Something to do with Haarp you're suggesting? If so, which country was the target and why? Presumably Indonesia, where the earthquake centre appears to have been nearest? Or is it a ploy to get them all to spend money on the tsunami early warning system? Who knows, but it certainly sounds a little too suspect to be totally natural.

Does anybody think this has anything to do with the testing of nuclear weapons in the oceans?

No, because there have been no nuclear tests in the ocean since the 1950s.

The French haven't conducted any tests in the Pacific for about ten years.

And expecting that a nuclear test could trigger an earthquake like that is rather like expecting to topple a boulder witha feather.

The quake happened along a very predictable fault line. ALthough we know that there will be many quakes along these lines [continental drift], the one thing we cannot as yet predict is when they will happen.

So the two quakes happened 365 days apart. So what?

Posted on  http://www.indycymru.org.uk :

Those cretins in Planning, those imbeciles you elected to Parliament, those morons who run things, are all exposed as incompetent inadequates by a small wave in the Indian Ocean.

Now look at  http://www.terradaily.com/2004/041226152117.76iv431d.html to see what they should be planning and legislating for. We have put a warning here before.

Keep laughing. The backwash from the wave hitting the West Coast of America may do as much damage here in Wales as was done in Bangladesh a few days ago - just as survivors are begining to pick themselves up from the direct impact of the primary wave that will arrive here directly. Do follow up that URL.

What advice have you had?

What is HAARP?

What has a tsunami got to do with Parliament? Are they supposed to be psychics? Seers? Visionaries? Know exactly where and when this will happen? Tell people not to go down to beach to play?

Oh, and btw, it would be the East Coast of America. And no, it wouldn't rebound onto Wales.

That article is speculation. It might be good speculation, but still speculation. When will it happen? Anyone's guess. And it would be a guess. This year? Next year? A thousand years? Get real.

did it get hit by the tsumani?

>"That article is speculation.... This year? Next year? A thousand years? Get real."
Have a fuller source for the speculations:  http://www.benfieldhrc.org/Information%20Centre/Publications/Abstracts.htm#slchangevol
Note the scientific basis.

>"What has a tsunami got to do with Parliament?"
One has been forecast in the Atlantic to be much more severe. That was detailed in Indycymru about a year ago. Someone, probabaly someone also with Admin rights on UKindymedia wiped it. The wave that will hit the UK will be much bigger than that unforecast wave that hit in the indian ocean. And as there, no system has been set up to warn people and get them evacuated in the hours between the mountain collapsing into the sea, and the huge wave hitting the UK. That is what it has to do with the stupid moronic idiotic imbeciles selection committees select for people to vote for as MPs.

>"Oh, and btw, it would be the East Coast of America. And no, it wouldn't rebound onto Wales."
It should be East Coast. Do you really think that a 50 meter wave hitting the USA will not have a backwash that could be nearly as bad as that Indian Ocean Tsunami when it hits the UK?

That old indycymru article was almost certainly posted up on UKIndymedia as well. Was it also deleted from here? If so by who? Agents of KGBetc alarmed that reality might burst their economic bubble? Or plain stupidity?

"Initial indications are that Diego Garcia was not affected by the Andaman Tsunami of 26 December 2004. It is located south of the tip of India, well with in range of what the tsunami, with a max elevation of 22 and an average elevation of only 4 feet. Civilians monitoring shortwave radio reported on rec.radio.shortwave that a female operator, in answer to a query from an aircraft after giving weather information, reported no ill effects from the earthquake. So everything appears well on Diego Garcia."

If there is a lot of outlying coral, and it was low tide.... Otherwise at high tide perhaps it was a clean sweep. It is about the same distance from the quake as Bangladesh.

I read in the Independent (I think) today that Diego Garcia received timely warning of the coming waves.

Funny that.

No actually it is a sick, sick, sick sign of the flaws in 'globalisation' and the wasted potential of the internet.

For all the 'international development networks', 'global information systems' and the rest that our taxes have gone to pay expensive international experts to create for decades now, the only island in the ocean affected that gets a timely warning is one where local people have already been evicted to make way for a US/UK military base and (probably) illegal military jail holding some of the 'disappeared' of the new world order....

If I was religious how could I avoid thinking that God was trying to tell us something? Thousands of humans massacred on Boxing Day but hardly any wild animals died. Maybe a religious person here could offer some sort of explanation for their God's destructive anger.

 http://www.counterpunch.org/rajiva12302004.html

In the yellow press, or perhaps the Murdoch press, this technique is klnown as 'mudslinging', In other words, evidence isn't important: the fact that the matter has been raised at all is the crucial point.

The article admits that there haven't been any nuclear tests for around 12 years or so. So what do they have to do with it?

If the plates are moving, then there will be earthquakes. As it happens, the longer the time interval, the more severe the quake will be.

It doesn't take a great deal of thought to realise that quakes such as this are quite common in geologic timescales. The Himalayas are around 10,000m high. If this quake caused a vertical dispalcement of 10m, then you're going to need 1000 such quakes.

 http://www.independent-media.tv/itemprint.cfm?fmedia_id=10211&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported

nuke tests - nah, haven't been any for 20 years.

