makes a lot of difference.

Two Percent said...

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

"There is no Global Warming, 2%. It's Ocean Warming, due to more than two million undersea volcanoes which currently erupt... "

Hi Orbs,

A couple of points if I may?

There is no real difference between Ocean and Global Warming. The Gulf Stream warms much of the Northern Hemisphere. Heat is transferred from ocean to air and land, quite effectively, so Ocean Warming will result in Global Warming.

However, I can't buy 2 million undersea volcanoes. There are 360 million km^2 of ocean on Earth. Therefore, you require one volcano for every 180 square kilometres of seafloor. Where's all that heat going to come from?

Besides, the pollution they would release will kill off much of the sea life, bring on Global Winter and the the next Ice Age, and it'll be 'Nite, nite, Nurse....'

expat said...

Repeat of the "millions of undersea volcanoes" disallowed.

Two Percent said...

Shame!

Orbs, please try to write something that doesn’t offend expat’s sense of acceptability.

I have to concede: you may not be so far off. Frankly, I’m shocked.

The Oregon State item is rather poorly written for an academic institution, but there it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_volcano

http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/submarine

https://www.sciencealert.com/almost-nobody-noticed-largest-underwater-volcano-eruption-ever-recorded-havre-seamount

https://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/Learning/Science-Topics/Ocean-Floor/Undersea-New-Zealand/Submarine-Volcanoes

Of course, most undersea volcanic eruptions appear to barely warrant the title, apparently discharging at orders of magnitude more slowly than on land. Volcanic oozing, perhaps. But, there may be a million of them down there, with maybe 75,000 over half a mile high.

The planet is such a mystery!

James Concannon said...

Well, here we are, it's Tuesday and the Canary Islands haven't fallen into the Atlantic Ocean.

BTW Lompok isn't "in the path of the blood moon eclipse" so Theadora can't have that one. Morningstar is, naturally, claiming it as fulfilling his prediction notwithstanding the fact that his prediction didn't even mention earthquakes and Lompok was five days late.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

I noticed this just now:

"At least 98 people have been confirmed dead and more than 236 severely injured in a 6.9 magnitude earthquake that rocked the Indonesian tourist island of Lombok on Sunday evening."

theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/05/powerful-earthquake-strikes-indonesia-killing-at-least-three

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

Jim Berkland would have been more specific, predicting Earthquakes during the Supermoon, along all the usual fault lines, and particularly in the path of the eclipse.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...


Is this what Jim meant?

M 2.7 - 18km SW of Lompoc, CA
2018-04-03 10:58:16 UTC
34.505°N 120.573°W
3.6 km depth
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ci37906015#executive">earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ci37906015#executive

expat said...

That's the last Jim Berkland comment I'll allow. It's trivial.

THE Orbs Whiperer said...

I was asking about Jim Concannon's reference to Lompoc, as if butter wouldn't melt in your mouth, Patrick.


Anonymous James Concannon said...

BTW Lompok isn't "in the path of the blood moon eclipse"