| Submit your comments on this article |
| Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia |
| Northern Poland hit by mysterious record-breaking earthquake |
| 2004-09-22 |
| Posted by:Dutchgeek |
| #36 Aris, you are right as the incorrect use of epicenter, I meant to say epicenter focus depth. As for the submarine and nuke 'splosion, I apparently overlooked that it was put forth before the mentioning of depth. Mea culpa. However, you seem to be quite keen to insult readily too, so in that regard, we are even. |
| Posted by: Memesis 2004-09-22 11:35:21 PM |
| #35 I thought I had a permian lump once.....turned out it was just from the hormel chili..... |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-09-22 11:28:34 PM |
| #34 Yes, facts, Memesis, just facts. As is the fact that I never said anything about submarines, nor about nuke testing, *after* the bit of info about the quake's depth was mentioned. But hey, don't you care about that. Just keep on insulting. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 11:08:44 PM |
| #33 Your various ad hominems aside, my point was that Permian lumps had nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion. I don't need to google details about geological periods, nor do I believe I ever asked you to serve them to me. But when someone participates by repeating "Permian lump" several times as if people are supposed to know what it means (and supposedly are too stupid for words if they don't), then it'd be kind if were either to provide a clear explanation about Permian lumps' relevancy to the topic -- or atleast a link that explains such. As *I* tend to do when there are details around that are too long or too tiresome to copy out directly. Zarathustra chose to attack my "critical thinking" because I didn't know about the "Permian lumps" relevancy. Well, I still don't and don't feel afraid to admit it. I only googled for info on quakes and frequency in the region, I offered you the maps I found on this very thread. I showed you that earthquakes aren't equally common or equally nasty all over -- and that therefore if the Polish scientists are confused and amazed I'm prepared to listen to them and start hypothesizing about alternate explanations. That the hypocenter depth was 10 km and the sea bottom was 200 m max, is indeed quite useful information, disproving the submarine hypothesis. But do please keep in mind however, both you and Zarathustra, that this bit of info was only mentioned by BigEd *after* I'd made said failed submarine hypothesis. So I don't see why you are attacking me for some supposed lack of logic or critical thinking. And you idiots, Memesis and Zarathustra, are too lazy to provide a single link, and you're attacking *me* as "feeling entitled to be served everything". And as a sidenote one of the things we learned among that basic stuff when were doing earthquakes is that the epicenter doesn't have depth, it's the hypocenter that's beneath the earth. So "epicenter depth" is a contradiction in terms. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 11:06:09 PM |
| #32 "dude, mike moore was in Poland?" LOL jarhead, haven't thought of that one. Lemme google.........no, not in Poland nor around Kaliningrad at the time. So the big fart theory is out, too. |
| Posted by: Memesis 2004-09-22 10:48:00 PM |
| #31 Oh, Aris, just so you have some idea about how far we got with drilling: "Release Date: January 2004 SONARDYNE POSITIONS TRANSOCEAN FOR NEW DRILLING RECORD Houston-based Sonardyne Inc., has revealed that the new world water depth drilling record set by Transocean’s drillship Discoverer Deep Seas was accomplished using a Sonardyne dual redundant subsea acoustic positioning system. The record was set last November when the vessel spudded a well in 10,011 feet (3,051 metres) of water in the Gulf of Mexico ." Facts, Aris, just facts. Accessible to me, and to you, the only impediment is your laziness (or someone else's for that matter). |
| Posted by: Memesis 2004-09-22 10:44:35 PM |
| #30 "though I'm not entirely sure how terms like "Lower Permian lump" and "Precambrian crystalline basement" actually helped clarify anything. I'm also arrogant and annoying but I atleast prefer not to use technical and convoluted words just to impress." Fer christ sake, google, man, if you do not have any bearings on geological periods (basic stuff in the secondary type of school). Or do you think you are entitled to be served everything? Oh yea, you're liberal, so you do. Once again, epicenter depth 10km, while sea bottom at 200m max in the area. Just common sense would tell ya that it couldn't have been a submarine, you're 9800m short. If you were looking, you would find out that the maximum depth used for underground testing of nukes was about 2500ft (800m), in most cases less than 600m. Just simple facts and the sub or underground nuke explosions are out. The only remainin scenario is thus quake. Until someone is able to build a standing vawe scalar generator that could result in what, theoretically, appears as an earthquake for all practical purposes, if you were able to generate energetic pulses in megaton range. I am thus puzzled how Poles could have been confused, regardless the fact that the signatures of underground nuke explosion and earthquakes are distinct, you simply can't confuse them if you had exposure to both (I guess someone skipped a class or two over there). |
| Posted by: Memesis 2004-09-22 10:25:57 PM |
| #29 dude, mike moore was in Poland? |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-09-22 9:58:50 PM |
| #28 We did cover Richter at school and I remember the Mercalli scale mentioned also. But somehow it didn't come up, the question about whether a nuke going off underground (or underwater) could be felt as an earthquake or not. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 9:46:26 PM |
| #27 Aris, From the UC Seismic Lab: the recent (5/30/98 at 06:22:28 UT) magnitude 6.5 earthquake in Afghanistan (37.4 N, 70.0 E), had a source duration of about 5 seconds and an estimated source volume of order 4000 cubic kilometers. This earthquake also had a focal depth of 18 km. The energy release is equivalent to a 2000 kiloton nuclear explosion. Or a 2 megaton bomb. Note the number of variables involved and that an increase of 1 in the Richter scale indicates an increase of 31X in magnitude. This page is a start on the topic. Given that Greece is in an area of seismic activity, I am surprised that the topic is not covered in the schools. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-09-22 6:06:01 PM |