So, then, oil? Oh, yeah, I saw some dead dolphins on beach a thousand miles away, so it must be eXXon!! And Rumsfeld, of course. He's oil isn't he?

No? That won't wash? Well, how about the idea that it was that Israeli mininuke at the Bali bombing? nah, can't talk about that - the post'll get hidden.

Global warning? Well, maybe. Pushing it a bit. But if it was, we can blame that one on Bush. Kyoto treaty, see.

Running out of ideas now. GM crops? Nah. Sainbury's milk? Marks and Spencer? HLS? No, draw the line there.

Perhaps it was some Christmas fireworks. Errr ... I'm sure they were provided by Haliburton.

 http://www1.industry.gov.au/department/annualreport01_02/geoscience/priorities.html

emphasis on "known"
 http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=nd98norris

how earthquakes were started before nuclear tests or oil drilling?

1. The 'skeptic's' rush of agitated attacks on novel questions raised here were lies in part, eg., " No, because there have been no nuclear tests in the ocean since the 1950s." (untrue); "And expecting that a nuclear test could trigger an earthquake like that is rather like expecting to topple a boulder witha [sic] feather." (also untrue); etc., and otherwise just plain wasteful of people's time and outright diversionary in tactic. The 'skeptic' inserts a lot of foolish chatter here at UK Indymedia into what could be food for thought, an alternative way of viewing, debate, a way to generate creative solutions.

2. Concerned scientists study and measure the effects of nuclear explosions on the lithosphere for the reason that this type of activity is dangerous to all life, period. Logically, we know that earthquakes are caused by both natural and unnatural forces. To answer the skeptic's diversion disguised as a 'question', earthquakes were caused by natural forces before manmade quakes wer made possible and now quakes can be caused by both. This is a scenario which is really not too hard to figure out for any thinking person, unless of course the 'skeptic' does not really have trouble comprehending these things but actually desires to drive people away from thinking about other possibilities. Now why would someone be so intent on destroying a chance for people to gain new knowledge and to debate the ideas, even if that knowledge leads to the incrimination of businesses and/or governments? So, what can we conclude? Is the skeptic an unhappy ill-adjusted person whose primary motive in life is to sound off to him/herself in order to feel important or to harangue other people, or is there something more to the skeptic's actions? Why, indeed, is this person so seemingly enraged/afraid/agitated by anything that suggests more than natural forces could have caused the recent Asian tsunami?: "...the government attacks them [thinkers, dissenters] with all the means at its disposal, including disinformation campaigns, lies, attempts to disrupt debate and information-sharing, frameups, infiltration, agents provocateur, and, occasionally, outright murder..." This type of infiltration is well-known to be happening at sites such as Indymedia: it's to be expected.

3. From people with more useful work on their hands, as opposed to this 'skeptic's' tarnished ones:  http://www.coastalpost.com/96/4/5.htm

4. We certainly know that no government engaging in anti-test ban activity is going to "fess up" despite the fact that the 'skeptic' is so convinced of government/corporate honesty. Laughable. People in search of truth will not be waylaid by pesky fleas such as the 'skeptic'.

The Coastal Post - April, 1996
The Final Nuke-Earthquake Report
BY KAREN NAKAMURA

When the Coastal Post began this series on a possible connection between nuclear underground tests and earthquakes, it was to commemorate the signing of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Within a month, the Chinese resumed testing and the French announced they soon would.

To check the theory of a connection, I made several predictions based on observations made during the eighties.

There would be greater earthquake activity in the five-day period after testing. That activity could extend up to ten days on occasion.

Earthquake activity would be particularly heavy in the Indonesia, Micronesia triangle for two reasons:

First, the most active earthquake zone in the world is where three continental plates collide. Second, it lies half-way between the Chinese and French test sites.

Other activity would be along the plates and accompanying faults, radiating out from the triangle, such as the New Zealand-Australian system, Indo-China, China, Japan and up through the Aleutians.

Also, pressure from the blast pushes out in all directions.Could an internal wave activate the great spine of the Andies, Rockies and Sierras? The atolls are almost as close to the American continents as they are to the Asian. And the entire region makes up the Ring of Fire.

The hypothesis also said there would be a measurable effect on weather conditions, either magnifying current conditions or creating extremes in reverse.

And finally, there was the prediction of increased volcanic activity.

These predictions were made because of my own research. But, more importantly, that done by Dr. Gary Whiteford of the University of New Brunswick, during the barrage of tests conducted in the eighties. Here are some of his findings so that the recent tests can be evaluated.

Responding to the military's claim that test and quakes are coincidence, Dr. Whiteford states, "The geographical patters in the data, with a clustering of earthquakes in specific regions matched to specific test dates and sites, do not support the easy and comforting explanation of 'pure coincidence'."

During the first half of the century, 1900-1950, there was an average of 68 large quakes a year. Between 1950 and 1988, the average almost doubled to 137, coinciding with years when testing was frequent.

Of these, 32 were killer quakes. Twenty came within five days after a nuclear test, 12 within 24-hours. The death count of these 20 quakes was 500,000 to 1,000,000, depending on estimates.

The Dec. 10, 1988 Armenian quake killed up to 50,000 people. The Soviets tested three days before.

