Dwarf Star

mysterious

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I will try to explain why. This post below:



Apart from the Planet X stuff was about seeing some bright object next to Venus in the sky, to which namloc replied:



A perfectly reasonable response, simply stating Venus' & Sirius' position at the moment. Nothing wrong with pointing that out. Your response:



Was a tad bit arrogant and slightly aggressive. As are the vast majority of your posts, and of a few others on here. My style is to give as good as I get, which is why I am able to have reasonable discussion with toracx (?), because he is polite and open to differing views. As far as I can see, the problem here is your attitude, and your constant need to skirt the line between breaking the charter and not. Try stepping back and being a little less... dare I say egotistical? I guarantee you will see a change in attitude towards you.

Give it a go.

He who judges!

The "i am but your this" etc read your own posts dude. The response of mine wasn't even to you.

I haven't nothing else to say(I don't need too) I don't need to follow you. I don't need to be corrected by you. Maybe you should practice by your own advice, the advice you preach to others.

squod

There's some shooting stars for tommorrows arguments discussion.:D

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/ataglance/

Lyrid shower is in the dark hours before dawn. At that time the moon will be under the horizon. Likely, the optimal night will be between midnight and dawn on Thursday, April 22. But a day or two before and after the peak date may offer a decent sprinkling of meteors too.

http://earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/earthskys-meteor-shower-guide

My name is URL

SuperGrover wrote: »

Someone had to say it.

No, they really didn't. I hope it made you feel like a big man for a minute though

I also hope you're site-banned for making the post, with full intent of being banned for it

Mahatma coat

AAAAAAAAANYWAY Back sorta OT, All thes Fvckin earthquakes, I dare one a ye to stand there witha straight face and say that this is 'Normal' its at very least different from what we consider Normal.

could there be something out there fuppin up the gravities???

Flamed Diving

It's normal.

Mahatma coat

Really, so if you made one of your graphs of Earthquakes/Volcanoes per week spread out over the last 50 years it'd be fairly flat then?????

Flamed Diving

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Really, so if you made one of your graphs of Earthquakes/Volcanoes per week spread out over the last 50 years it'd be fairly flat then?????

The Earth isn't fifty years old.

Yitzhak Rabin

Mahatma coat wrote: »

AAAAAAAAANYWAY Back sorta OT, All thes Fvckin earthquakes, I dare one a ye to stand there witha straight face and say that this is 'Normal' its at very least different from what we consider Normal.

could there be something out there fuppin up the gravities???

Really, so if you made one of your graphs of Earthquakes/Volcanoes per week spread out over the last 50 years it'd be fairly flat then?????

There has been an increase in the death toll rate from earthquakes since 1900-2008. This is easily explained however, by the fact that the population was 1.6bn in 1900, and is c.6.8bn now. Combine that with the fact that there has been a much bigger migration from rural to urban areas, especially in Asian countries like China, where alot of these deadly earthquakes have hit. So I don't think there is anything strange going on....

[straight face]This is normal[/straight face]

Flamed Diving

yekahs wrote: »

There has been an increase in the death toll rate from earthquakes since 1900-2008. This is easily explained however, by the fact that the population was 1.6bn in 1900, and is c.6.8bn now. Combine that with the fact that there has been a much bigger migration from rural to urban areas, especially in Asian countries like China, where alot of these deadly earthquakes have hit. So I don't think there is anything strange going on....

[straight face]This is normal[/straight face]

Not forgetting the exponential increase in seismic stations around the world, since the beginning of the 20th century, meaning a huge increase in the number of measured earthquakes globally, simply as a consequence of these additional stations.

So any increase in the total measured during this time period is to be expected.

Yitzhak Rabin

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Not forgetting the exponential increase in seismic stations around the world, since the beginning of the 20th century, meaning a huge increase in the number of measured earthquakes globally.

So any increase in the total measured during this time period is to be expected.

Thats the death toll though its not measuring the amount of earthquakes.

humanji

SuperGrover banned for a month.

Flamed Diving

yekahs wrote: »

Thats the death toll though its not measuring the amount of earthquakes.

Yeah, your explanation is also valid, for a different measure. When you combine both, you see why there might appear to be an increase.

