Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I took my daughter out to the Natural Museum of History here in Manhattan and came across a rather interesting piece of charting technology. There are a few folks here who seem to think that a few large quakes here and there (right along the average in reality) is heralding the end times as they believe it will go down. Others, preferring to deal with actual facts, point out that earthquakes are far more frequent than many realize but while we hear about a major one every now and again, the reality is, there are numerous earthquakes daily. Most, however, are too minor to even garner a notice or they occur in remote locations.
Well, while walking with my daughter we came across this real-time chart that shows all the quakes over a month's period. In fact, the occurrences are so common, scientists EXPECT them and can even predict an average because of the consistency over the recent decades. Here's the chart below, but take careful note of the earthquakes over the past 2 weeks (the yellow circles). There were hundreds upon hundreds that were registered, but how many did we hear about?
There was another screen below (as seen in the picture) that registered tremors as they occur. In fact, there was even a time clock that PREDICTS the next quake.
WTH. Excuse my language but that doesn't make any sense. How can they *predict* an earthquake? I was under the impression that when earthquakes or tremors occur, they are registered immediately afterward? How can they just predict an earthquake that never happened, and then register it as so even thought it did not occur yet? Thanks for this Insane! You really opened my eyes. Now if they have this time clock that predicts tremors and earthquakes and registers them into the system before they even happen, what's stopping them from falsifying info like the actual number of earthquakes in recent years? Because it doesn't make any sense. USGS has there chart where they list all the significant earthquakes. They are all relatively equal in number for the past few years. But Wikipedia has a condensed list and gives the significant number of earthquakes 4.0+ and it gets bigger every year. And Wikipedia isn't the only one. There is this data chart I believe you have seen going around since last year listing all the earthquakes in the past few years and 2008 or 09 was sky high in number. It just doesn't make sense that there are two opposing sources. They should have the same information.
I've been thinking for quite a while now that USGS has the power to do something of that caliber. To falsify the actual number of earthquakes to refrain from having a mass hysteria. Because this is widely known people panic quickly and fanatically in the face of a coming disaster. Imagine, hypothetically (because Idk if it's true), if everyone learned that earthquakes were in fact increasing, by a large percentage, this would create a havoc among people of the world. You know, I'm not a paranoid person by any means, but I've been thinking about this for quite awhile. So many times in history, a national government would try to down play the actual level of emergence in the face of a coming disaster. Kind of like the Gulf Oil Spill. Or the recent floods of Nashville and Arkansas. They would downplay these events to refrain from causing panic among the masses and in turn, it just made everything THAT much more worse. But you know what? It doesn't matter anyway. What's done in the dark, comes to the light. When the big earthquakes start hitting places you would never think they would, you'll see. There is nothing we need to prove. They've been happening. The only people who actually sit and say "Everything is okay" are the ones that haven't experience a thing.
Multiple earthquakes happen daily, most that we don't know about, hear about or feel to even take notice. Every now and again, a relatively large one rolls through and some folks think that means this is proof the Bible is being fulfilled when in fact, the earth is simply doing what it has always done. Many quakes with a relatively FEW large ones here and there in the course of a year.
WTH. Excuse my language but that doesn't make any sense. How can they *predict* an earthquake?
They predict them like how you or I can predict a train or bus will pass by every few minutes in New York City. They observe the past, realize one occurs in the world every few minutes and as a result, predict that one will hit somewhere in the world within the next few minutes. Simple as that. They are NOT predicting WHERE the next one will hit though they are pretty sure it will be in an area where they happen OFTEN happen. If you predict rain will fall somewhere on the earth in the next second, how right would you be? What basis would you use to make such predictions? Once you understand that, you will realize how they can make such predictions. This is why I have always said that the mention of earthquakes being a "sign" of the end is not some ground breaking revelation. Why? They ALWAYS have been occurring in different (divers) places.
Quote:
I was under the impression that when earthquakes or tremors occur, they are registered immediately afterward? How can they just predict an earthquake that never happened, and then register it as so even thought it did not occur yet? Thanks for this Insane! You really opened my eyes.
