Thanks Dave,

Just the ammunition I need to get some of the local hippies to calm down a bit.

Mark

On 13/03/11 21:08, Dave Nelson wrote:
> Hi Jon, Mark and Dick
>
> For one of the few times ;) I would have to agree with Jon. Altho I couldnt state
> an absolute and utter NO. I would have to say that the possibility of
> correlation between
> large quakes and CME's is dubious at best, and I think my chances of winning
> the lottery
> stand far higher probability. I have been studying quakes and solar activity
> for some 40 years
> now.
> If there was a correlation then there should be an obvious increase in seismic
> activity during
> every solar max and a drop off of activity during solar minimum, as CME
> increase in size and
> number then decline. That just isnt supported by the data.
> when you look at seismic activity even over the last 100 - 200 yrs. the rate of
> large events doesnt
> change, regardless of what solar activity is doing. There is still on avg 1 x
> M8+ event / yr and
> ~ 15 x M7 - 7.9 events/ yr.
> During the Maunder Minimum, the period roughly spanning 1645 to 1715 when
> sunspots and
> therefore CME's were next to non existant the world was still shaken by many
> huge and or
> damaging quakes eg.....
>
> *1106 1638 St. Lawrence Valley region. US-Canada Bdr
> *1202 1645 Quito, Ecuador,
> 1305 1647 Santiago, Chile, 1,000 Dths
> 1662 Anhwei, China, 300,000 Dths
> *0502 1663 2230UT 7.0 St. Lawrence River, Canada, damage, MMI X
> 1205 1664 7.3 Ica, Peru, Fatalities 400
> NOV 1667 Shemakha, Caucasia, 80,000 Dths
> 1708 1668 8.0 Anatolia, Turkey, 8,000 Dths
> *1701 1670 Cntrl Europe
> 0406 1679 Caucasia
> *2010 1687 8.5 Lima, Peru, 600 Dths
> 0706 1692 Jamaica, Fatalities 2000 from quake and tsunami
> 1101 1693 7.5 Sicily-Italy area, ~60,000 Deaths
> 2601 1700 ~9 Cascadia Subduction Zone offshr Oregon, USA, Maj
> tsunami crossed the Pacific and did damage in Japan
> *3112 1703 Tokyo-Odowara area, Japan, >5,000 Deaths
> MY or JN 1710 Algiers
> 0302 1716 Medea, Algeria, 20,000 Dths
>
>
> During 1989 which was one of the stronger solar max's of recent times with the
> largest X class flares
> ever recorded a couple > X20 there was still only 1 x M8+ that year the M8.2 of
> Macquarie Island
> (an aside ... that was the first M8 I recorded on my gear, I lived ~900km to
> the nth)
> 1989 saw only 4 x M7 - 7.9 events a very quiet year for big quakes !!!
> Lets take into account a little time lag between CME's hitting earth and
> seismic activity occurring
> 1990 was an even quieter year with no events hitting M8 and about the same # of
> M7's as 1989
>
> BUT... We mustn't forget you are purporting INSTANT effects as you were blaming
> the recent 2-3 weeks
> of solar activity for a immediate big event!!!! .... sorry it just doesnt wash
>
> These CME's and flares of the last few weeks have been tiny in comparison to
> the big stuff, the sun only
> "clearing its throat"
>
> cheers
> Dave
>
>
> At 06:23 PM 13/03/2011, you wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Given the number of earthquakes / number of solar flares there is no
>> correlation at all. Most of the years 2007 to 2011 there where few to
>> none sun spots and even fewer solar flares. That I know because I
>> monitor the sunspots also for solar flares. You even have longer period
>> in history known as little ice age where there was few to none sun
>> spots, even in that period a large earthquakes are known to have
>> happened.
>>
>> This study does not keep up with the facts in this matter. That is a
>> fact. In fact, I also see that this study is full of errors, flaws and
>> wrong assumsions. It only provies sunspots = earthquakes but does not
>> give a time scale for it and with that removes the data that proves that
>> this study is in fact wrong.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jón Frímann.
>>
>> On sun, 2011-03-13 at 19:33 +1300, Mark Robinson wrote:
>> > Jón,
>> >
>> > http://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0602208 indicates that solar flares and
>> > earthquakes share very similar distributions but does not examine correlation