Mahatma coat

the dates down the side are interestin, the graph itself does reflect what ye say about the increases in both affected populations and recording stations, but the dates on the side seem to indicate a sorta cycle

Yitzhak Rabin

Mahatma coat wrote: »

the dates down the side are interestin, the graph itself does reflect what ye say about the increases in both affected populations and recording stations, but the dates on the side seem to indicate a sorta cycle

What do you mean? That the powerful ones seem to come regularly?

Mahatma coat

sorta 3-4 Years on 3-4 Years off in a reasonably loose cycle

Flamed Diving

I found this:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/faq/?categoryID=6&faqID=110

Yitzhak Rabin

Mahatma coat wrote: »

sorta 3-4 Years on 3-4 Years off in a reasonably loose cycle

I can kinda see what you mean. If you look at the parts where its 'thicker'(because there have been earthquakes in consecetive(sp?) years) you can definitely make out a sort of patern of mini-bell curves all the way down the chart. Its particularly significant around the 70s. I wonder if its a natural phenomenon, or just my pattern seeking ape brain making something out of nothing.

Also for all the "big ones" there was a few years of gradually increasing death tolls, and then gradually decreasing for the subsequent years after. It seems there is obviously some build up of sesmic activity that gets realesed in a big earthquake, and then it builds up again for a few years and continues on in that cycle.

Actually I remeber hearing that San Fran is due a big earthquake soon as it hasn't had one in years and there is alot of tension built up between the plates.

mysterious

Mahatma coat wrote: »

AAAAAAAAANYWAY Back sorta OT, All thes Fvckin earthquakes, I dare one a ye to stand there witha straight face and say that this is 'Normal' its at very least different from what we consider Normal.

could there be something out there fuppin up the gravities???

Another one in Australia today. The volcanic eruption in iceland was huge.

Oh its just a every normal event. It's not a normal everyday event. The amount of earthquakes since january this year has taken a full free for all slide up the chart.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXAqJzLdmCY

Another massive one in China last week.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRgaNYV4Wu4

Infact Chile still taking hits. California has also been shaking.

mysterious

yekahs wrote: »

I can kinda see what you mean. If you look at the parts where its 'thicker'(because there have been earthquakes in consecetive(sp?) years) you can definitely make out a sort of patern of mini-bell curves all the way down the chart. Its particularly significant around the 70s. I wonder if its a natural phenomenon, or just my pattern seeking ape brain making something out of nothing.

Also for all the "big ones" there was a few years of gradually increasing death tolls, and then gradually decreasing for the subsequent years after. It seems there is obviously some build up of sesmic activity that gets realesed in a big earthquake, and then it builds up again for a few years and continues on in that cycle.

Actually I remeber hearing that San Fran is due a big earthquake soon as it hasn't had one in years and there is alot of tension built up between the plates.

The whole pacific plate is moving. There is earthquakes every day in the Pacific but thankfully its not in major populated areas. The 04 mega Tsnami really shifted the plates and it's been building up tension all around the Pacific. If Chile has seen record level earthquakes. California is like a melting pot ready to explode.

mysterious

Utah hit by 4.9 earthquake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsWioITQqNQ

uprising2

Here's the 2010 earthquake list(its only April:eek:), also keep in mind the death toll from Haiti alone was almost equal to the highest death toll on yekahs chart, I think were in for a year to remember.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:2010_earthquakes

namloc1980

It's easily to blow these earthquakes out of proportion as they happen and to sensationalise them. Earthquakes have always happened and always will. And why are people saying the Iceland eruption is massive, huge and devastating and blowing it out of all proportion?

namloc1980

uprising2 wrote: »

Here's the 2010 earthquake list(its only April:eek:), also keep in mind the death toll from Haiti alone was almost equal to the highest death toll on yekahs chart, I think were in for a year to remember.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:2010_earthquakes

There is nothing hugely exceptional about the level of earthquakes so far in 2010 compared to other years but it's easy for some people to scare monger and blow it all out of proportion. Interestingly it seems to be the CT community who are driving this. According to the same wiki source quoted above the number of earthquakes so far this year is marginally more than in 2009 but nothing that should have us running for the underground bunker in fear.

uprising2

namloc1980 wrote: »

It's easily to blow these earthquakes out of proportion as they happen and to sensationalise them. Earthquakes have always happened and always will. And why are people saying the Iceland eruption is massive, huge and devastating and blowing it out of all proportion?