Note, they are NOT predicting WHERE a quake will happen. Based on past observations, they just happen to realize one will hit ever few minutes on the earth. It might be a 1.2 magnitude quake that no one will bat an eye at or it could be a 9.0 in Chile.
Quote:
Now if they have this time clock that predicts tremors and earthquakes and registers them into the system before they even happen, what's stopping them from falsifying info like the actual number of earthquakes in recent years? Because it doesn't make any sense. USGS has there chart where they list all the significant earthquakes. They are all relatively equal in number for the past few years. But Wikipedia has a condensed list and gives the significant number of earthquakes 4.0+ and it gets bigger every year. And Wikipedia isn't the only one. There is this data chart I believe you have seen going around since last year listing all the earthquakes in the past few years and 2008 or 09 was sky high in number. It just doesn't make sense that there are two opposing sources. They should have the same information.
I've been thinking for quite a while now that USGS has the power to do something of that caliber. To falsify the actual number of earthquakes to refrain from having a mass hysteria. Because this is widely known people panic quickly and fanatically in the face of a coming disaster. Imagine, hypothetically (because Idk if it's true), if everyone learned that earthquakes were in fact increasing, by a large percentage, this would create a havoc among people of the world. You know, I'm not a paranoid person by any means, but I've been thinking about this for quite awhile. So many times in history, a national government would try to down play the actual level of emergence in the face of a coming disaster. Kind of like the Gulf Oil Spill. Or the recent floods of Nashville and Arkansas. They would downplay these events to refrain from causing panic among the masses and in turn, it just made everything THAT much more worse. But you know what? It doesn't matter anyway. What's done in the dark, comes to the light. When the big earthquakes start hitting places you would never think they would, you'll see. There is nothing we need to prove. They've been happening. The only people who actually sit and say "Everything is okay" are the ones that haven't experience a thing.
Don't panic my friend. I think you were making some wrong assumptions. They predict the earthquakes like you or I can predict there will be a murder some place in the world in the next second. The past and current trends helps to assist in making predictions for the future. Understand?
The earthquakes described in the Revelation (of Jesus Christ) represent the kingdoms and systems of this world which have been built up by man. It's a spiritual book that we should desire to first understand its implications as it pertains to each of us individually, as it is - after all - the revealing of Christ in His church.
The earthquakes described in the Revelation (of Jesus Christ) represent the kingdoms and systems of this world which have been built up by man. It's a spiritual book that we should desire to first understand its implications as it pertains to each of us individually, as it is - after all - the revealing of Christ in His church.
I don't think these folks are only speaking about the mention of earthquakes in the book of Revelation. They are referring to Matthew, Mark and Luke where the writers mention that there will be earthquakes in different places. Since those passages are found within the context of the world coming to an end or the return of Jesus, they believe that earthwuakes today, great or small, which have bee going on since the dawn of time are evidence Jesus is soon to return.
I don't think these folks are only speaking about the mention of earthquakes in the book of Revelation. They are referring to Matthew, Mark and Luke where the writers mention that there will be earthquakes in different places. Since those passages are found within the context of the world coming to an end or the return of Jesus, they believe that earthwuakes today, great or small, which have bee going on since the dawn of time are evidence Jesus is soon to return.
There's no different message, if we understand that Jesus spoke heavily on the subject of refinement as well.
Maybe if people understood what earthquakes were - they would have a different opinion of them. They are caused by shifting in the earths plates. You can read about earthquakes on wikipedia. There is an iron clad scientific explaination for them. I used to live in Los Angeles and we had them all the time. There is a reason they happen in Los Angeles - because of the fault lines in the Earth's crust. There is a reason why they don't usually happen in other areas- no fault lines. So as much as they can't predice exactly where an earthquake is going to hit - they do know the areas that are more susceptible. I hope that eases people's mind a little bit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is why I have always said that the mention of earthquakes being a "sign" of the end is not some ground breaking revelation. Why? They ALWAYS have been occurring in different (divers) places.