A month before that, on Nov. 5, the French tested at the Mururoa Atoll site in the South Pacific. The next day 600 people were killed in quakes ranging from Indo-China to China.

On Nov. 24, the French tested again. A day later, eastern Canada was rocked by an unusual 6.0 quake. The next day a similar quake hit central China.

Exact force sizes are hard to confirm. The National Earthquake Center in Golden Colorado measures ground zero seismic activity.

And quakes don't always shake neatly in accordance with blast size though they generally fall in the area.

To understand the magnitude of the force, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts were 13 and 20 kilotons. Compare that to the 120 kilotons detonated by the French on January 27 and the destructive 6.5 to 7.0 Chinese quake February 3, six days later.

There are three different test sizes: 2-20 kilotons, small; 20-80 kilotons, medium; and the rare 80-150 kilotons, large.

Anti-nuke groups often discuss the danger of the Mururoa test site. In a 1989 documentary, the Costeau Society showed man-made fractures along the sides of the atoll. The island is built, as is the Fangataufa Atoll, on a dormant volcano. Tests take place in the volcano's core.

Costeau warned further testing could cause more fracturing and leakage of radioactivity into the ocean. One prediction was fulfilled. Radioactivity was found after the Dec. 27, 1995 test. Measurements of further fracturing are hampered by the French government.

However, the public was enlightened to the fact a blast vaporizes the stone around it for hundreds of feet then melts about the same amount of the surrounding rock. Minutes later it hardens to a kind of radioactive glass ball.

In 1989 a New Zealand geophysics official stated the fragile Mururoa Atoll had been "knocked into bits and has had all it can take."

The same year, amid intense pressure from Southern Pacific rim governments, the French switched to the less used Fangataufa Atoll. When tests were resumed last year, they returned to the Mururoa Atoll despite world-wide outcry.

French tests are now complete. What are the results.

After the Chinese test of August 17 and the French test of Sept. 5, there was a long series of hurricanes.

It was hurricane season and a hurricane was already in the Caribbean on the day of the Chinese test. Under normal circumstances, this hurricane would have built up, done its damage for a couple of days, and faded away.

But this hurricane stayed around for weeks and on its heels, not only was there a French test, but four more hurricanes stacked up, pushing from the east. This pattern didn't change until early October.

The December 27 test saw the Washington D.C. winter shutdown. After the Jan. 27 test, there was flooding in Seattle and ice flow jams on the East Coast. A combination of rain and freezing weather broke records across the midwest on both occasions. Parts of Oklahoma didn't have rain all winter.

With volcanic activity, a day after the Chinese test of August 17, a dormant volcano erupted on Montserrat in the Caribbean.

After the 100-110 kiloton blast on Fangataufa on Oct. 2, Mt. St. Helena experienced a series of tremors. Within the next two weeks, New Zealand's Mt. Puapehu showed intense activity after spectacularly erupting near a ski resort.

On Oct. 9, Java's Mt. Merapi volcano showed increased activity. Japan's Mt. Hosshu erupted for the first time in 257 years.

On Nov. 21 there was a test at Mururoa, in early December another eruption on Montserrat. Dec. 18, Mt. Hosshu erupted once more, doing so again during the first weeks of January after the Dec. 27 French test.

Not only did the Sulawesi Island near Indonesia have a 7.7 quake on Jan. 1, two volcanos, the Soputan and Vokon erupted Jan. 13 and 14.

In early February, after the Jan. 27, 120 kiloton test, the Kilauea volcano in Hawaii erupted. After weeks of rumbling, the mythical Popocatepetl near Mexico City erupted sending a plume two miles into the air.

Is the force hitting the earth's liquid core causing it to ricochet around inside the earth? The entire Ring of Fire has been activated since tests began.

Examining the quake information, watch ricochets and how often quake size follows ground zero size.

There was the Chinese quake of Feb. 3, six days after the 120 kiloton French test on Jan. 27.

An interesting side note is that for two days there were no 5.5 quakes or over. Then all hell broke loose beginning on the 30th with a 6.2 and 6.7 in New Zealand; a 5.9 and 5.8 in the Kuril Islands and finally the 6.5 to 7.0 quake in China.

May 17, the Chinese test registered 6.1 ground zero, 16 hours later there was a 7.7 quake in the Indonesian triangle. Fourteen hours later there was a 6.5 aftershock.

August 17 saw a 5.4 ground zero Chinese test. Twenty-four hours later, a 5.3 quake hit near Guam, then a 5.8 near the Falkirks in the Atlantic with a 5.7 aftershock.

Oct. 2, Fangataufa Atoll, 6.0 ground zero, 110 kilotons. The next day, a 7.0 Sumatra quake. Oct. 9, a 7.6 Mexican quake. And so on.

These are only a few examples. They all show the same pattern with few deviations.

Can there be a doubt about the connection? That it should be scientifically investigated? And the findings made public? To the contrary, USGS funding has been drastically reduced.

(The Coastal Post thanks the doubtful but kind people at the USGS National Earthquake Center in Golden Colorado for providing information for this article.)