Yes its easy to exaggerate these earthquake's, but not so easy to trifle or understate.
Just ask anybody in Haiti,China,Tibet, Chile, etc.

mysterious

namloc1980 wrote: »

It's easily to blow these earthquakes out of proportion as they happen and to sensationalise them. Earthquakes have always happened and always will. And why are people saying the Iceland eruption is massive, huge and devastating and blowing it out of all proportion?

:eek:

You have some nerve and complete ignorance to say that. Earthquakes have been tipping to record levels. What exactly does it mean to make something sensational?

You have to get it into your head, these are the facts and the facts the amount of earthquakes we've had this year is not normal, by any standard. It's actually getting worse. We are in a major shift and the Mayas are right about our old earth leaving and our new earth is coming. We are in the middle of a huge transition. You obviously are not aware, but we are.. We are moving into the dark rift, we will see much more shifts on our planet as we move into this decade.

I'm appalled by your insensitivity and it's actually an outragous statment. If anything your trying to bellttle all the earthquakes we've had.

Nobody is blowing anything out of proportion. If you had the cheek to make accusations like that, don't be surprised people wondering if your trying to cover it up under the carpet like the saying goes with governments and people in authority, "oh nothing to see her folks move along".


It's time we wake the f£$k up already.

namloc1980

uprising2 wrote: »

Yes its easy to exaggerate these earthquake's, but not so easy to trifle or understate.
Just ask anybody in Haiti,China,Tibet, Chile, etc.

Who's understating? Earthquakes are devastating for those caught up in them but the CTers are making this out to be the end of the world! Earthquakes happen and with the population of the planet approaching 7bn it's not surprising that more people are unfortunately being caught up in them.

namloc1980

mysterious wrote: »

:eek:

You have some nerve and complete ignorance to say that.

I'm appalled by your insensitivity and it's actually an outragous statment. If anything your trying to bellttle all the earthquakes we've had.

If you had the cheek to make accusations like that, don't be surprised people wondering if your trying to cover it up under the carpet like the saying goes with governments and people in authority, "oh nothing to see her folks move along"..

How dare you make such personal and direct accusations against me and claiming that I am some kind of govt agent trying to cover things up. You are an ignoramus for making such appalling accusations. And one AGAIN you fail to provide evidence for any of your points!

humanji

Mysterious, tone it down.

fontanalis

mysterious wrote: »

:eek:

You have some nerve and complete ignorance to say that. Earthquakes have been tipping to record levels. What exactly does it mean to make something sensational?

You have to get it into your head, these are the facts and the facts the amount of earthquakes we've had this year is not normal, by any standard. It's actually getting worse. We are in a major shift and the Mayas are right about our old earth leaving and our new earth is coming. We are in the middle of a huge transition. You obviously are not aware, but we are.. We are moving into the dark rift, we will see much more shifts on our planet as we move into this decade.

I'm appalled by your insensitivity and it's actually an outragous statment. If anything your trying to bellttle all the earthquakes we've had.

Nobody is blowing anything out of proportion. If you had the cheek to make accusations like that, don't be surprised people wondering if your trying to cover it up under the carpet like the saying goes with governments and people in authority, "oh nothing to see her folks move along".


It's time we wake the f£$k up already.

:eek:

mysterious

namloc1980 wrote: »

How dare you make such personal and direct accusations against me and claiming that I am some kind of govt agent trying to cover things up. You are an ignoramus for making such appalling accusations. And one AGAIN you fail to provide evidence for any of your points!

Don't play the victimization dude, I quoted your own post and what was at fault, and responded to your post in question of where the faults were, my response is what with "if" others accuse you. Nobody personally attacked you, only you have the above reply with "How dare you", to create an interrogation complex.

People have minds, and they will question your motives "if" you make accusations of others sensationalizing topics such as earthquakes. Your not very self aware of how shocking your posts and your own accujsations are.

i have provided evidence.:) But I think we can all gather you choosed either to ignore it or brush it out of your awareness. That is however your issue and problem.

All the earthquakes I've mentioned, I've given videos on.

namloc1980

mysterious wrote: »

Don't play the victimization dude, I quoted your own post and what was at fault, and responded to your post in question of where the faults were, my response is what with "if" others accuse you. Nobody personally attacked you, only you have the above reply with "How dare you", to create an interrogation complex.