>> > between the two.
>> >
>> > It is easy to theorise that solar flares, which have a large magnetic
>> > component, impacting on earth could disturb the big magnet in the middle.
>> > Remember that aurora happen at the poles. The deeper an earthquake the lower
>> > the frequencies that we see on the surface. Without doing any formal analysis,
>> > my own observation is that eigenmode activity often precedes large quakes, as
>> > it did in the case of the Japanese event. Similarly impacts of CMEs often
>> > precede eigenmode activity.
>> >
>> > Dismissing scientific curiosity out of hand does you no credit, perhaps you
>> > could cite some references for your arguments. Some reasoning might be nice
>> too
>> > especially as I seem to remember you yourself saying many similar things here
>> > over the years.
>> >
>> > The position that "earthquakes can't be predicted therefore anyone who wishes
>> > to explore the possibility is nuts" is closer to religion than science.
>> >
>> > Mark
>> >
>> >
>> > On 13/03/11 18:48, Jón Frímann wrote:
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > The answer is still no.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Jón Frímann.
>> > >
>> > > On lau, 2011-03-12 at 21:41 -0800, Dick Habegger wrote:
>> > >> Thank you for your reply, Jon. I value your comments.
>> > >>
>> > >> However, USGS spent many years in denial that there was a relationship
>> > >> to earthquakes on the opposite sides of the Earth.
>> > >> We, in our HAM Seismic Precursor Net decided that there was a relationship.
>> > >> Now, Kate Hutton, et al, at JPL have expressed this relationship.
>> > >> Also, they are warning of a major Earthquake in the California region.
>> > >> This is a departure of previous comments and answers to questions.
>> > >> My discussions with Waverly Pearson at Golden, had other similar
>> > >> comments; especially with the New Madrid Fault.
>> > >>
>> > >> Also, Jim Berkland was ridiculed with his Dog and Cat Reports (missing
>> > >> in want-ads).
>> > >> And, his idea of Full/New Moon stress triggering stress lines.
>> > >> Now, these are discussed in many quarters and countries.
>> > >>
>> > >> Therefore, I suggest more thought and study with CME's.
>> > >> Why is do both happen I am a believer that there is nothing as
>> > >> "coincidence". Only the rules have not been developed yet.
>> > >> I will leave it at that point since I am far below the talents of this
>> > >> group.
>> > >> Just think, the island of Japan moved 8 feet! Try that at home, folks!
>> > >>
>> > >> Dick Habegger
>> > >> Phelan, CA
>> > >>
>> > >> On 3/12/2011 8:12 PM, Jón Frímann wrote:
>> > >>> Hi,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The answer is no.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Regards,
>> > >>> Jón Frímann.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On lau, 2011-03-12 at 20:07 -0800, Dick Habegger wrote:
>> > >>>>> AURORAS IN THE USA: A coronal mass ejection (CME) hit Earth's
>> > >>>>> magnetic field on March 10th. The impact set off a G1-class
>> > >>>>> geomagnetic storm and sent Northern Lights rippling over the
>> > >>>>> US-Canadian border into states such as Wisconsin, Minnesota, and
>> > >>>>> Michigan. Sky watchers who hadn't seen auroras in years captured
>> > >>>>> beautiful photos of green and purple streamers. This is another sign
>> > >>>>> that Solar Cycle 24 is heating up. Checkhttp://spaceweather.com for
>> > >>>>> photos and updates.
>> > >>>> I have been receiving reports from spaceweather.com that the Sun has
>> > >>>> been having major sunspot activity lately. The same period has seen
>> > >>>> major earthquakes on Earth. Is there a correlation between the events?
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Dick Habegger
>> > >>>> Phelan, CA

__________________________________________________________

Public Seismic Network Mailing List (PSNLIST)

To leave this list email PSNLIST-REQUEST@.............. with 
the body of the message (first line only): unsubscribe
See http://www.seismicnet.com/maillist.html for more information.