1. The 'skeptic's' rush of agitated attacks on novel questions raised here were lies in part, eg., " No, because there have been no nuclear tests in the ocean since the 1950s." (untrue); "And expecting that a nuclear test could trigger an earthquake like that is rather like expecting to topple a boulder witha [sic] feather." (also untrue); etc., and otherwise just plain wasteful of people's time and outright diversionary in tactic. The 'skeptic' inserts a lot of foolish chatter here at UK Indymedia into what could be food for thought, an alternative way of viewing, debate, a way to generate creative solutions.

2. Concerned scientists study and measure the effects of nuclear explosions on the lithosphere for the reason that this type of activity is dangerous to all life, period. Logically, we know that earthquakes are caused by both natural and unnatural forces. To answer the skeptic's diversion disguised as a 'question', earthquakes were caused by natural forces before manmade quakes wer made possible and now quakes can be caused by both. This is a scenario which is really not too hard to figure out for any thinking person, unless of course the 'skeptic' does not really have trouble comprehending these things but actually desires to drive people away from thinking about other possibilities. Now why would someone be so intent on destroying a chance for people to gain new knowledge and to debate the ideas, even if that knowledge leads to the incrimination of businesses and/or governments? So, what can we conclude? Is the skeptic an unhappy ill-adjusted person whose primary motive in life is to sound off to him/herself in order to feel important or to harangue other people, or is there something more to the skeptic's actions? Why, indeed, is this person so seemingly enraged/afraid/agitated by anything that suggests more than natural forces could have caused the recent Asian tsunami?: "...the government attacks them [thinkers, dissenters] with all the means at its disposal, including disinformation campaigns, lies, attempts to disrupt debate and information-sharing, frameups, infiltration, agents provocateur, and, occasionally, outright murder..." This type of infiltration is well-known to be happening at sites such as Indymedia: it's to be expected.

3. From people with more useful work on their hands, as opposed to this 'skeptic's' tarnished ones:  http://www.coastalpost.com/96/4/5.htm copied below -

The Coastal Post - April, 1996
The Final Nuke-Earthquake Report
BY KAREN NAKAMURA

The Coastal Post - April, 1996
The Final Nuke-Earthquake Report
BY KAREN NAKAMURA

When the Coastal Post began this series on a possible connection between nuclear underground tests and earthquakes, it was to commemorate the signing of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Within a month, the Chinese resumed testing and the French announced they soon would.

To check the theory of a connection, I made several predictions based on observations made during the eighties.

There would be greater earthquake activity in the five-day period after testing. That activity could extend up to ten days on occasion.

Earthquake activity would be particularly heavy in the Indonesia, Micronesia triangle for two reasons:

First, the most active earthquake zone in the world is where three continental plates collide. Second, it lies half-way between the Chinese and French test sites.

Other activity would be along the plates and accompanying faults, radiating out from the triangle, such as the New Zealand-Australian system, Indo-China, China, Japan and up through the Aleutians.

Also, pressure from the blast pushes out in all directions.Could an internal wave activate the great spine of the Andies, Rockies and Sierras? The atolls are almost as close to the American continents as they are to the Asian. And the entire region makes up the Ring of Fire.

The hypothesis also said there would be a measurable effect on weather conditions, either magnifying current conditions or creating extremes in reverse.

And finally, there was the prediction of increased volcanic activity.

These predictions were made because of my own research. But, more importantly, that done by Dr. Gary Whiteford of the University of New Brunswich, during the barrage of tests conducted in the eighties. Here are some of his findings so that the recent tests can be evaluated.

Responding to the military's claim that test and quakes are coincidence, Dr. Whiteford states, "The geographical patters in the data, with a clustering of earthquakes in specific regions matched to specific test dates and sites, do not support the easy and comforting explanation of 'pure coincidence'."

During the first half of the century, 1900-1950, there was an average of 68 large quakes a year. Between 1950 and 1988, the average almost doubled to 137, coinciding with years when testing was frequent.

Of these, 32 were killer quakes. Twenty came within five days after a nuclear test, 12 within 24-hours. The death count of these 20 quakes was 500,000 to 1,000,000, depending on estimates.

The Dec. 10, 1988 Armenian quake killed up to 50,000 people. The Soviets tested three days before.

A month before that, on Nov. 5, the French tested at the Mururoa Atoll site in the South Pacific. The next day 600 people were killed in quakes ranging from Indo-China to China.

On Nov. 24, the French tested again. A day later, eastern Canada was rocked by an unusual 6.0 quake. The next day a similar quake hit central China.

Exact force sizes are hard to confirm. The National Earthquake Center in Golden Colorado measures ground zero seismic activity.

And quakes don't always shake neatly in accordance with blast size though they generally fall in the area.

To understand the magnitude of the force, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts were 13 and 20 kilotons. Compare that to the 120 kilotons detonated by the French on January 27 and the destructive 6.5 to 7.0 Chinese quake February 3, six days later.

There are three different test sizes: 2-20 kilotons, small; 20-80 kilotons, medium; and the rare 80-150 kilotons, large.

Anti-nuke groups often discuss the danger of the Mururoa test site. In a 1989 documentary, the Costeau Society showed man-made fractures along the sides of the atoll. The island is built, as is the Fangataufa Atoll, on a dormant volcano. Tests take place in the volcano's core.