People have minds, and they will question your motives "if" you make accusations of others sensationalizing topics such as earthquakes. Your not very self aware of how shocking your posts and your own accujsations are.

i have provided evidence.:) But I think we can all gather you choosed either to ignore it or brush it out of your awareness. That is however your issue and problem.

All the earthquakes I've mentioned, I've given videos on.

Well that is a case of the pot calling the kettle black if I ever saw it. :pac:

Also by evidence you mean you provided mysterious evidence i.e. no evidence at all.

K-9

mysterious wrote: »

Don't play the victimization dude, I quoted your own post and what was at fault, and responded to your post in question of where the faults were, my response is what with "if" others accuse you. Nobody personally attacked you, only you have the above reply with "How dare you", to create an interrogation complex.

People have minds, and they will question your motives "if" you make accusations of others sensationalizing topics such as earthquakes. Your not very self aware of how shocking your posts and your own accujsations are.

i have provided evidence.:) But I think we can all gather you choosed either to ignore it or brush it out of your awareness. That is however your issue and problem.

All the earthquakes I've mentioned, I've given videos on.

By evidence I think people mean data saying the level of earthquakes this year is abnormal, not evidence of the China earthquake.

mysterious

namloc1980 wrote: »

Well that is a case of the pot calling the kettle black if I ever saw it. :pac:

Also by evidence you mean you provided mysterious evidence i.e. no evidence at all.

No I'm just making you aware, that accusing others of sensationalizing a topic about recorded earthqaukes is a very outlandish rude thing to accuse others here as doing. it's actually pointing fingers at others as if to say you all here are creating fear or exaggeration to the topic of earthqueakes, and you know it's simply not true and that accusation was uncalled for.

It was another interesting adult conversation, and here you are refusing to accept what you said was wrong. I'm just showing it out on the open, I don't need to accuse you of anything, since you made the outlandish ignorant claims yourself.

IMO it was a very sly thing to do, considering thousands of people have died in these earthquakes and no one in their right mind would create hysteria over these earthqaukes.

Well the evidence is clear on this topic, you can ignore them if you like.:)

namloc1980

US Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center

Magnitude 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
8.0 to 9.9 1 1 0 1 2 1 2 4 0 1 1
7.0 to 7.9 14 15 13 14 14 10 9 14 12 16 5
6.0 to 6.9 146 121 127 140 141 140 142 178 168 142 61
5.0 to 5.9 1344 1224 1201 1203 1515 1693 1712 2074 1768 1754 741
4.0 to 4.9 8008 7991 8541 8462 10888 13917 12838 12078 12291 6928 2657


The 2010 figures are to date i.e. 4 months so if we annualise the figures for 2010 we get:

8.0 to 9.9 3
7.0 to 7.9 15
6.0 to 6.9 183
5.0 to 5.9 2223
4.0 to 4.9 7971

So please mysterious can you show me where this year has a massive increase in earthquakes on previous years or that this year is somehow abnormal?????

mysterious

namloc1980 wrote: »

US Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center

Magnitude 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
8.0 to 9.9 1 1 0 1 2 1 2 4 0 1 1
7.0 to 7.9 14 15 13 14 14 10 9 14 12 16 5
6.0 to 6.9 146 121 127 140 141 140 142 178 168 142 61
5.0 to 5.9 1344 1224 1201 1203 1515 1693 1712 2074 1768 1754 741
4.0 to 4.9 8008 7991 8541 8462 10888 13917 12838 12078 12291 6928 2657


The 2010 figures are to date i.e. 4 months so if we annualise the figures for 2010 we get:

8.0 to 9.9 3
7.0 to 7.9 15
6.0 to 6.9 183
5.0 to 5.9 2223
4.0 to 4.9 7971

So please mysterious can you show me where this year has a massive increase in earthquakes on previous years or that this year is somehow abnormal?????

Is that for US or the world, on that graph the records are going up all the time except for 2009. A 10 year period is like a mille second in earth years. If we are going to talk about increase you'd need to do a complete graph since records began.

You know I will be right on this one.:p

namloc1980

mysterious wrote: »

Is that for US or the world, on that graph the records are going up all the time except for 2009. A 10 year period is like a mille second in earth years. If we are going to talk about increase you'd need to do a complete graph since records began.

You know I will be right on this one.:p

Well seeing as how the number of seismograph being used has exponentially increased over time it's a pretty safe bet that the number of quakes being detected has also increased. But your point was that 2010 was some kind of aberration in terms of the number of quakes happening. The FACTS don't back you up I'm afraid. So where is your evidence?

uprising2

Here's a little fact, so far this year 2010, almost 1000X Times more people have died from earthquakes than died in 2000.

230,000 in 2010 so far
000,231 in 2000 (whole year)


1,787 in 2009

mysterious

When your connected to nature you learn things too.:)

But just to remind you, when you discuss earth events, its really dumb to talk about 10 years as a way to convey evidence to your claims. A human life is like a second in earth time. Earthquakes have been rising ever since records began.

The facts of the matter, is they are increasing, I don't get hogged on gritty small minute details like you do.

http://www.google.ie/#q=earthquakes+recorded+history&hl=en&rlz=1R2ADFA_enIE365&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=S1TPS7jlD5CSmwPb09EJ&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11&ved=0CC0Q5wIwCg&fp=6a106e62fca27318

mysterious

uprising2 wrote: »

Here's a little fact, so far this year 2010, almost 1000X Times more people have died from earthquakes than died in 2000.

230,000 in 2010 so far
000,231 in 2000 (whole year)


1,787 in 2009

Well at least Namloc can't sneakingly call you or anyone "over sensationalizing" this, when you've shown him the facts of how serious this is and its not like a random event oh it's just "coincidence", there is still more earthquakes going off. I wouldn't think he would go any further on trying to negate the reality of whats going on in the world right now as we are talking about people dieing in huge numbers. This year has been horendous:(


You don't needt to back up these things with facts, when you see the world been turned upside down. Iceland volcano just exploded the other day and the whole of Europe aviation industry has to shut down. We ARE living into turbelant times.

namloc1980

uprising2 wrote: »

Here's a little fact, so far this year 2010, almost 1000X Times more people have died from earthquakes than died in 2000.

230,000 in 2010 so far
000,231 in 2000 (whole year)


1,787 in 2009

Taking the Haiti earthquake in isolation is obviously going to massively skew the figures. We all know the reasons for the devastating loss of life in Port Au Prince - large quake close to a overcrowded city with very poor building standards etc.

mysterious

namloc1980 wrote: »

Taking the Haiti earthquake in isolation is obviously going to massively skew the figures. We all know the reasons for the devastating loss of life in Port Au Prince - large quake close to a overcrowded city with very poor building standards etc.

You need to re read your post, and just think about what your saying. It's absurd.

What are you trying to say here? They should move Haiti somewhere now? Sure aren't you great for pointing this out, but it's all a bit to late to point it out now... I can't believe I'm reading these posts.

i'm going to stop reading your post for a while I think, beccause they are really well over the line and your coming up with some inane points to even argue like that people were in the wrong area of the time of an earthquake.

It was an earthqauke dude ffs.

namloc1980

mysterious wrote: »

When your connected to nature you learn things too.:)

But just to remind you, when you discuss earth events, its really dumb to talk about 10 years as a way to convey evidence to your claims. A human life is like a second in earth time. Earthquakes have been rising ever since records began.

The facts of the matter, is they are increasing, I don't get hogged on gritty small minute details like you do.

http://www.google.ie/#q=earthquakes+recorded+history&hl=en&rlz=1R2ADFA_enIE365&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=S1TPS7jlD5CSmwPb09EJ&sa=X&oi=timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11&ved=0CC0Q5wIwCg&fp=6a106e62fca27318

So basically the figures don't support your argument so you dismiss them. :rolleyes: Oh yeah you might also let us know how many seismographs were in the world in the year 400 Ad for example?

mysterious wrote: »

Well at least Namloc can't sneakingly call you or anyone "over sensationalizing" this, when you've shown him the facts of how serious this is and its not like a radom event, there is still more earthquakes going off.

Why are you so aggressive when making a point :rolleyes:

And you might back it up with facts rather than opinion.

namloc1980

mysterious wrote: »

You need to re read your post, and just think about what your saying. It's absurd.

What are you trying to say here? They should move Hait somewhere now? Sure aren't you great for pointing this out, but it's all a bit to late to point it out now...

i'm going to stop reading your post, beccause they are really well over the line and your coming up with some inane points to even argue like that people were in the wrong area.

It was an earthqauke dude ffs.