Costeau warned further testing could cause more fracturing and leakage of radioactivity into the ocean. One prediction was fulfilled. Radioactivity was found after the Dec. 27, 1995 test. Measurements of further fracturing are hampered by the French government.

However, the public was enlightened to the fact a blast vaporizes the stone around it for hundreds of feet then melts about the same amount of the surrounding rock. Minutes later it hardens to a kind of radioactive glass ball.

In 1989 a New Zealand geophysics official stated the fragile Mururoa Atoll had been "knocked into bits and has had all it can take."

The same year, amid intense pressure from Southern Pacific rim governments, the French switched to the less used Fangataufa Atoll. When tests were resumed last year, they returned to the Mururoa Atoll despite world-wide outcry.

French tests are now complete. What are the results.

After the Chinese test of August 17 and the French test of Sept. 5, there was a long series of hurricanes.

It was hurricane season and a hurricane was already in the Caribbean on the day of the Chinese test. Under normal circumstances, this hurricane would have built up, done its damage for a couple of days, and faded away.

But this hurricane stayed around for weeks and on its heels, not only was there a French test, but four more hurricanes stacked up, pushing from the east. This pattern didn't change until early October.

The December 27 test saw the Washington D.C. winter shutdown. After the Jan. 27 test, there was flooding in Seattle and ice flow jams on the East Coast. A combination of rain and freezing weather broke records across the midwest on both occasions. Parts of Oklahoma didn't have rain all winter.

With volcanic activity, a day after the Chinese test of August 17, a dormant volcano erupted on Montserrat in the Caribbean.

After the 100-110 kiloton blast on Fangataufa on Oct. 2, Mt. St. Helena experienced a series of tremors. Within the next two weeks, New Zealand's Mt. Puapehu showed intense activity after spectacularly erupting near a ski resort.

On Oct. 9, Java's Mt. Merapi volcano showed increased activity. Japan's Mt. Hosshu erupted for the first time in 257 years.

On Nov. 21 there was a test at Mururoa, in early December another eruption on Montserrat. Dec. 18, Mt. Hosshu erupted once more, doing so again during the first weeks of January after the Dec. 27 French test.

Not only did the Sulawesi Island near Indonesia have a 7.7 quake on Jan. 1, two volcanos, the Soputan and Vokon erupted Jan. 13 and 14.

In early February, after the Jan. 27, 120 kiloton test, the Kilauea volcano in Hawaii erupted. After weeks of rumbling, the mythical Popocatepetl near Mexico City erupted sending a plume two miles into the air.

Is the force hitting the earth's liquid core causing it to ricochet around inside the earth? The entire Ring of Fire has been activated since tests began.

Examining the quake information, watch ricochets and how often quake size follows ground zero size.

There was the Chinese quake of Feb. 3, six days after the 120 kiloton French test on Jan. 27.

An interesting side note is that for two days there were no 5.5 quakes or over. Then all hell broke loose beginning on the 30th with a 6.2 and 6.7 in New Zealand; a 5.9 and 5.8 in the Kuril Islands and finally the 6.5 to 7.0 quake in China.

May 17, the Chinese test registered 6.1 ground zero, 16 hours later there was a 7.7 quake in the Indonesian triangle. Fourteen hours later there was a 6.5 aftershock.

August 17 saw a 5.4 ground zero Chinese test. Twenty-four hours later, a 5.3 quake hit near Guam, then a 5.8 near the Falkirks in the Atlantic with a 5.7 aftershock.

Oct. 2, Fangataufa Atoll, 6.0 ground zero, 110 kilotons. The next day, a 7.0 Sumatra quake. Oct. 9, a 7.6 Mexican quake. And so on.

These are only a few examples. They all show the same pattern with few deviations.

Can there be a doubt about the connection? That it should be scientifically investigated? And the findings made public? To the contrary, USGS funding has been drastically reduced.

(The Coastal Post thanks the doubtful but kind people at the USGS National Earthquake Center in Golden Colorado for providing information for this article.)

4. We certainly know that no government engaging in anti-test ban activity is going to "fess up" despite the fact that the 'skeptic' is so convinced of government/corporate honesty. Laughable. People in search of truth will not be waylaid by pesky fleas such as the 'skeptic'.

1. The 'skeptic's' rush of agitated attacks on novel questions raised here were lies in part, eg., " No, because there have been no nuclear tests in the ocean since the 1950s." (untrue); "And expecting that a nuclear test could trigger an earthquake like that is rather like expecting to topple a boulder witha [sic] feather." (also untrue); etc., and otherwise just plain wasteful of people's time and outright diversionary in tactic. The 'skeptic' inserts a lot of foolish chatter here at UK Indymedia into what could be food for thought, an alternative way of viewing, debate, a way to generate creative solutions.

2. Concerned scientists study and measure the effects of nuclear explosions on the lithosphere for the reason that this type of activity is dangerous to all life, period. Logically, we know that earthquakes are caused by both natural and unnatural forces. To answer the skeptic's diversion disguised as a 'question', earthquakes were caused by natural forces before manmade quakes wer made possible and now quakes can be caused by both. This is a scenario which is really not too hard to figure out for any thinking person, unless of course the 'skeptic' does not really have trouble comprehending these things but actually desires to drive people away from thinking about other possibilities. Now why would someone be so intent on destroying a chance for people to gain new knowledge and to debate the ideas, even if that knowledge leads to the incrimination of businesses and/or governments? So, what can we conclude? Is the skeptic an unhappy ill-adjusted person whose primary motive in life is to sound off to him/herself in order to feel important or to harangue other people, or is there something more to the skeptic's actions? Why, indeed, is this person so seemingly enraged/afraid/agitated by anything that suggests more than natural forces could have caused the recent Asian tsunami?: "...the government attacks them [thinkers, dissenters] with all the means at its disposal, including disinformation campaigns, lies, attempts to disrupt debate and information-sharing, frameups, infiltration, agents provocateur, and, occasionally, outright murder..." This type of infiltration is well-known to be happening at sites such as Indymedia: it's to be expected.

3. From people with more useful work on their hands, as opposed to this 'skeptic's' tarnished ones:  http://www.coastalpost.com/96/4/5.htm copied below -

The Coastal Post - April, 1996
The Final Nuke-Earthquake Report
BY KAREN NAKAMURA

"...Responding to the military's claim that test and quakes are coincidence, Dr. Whiteford states, "The geographical patters in the data, with a clustering of earthquakes in specific regions matched to specific test dates and sites, do not support the easy and comforting explanation of 'pure coincidence'."

During the first half of the century, 1900-1950, there was an average of 68 large quakes a year. Between 1950 and 1988, the average almost doubled to 137, coinciding with years when testing was frequent..."

4. We certainly know that no government engaging in anti-test ban activity is going to "fess up" despite the fact that the 'skeptic' is so convinced of government/corporate honesty. Laughable. People in search of truth will not be waylaid by pesky fleas such as the 'skeptic'.

the American does not have time on his hands either.

One of the principles of science is the difference between co-incidence and causation. Another is correlation.

What you have produced is anecdotal evidence. There is no causal link.

Frankly, the idea that an underground test in the Pacific can produce hurricanes in the Carribean is, I am afraid, preposterous.

What produced this year's Carribean hurricanes - some of the most destructive for a long time?

Another point you have failed to grasp is that these earthquakes will happen irrespective of nuclear blasts. They happen because of stresses in the earth's crust. The stresses are a result of continental drift.

A day after a test a volcano erupted. Now go study how volcanoes erupt: they need an underlying layer or bubble of magam. This is supposed to appear in 24 hours?

Well, if it's foolish chatter, you're making a considerable effort to rebut it.

And if all else fails, resort to the ad hominem attack.

Just as we suspected, 'sceptic' poster regularly disrupts other posters at UK Indymedia with habitual drivel and nonsense:
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/03/288022.html  http://www2.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/12/302423.html  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/11/301222.html

Sceptic says: One of the principles of science is the difference between co-incidence and causation. Another is correlation.

No! You are muddled. The follwoing may help:


Correlation means things (events) having a mutual relationship. It is not a principle, that's just the way they are.

Co-incidence means things occurring together without apparent connection. It is not a principle, its just the way they are.

Causality is a principle: everything has a cause. It would apply to above types of events.

dear american: never mind the arguments: just make the attacks personal. At least Newton has the ability to follow the logic of the thread.

dear newton: apologies if I didn't make myself clear.

What I was trying to say is this:

Two events may occur at the same time with there being any link between them at all. This is co-incidence.

Correlation: two sets of data appear to go together in some way - e.g., the data sets are apparently linked in some way. We might have a correlation between shoe size and height.

Correlation tells us nothing about causation - that is, which set of data is influencing the other, or, indeed, whether there is any underlying linkage at all. There may be a correlation between the number of cars on the road and the number of single parent families - both have continued to increase over the past quarter of a century. Doesn't mean to say that they are linked in any significant way, nor does it tell us anything about what caused the increases.

My point in this thread is that nuclear testing and the recent quake are not co-incident.

To establish a correlation between tests and quakes you'd need data for every quake and every test over the past half century, not just to say that after test X there was an earthquake at Y. And given the infrequency of large quakes, it's unlikely that we have sufficient data to make any meaningful correlation.

 http://www.intl-news.com/blog/_archives/2004/12/29/218503.html

1.) "10/18/04 Australia (Empire Oil & Gas): Perth Basin Exploration Permit includes Seismic Survey"

2.) "From the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program (Please note that all but 3 entries do not report Magnitude data. The New Zealand entries were the only entries found not to have Magnitude data when searched!)"

3.) "Crown Minerals Acquires Seismic Survey Off New Zealand"

What you are pointing to is not evidence at all - it is supposition. One of the reports points to 'air guns'. Now, whilst I accept that these are not the conventional airguns that fire pellets, the idea of sound waves setting off earthquakes is perhaps a tad farfetched.

By this level of analysis, you could point to any human or even natural activity whatsoever and say: could it have caused the quakes? [And note the weasel question mark]. Since you offer no proof or causal link, then the answer inevitably is yes, perhaps it could. But being politically motivated, he points to oil, which we know is responsible for all the world's tragedy's from the massacres in Darfur to earthquakes in the Far East.