You are so pathetic in your points and completely ignorant of other peoples posts. You are now on my ignore list and I think I will enjoy this forum much more with you ignored. You're inability to read posts and then twist people's points is absolutely childish and pathetic. How SAD!!

fontanalis

namloc1980 wrote: »

You are so pathetic in your points and completely ignorant of other peoples posts. You are now on my ignore list and I think I will enjoy this forum much more with you ignored. You're inability to read posts and then twist people's points is absolutely childish and pathetic. How SAD!!

In fairness I'd say mysterious is an act.

mysterious

namloc1980 wrote: »

You are so pathetic in your points and completely ignorant of other peoples posts. You are now on my ignore list and I think I will enjoy this forum much more with you ignored. You're inability to read posts and then twist people's points is absolutely childish and pathetic. How SAD!!

How am I twisting it, when I'm asking YOU to re read your own posts. I find them shocking to read.

How can you possibly make excuses for the Haiti earthquake, like oh its a poor area. Earthquakes don't decide let's hit that country because it has poor building materials. I could never say something as stupid as that espcially when we are talking about human deaths that occured because of an earthquake.. 230,000 people died so FAR this year, and you come up with excuses. We come up with facts, and now you have the cheek to brush this over aswell..... It's disgusting.

I'm not twisting anything, your the one making these assertions UP.

namloc1980

mysterious wrote: »

How am I twisting it, when I'm asking YOU to re read your own posts. I find them shocking to read.

How can you possibly make excuses for the Haiti earthquake, like oh its a poor area. Earthquakes don't decide let's hit that country because it has poor building materials. I could never say something as stupid as that espcially when we are talking about human deaths of a catylclimistc event.. 230,000 people died so FAR this year, and you come up with excuses.

I'm not twisting anything, your the one making these assertions UP.

I'm not making excuses you ignoramus! I'm pointing out the reasons so many people tragically died. Anyway I didn't even bring up the Haiti earthquake it was uprising2 who brought it up. God Almighty you really are so childish it's unbelievable!

uprising2

namloc1980 wrote: »

It's easily to blow these earthquakes out of proportion as they happen and to sensationalise them. Earthquakes have always happened and always will. And why are people saying the Iceland eruption is massive, huge and devastating and blowing it out of all proportion?

uprising2 wrote: »

Here's a little fact, so far this year 2010, almost 1000X Times more people have died from earthquakes than died in 2000.

230,000 in 2010 so far
000,231 in 2000 (whole year)


1,787 in 2009

namloc1980 wrote: »

You are so pathetic in your points and completely ignorant of other peoples posts. You are now on my ignore list and I think I will enjoy this forum much more with you ignored. You're inability to read posts and then twist people's points is absolutely childish and pathetic. How SAD!!

You confuse me, you say people are "blowing these earthquakes out of proportion", then accuse others of being ignorant.

EDIT:

You are making excuses and trying to crawl back under the rock.

Michaelrsh

If these were in fact planets, or a so called 'sun' heading towards out star system, then there would be massive gravitational disturbance, which would have major repercussions on Earth. It would have major effects on Earths orbit around the sun. Do a few calculations with Euler's Three Body Problem after determining the mass of these planet and this so called sun and also having determined correctly the position of these objects. See if they make any sense in relation to our present orbit. If they don't, then your theory is incorrect.

Maybe pm me some of your data and I'll look into it if you want.

namloc1980

uprising2 wrote: »

You confuse me, you say people are "blowing these earthquakes out of proportion", then accuse others of being ignorant.

mysterious is childishly trying to get a reaction out of people on this topic and I have risen to it unfortunately. I welcome some rational discussion on this topic and not the childishness of mysterious that he has managed to wind me up. Anyway back to the actual discussion.

Obviously the Haiti earthquake was a massive tragedy but that in itself does not mean earthquakes are happening at a massively increased rate compared to previous years.


EDIT: I do not appreciate the crawl under a rock comment. I never shirk from my points and you are completely twisting my words...again.

uprising2

Michaelrsh wrote: »

If these were in fact planets, or a so called 'sun' heading towards out star system, then there would be massive gravitational disturbance, which would have major repercussions on Earth. It would have major effects on Earths orbit around the sun. Do a few calculations with Euler's Three Body Problem after determining the mass of these planet and this so called sun and also having determined correctly the position of these objects. See if they make any sense in relation to our present orbit. If they don't, then your theory is incorrect.

Maybe pm me some of your data and I'll look into it if you want.

Stop dragging this thred OFF TOPIC;)