This man offers no evidence or scientific explanation.

Incidentally, there is no reason to believe that if the cause was manmade, it had to occur at sea. People ignorant of earthquakes have just seized on this because the part of the quake that impinged most on us as humans was a wave.

Finally, all these hypotheses do not address the point that the quake was a subduction event. The rocks were already stressed. The quake would have happened irrespective of any human activity. Indeed, the longer you wait, the worse the quake will be, as the plates move further and further.

The Whales strike back?
It has been said that God has abandoned mankind and gone swimming with the Dolphins. Interpret what this site says to suit yourself:
 http://www.independent-media.tv/itemprint.cfm?fmedia_id=10211&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported
It is what Oil searchers did to Whales.


There was an American Scientist forecasting this quake/tsunami trying to talk to the Indonesian Government, but the talk was cancelled as the Fascists are too busy at genocide to be able to afford any warning systems. The Fascists in Indonesia are enabled in their genocide by the UN, and are taking advantage of the disaster to disarm and capture Patriots who have been resisting the genocide.

The chance to genocide the Christians and Pagans was given through the UN by the Capitalist dominated USA as a reward to Moslem Indonesia for the massacre of about a million Chinese living in Indonesia. It seems those Chinese might have been Communists. USers are great at MANIPULATING Religion. Where is The Wrath of God?

It seems IndymediaUK Editors are too nervous of Divine intervention to allow that line of thought to continue. Or have previous items on such lines been taken out by Fundie infiltrators?

Rense.com


Sept AGSO Report On
Tsunami-Quake Danger
For SW Sumatra
From Harry Mason
 orbitx@bigpond.com
12-29-4


Dear Jeff,

Interestingly with amazing prescient "co-incidence" The Australian GeoScience Organisation - AGSO - ran an article in its AUSTGEO NEWS for September 2004 about the risk factors for earthquakes and consequent tsunamis developing off the SW coast of Sumatra.

See attached pdf file - note the AGSO model for a possible SW Sumatra tsunamis and compare with the recent tsunamis animation just posted on the Jeff Rense site (from  http://iri.columbia.edu/~lareef/tsunami/ ).

AGSO got it nearly right but failed to (publicly at least ) predict that multiple earthquakes would let rip along most of the entire Sumatra-Andaman shear zone and that this would create multiple tsunamis and that these would funnel up the Bay of Bengal and across to Sri Lanka with such DEADLY force. The AGSO model showed the tsunamis vectoring SW into the un-inhabited section of the Indian Ocean.

This is similar to the amazing coincidence of the Worlds foremost authorities on earthquakes and seismic events being in Tokyo for a major conference when disaster struck Kobe a few years ago, or the marine survey being located off shore of southern New Guinea when the "on fire" tsunamis hit their north coast. None of these coincidences on their own are out of the question BUT when taken as a class one has to seriously wonder...

The BIG question is was this AGSO report just an amazing co-incidence or were they asked to model the SW Sumatra area by someone wanting to know what might happen if the plate boundary was tickled by energetic scalar EM ??? The same area of the 9.2 richter quake has been the site of deliberate use of scalar EM to whip up cyclones (hurricanes). A Malaysian newspaper ran that story a few years back implying a deal between the Malaysian government and a Russian state owned company to create a cyclone to push smoke from Indonesian forest fires offshore. The actual cyclone creation event was visible on weather imagery shown on West Australian TV during the 7.00pm ABC weather news. It consisted of an annular ring say 50 miles in diameter consisting of multiple micro spirals (each say 5 miles in diameter) in edge contact - each micro-spiral being created sequentially until the annular ring was closed back to the first micro-spiral. Within a day the cyclone centred upon the angular ring had begun to spin up to full power.

If AGSO were "simply" being prescient their guys deserve high accolade. However prescience is not something for which AGSO is normally known.

However if the study was requested from "on high" we have a potential conduit to the source.

It will be interesting to see if AGSO suffers senior staff loss by suicide in the new year.

Best Regards,

Harry Mason

do tell us: what exactly are 'scalar EM'?

Maybe we should blame the elephants, and large animals etc!!!!

All the stomping about they do...causing pressure waves!!!!

Maybe that starts something !!!!

--------------

Maybe the dinosaurs weren't killed by a meteor, maybe the eruptions and earthquakes etc finished them off....cos of all the stomping about they did!!!!


The land mass' aren't evenly spaced over the planet, so we can't all cancel each other out!!!

Basically what i'm trying to say is the basic law of physics:

"every action has as equal and opposite reaction"

the quakes are obviously a reaction to an action, whether it be lots of little or one big bang, some might have been encouraged by many elements, but lets not dwell on large explosions being the sole cause.

As we all know a thin wire can support a large current for a short period (unless designed not to do so) so why can't the faultlines support a big bang for a short period!!

it's probably more to do with the so-called "test of time"

Things wear down, things giive way, things break, cars need servicing, and women go through hormonal changes so we can have kids and carry on reproducing.

Thats the way it is...and we have to live with them!!!

Pompeii was not destroyed by a volcano that was set off by an A-Bomb (well...not that I was there, but PROBABLY!!!)

And Albert Einstein had so much knowledge and ability, but was rejected by Cambridge Uni.
(I think that was what I read somewhere)


Sod trying to find blame and lets try to concentrate on reducing the damage things that will happen, even if we don't set off charges, and save some lives!!!

This b'stard wave hurt so many of our people and I sure as well want to see an improvement, by the prevention of so many deaths, the next time DOES happen.

The early warning system would have saved many lives (how quickly can you run 0.6miles (1km)???
which is as far as I hear it got inland on boxing day!!!

We can all blame people who have been brought up with different values than us and different ways of doing things, but lets let nature and progress sort them out.

Lets make it harder for things to catch us out, both people and nature, and save some lives. by not getting distracted by our so called "meeting habits".

Lets stop fighting and use our intelligence to make the people with 'the final say' the caring and humane ones.


p.s. I apologise if i've talked sh*te but it just came out quickly while I was bored at work and found this site.

All The Best To All

Regards

Sceptic: You are thinking outside the rubber box. It's dangerous and confusing, not least to youself.

Buflo nob: You are obviously one who puts what's left of his mind, after being mashed by a mornings work, to lifes big questions but ...

Albert Einstein was German, so he went to a German University (everyone must be with me at this point, including sceptic). Most of modern theoretical physics was discovered in Germany - clever bastards - so it wouldn't have been a good move to have applied to Cambridge, anyway. Perhaps 'Einstein was refected by Cambridge Uni.' was being used metaphorically, to explain to us British that he wasn't the top of his class, which he wasn't. What intrigued me most was that you alledged fact about Albert Einstein, had nothing whatsoever to do with the rest of your comment. This is called a disjucture, and is somthing I would be a little worried about. Maybe you over-egged on the vino and puff this crimbo. Get some rest.

Let me deal with the more serious point, now. Sorry, no, no, no! Dinosaurs were not killed by a Meteor. Some mad-arsed English scientist has made a career out of this claim, getting Nasa to fork out a fortune in research grants. And don't be fucking stupid claiming: dinosaurs stomping with their hooves might have caused quakes that led to their extinction. Listen up! Dinosaurs created so much methane, they suffocated. Yes, they were killed by their own relentless farting. Fact! Other animals migrated to the mountains, and in gaining respite from the dense fumes, found oxygenated air at altitidue, and so survived the stinking calamity.

Lesson: don't believe all of what you read, or all what you write - except in the case of sceptic.

We have veered off the point somewhat. We were originally travelling on the disaster train, to which we should return. So, do donate generously to the appeals.

I dont recall seeing any reference in any of the comments so far to the quake that happened on the 24th December in the Antarctic. I am not saying that this was the reason for the subsequent boxing day quake but who knows maybe it is linked. I am no seismologist sadly. However, it was a largish quake and could have had a knock on effect. i think this is as likely a scenario as the nuclear test theories that have been posted.

But the point is not why it happened but how the worst of the effects can be mitigated and how the survivors can be best helped in their time of need.

sometimes things do just happen without any conspiracy - a dificult concept for some on here to grasp i know but a fact none the less.

a link to the report of the quake is here:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4123927.stm

and for thos that cant be bothered to follow the link the story is pasted below:

An earthquake on a remote Antarctic archipelago home to 850,000 King Penguins was the strongest on earth in four years, seismologists say.
The quake hit 400km (250 miles) off the Macquarie Islands on Friday, measuring 8.1 on the Richter scale.

Penguins appear to have escaped a major disaster as the quake occurred deep under the sea, far from inhabited land.

There were no tsunamis, or large tidal waves, because the quake moved horizontally rather than vertically.

The tremors were felt in Tasmania, 1000km (600 miles) away, but because the epicentre was 10km underground, few observers noticed the initial quake.

10 BIGGEST QUAKES SINCE 1900
Chile, 1960: 9.5
Alaska, 1964: 9.2
Alaska, 1957: 9.1
Kamchatka, 1952: 9.0
Near Ecuador, 1906: 8.8
Alaska, 1965: 8.7
Tibet, 1950: 8.6
Kamchatka, 1923: 8.5
Indonesia, 1938: 8.5
Kuril Islands, 1963: 8.5
Source: US Geological Survey
Buildings on the islands shook for 15 seconds, seismologist Cvetan Sinadinovski said.

"If this had happened underneath a population centre it would probably have destroyed a whole city," he said.

The quake was the biggest anywhere on earth since an 8.4-magnitude tremor off the coast of Peru in June 2001. That killed 74 people.

Friday's earthquake was caused by the collision of two of the major tectonic plates which make up the earth's crust layer, the Indo-Australian and the Pacific plates.

The last quake of a similar magnitude in the Macquarie region was in 1924, Mr Sinadinovski said.

Despite its size, 22 staff of the Australian Antarctic Division slept through the tremors.

"Nobody felt anything," a spokesman said.

And Zarand? Other casuality?

Orlando Costa , Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

PS We have a small group of studies down here in the question of environmental war, if is there anyone else interested on this please get in contact

And Zarand? Other casuality?

Orlando Costa , Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

PS We have a small group of studies down here in the question of environmental war, if is there anyone else interested on this please get in contact