| #26 Indeed I have no idea about energies involved in a 5 RS quake, but this article quoted scientists that supposedly did say this quake could have been caused by a pretty big explosion, to the point that their Russian counterpart had to be asked if they did anything over there. That did make me imagine that a nuclear explosion would have been sufficient. Thanks you, Zarathustra ,for the details you provided, though I'm not entirely sure how terms like "Lower Permian lump" and "Precambrian crystalline basement" actually helped clarify anything. I'm also arrogant and annoying but I atleast prefer not to use technical and convoluted words just to impress. I "majored" in Computer Science. It has little to do with geology *or* nuclear bombs. But if you're gonna be snippy to me about facts checking can you atleast provide a link, as *I* tend to provide links? It would help me from falling to folly again, and thus help you by removing from you the burden of correcting my ignorance again. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 4:31:38 PM |
| #25 i could go for a lump of that crystaline basement. |
| Posted by: half 2004-09-22 4:08:01 PM |
| #24 Aris: "I guess that if a Russian nuke submarine went boom off Kaliningrad's coast, this will come out eventually." What was it you majored in, again? That would be a party popper. You simply have no idea about energies involved in 5 RS quake. Nothwithstanding the fact that the waters in the area are 200m deep max. The area is mainly composed of Lower Permian lump, sticking like an eye in a big chunk of Precambrian crystalline basement. The epicenter is about 200km NE from Caledonian Deformation Front, running NW-SE which marks boundary of North German Basin, a big chunk of Lower Permian. You can expect infrequent (in the scale of 1k years) readjustments, but with quite a bang when that happens. No, I am not a geologist either, but back in the 60's early 70's, we were taught critical thinking and facts checking, even on the secondary level of edu. |
| Posted by: Zarathustra 2004-09-22 4:00:03 PM |
| #23 In Kaliningrad, it's got to be a Teutonic Plate! |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2004-09-22 2:47:35 PM |
| #22 Detail says the earthquake was 10km/6mi deep. Being so deep, 99% it was natural, but... |
| Posted by: BigEd 2004-09-22 2:20:31 PM |
| #21 Close enough. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-09-22 11:10:08 AM |
| #20 Rafael, this quake was centered in Russia, not in Poland. From the maps I gave above, Poland's biggest quakes seem to be towards its south, and they quickly decrease the further north you move. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 10:46:12 AM |
| #19 I guess that if a Russian nuke submarine went boom off Kaliningrad's coast, this will come out eventually. I doubt it's an underground nuke test, mainly because the Russians wouldn't have much reason to do in Kaliningrad instead of Siberia. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 10:44:22 AM |
| #18 Some facts: (translated from Polish) - there were some 76 earthquakes in Poland in a 1000-year span - 6 of those were of magnitude 6 - last major quake occured in 1786, but the 1990s saw several quakes of magnitudes up to 4.6 |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-09-22 10:43:39 AM |
| #17 so i guess it's that weapon from under siege 2....create an earthquake anywhere at anytime...please |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-09-22 10:36:00 AM |
| #16 Possible explanations: i) Americans misfired their E3000 quake-producing device ii) Russians misfired their E3000b quake-producing device iii) Michael Moore is on tour in Poland iv) end of the world is coming v) the Swedes have a nuclear weapons program vi) the Jooos, of course vii) Mother nature got pissed viii) the North Koreans did NOT misfire their E3000c quake-producing device, attempt to blackmail the Baltic states ix) the Baltic Sea is overcrowded with submarines x) a rare earthquake |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-09-22 10:31:03 AM |
| #15 Tectonic plates? Whatever you meant, tinfoil hat off, Aris. Strike-slip occurs along plate lines as does uplifting of one plate over another. Quakes can still occur far from plate joints . I give this verrrry poor odds of being othr than naturally ocurring. A 5 is nothing.... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-09-22 10:28:57 AM |
| #14 Aaaaarrrghhhhhhhhh. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2004-09-22 10:16:56 AM |
| #13 And if "Tectonic trenches" is not accurate what's the proper term? "Tectonic faults"? Choose the proper term, I believe you know what was meant. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 10:15:54 AM |
| #12 Aris, I love your crazy ways. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2004-09-22 10:14:54 AM |
| #11 Phil B, places that didn't have them *can* one day have them, in the sense that it's physically possible. And since it's physically possible it occasionally happens. By "to the same extent" I meant "to the same frequency". That's why I said that the explanation of a natural phenomenon is *also* rational. But such events are *rare*, so your dismissive "it happens everywhere" is annoying. Yeah, it happens everywhere, but in some places it happens rarely enough that it's also rational to lift an eyebrow when it so happens and consider alternate scenario without dismissing them in advance. Especially when the quake happens centered in the only bit on the region that's Russian territory. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 10:11:02 AM |
| #10 Everywhere in the world does NOT have big earthquakes to the same extent Aris, you are implying an equivalence between frequency and intensity (of earthquakes). Places that have infrequent earthquakes can have severe quakes, e.g. New Madrid and Colchester, England. BTW, 'major tectonic trenches' has nice alliteration but is otherwise meaningless. Regards |
| Posted by: phil_b 2004-09-22 9:39:41 AM |
| #9 One of the greatest earthquakes in American history occured on the New Madrid fault in Missouri in the early 1800's. No major plate activity there either. |
| Posted by: Don 2004-09-22 9:38:40 AM |
| #8 Armed Robber: No nonsense. Just give me all your money. Mr Logic: I shall commence by pointing out to you that my demeanour is not one which could be described as nonsensical. Consequently I can attest you have no cause to reprimand me on your first point. On to your second point: Bearing in mind the potentially lethal situation in which I find myself, to wit: your presence in conjuction with the presumably loaded firearm which is presently levelled at my cranium, I will comply with your request comprehensively, albeit reluctantly. Here, twenty-seven pence. Armed Robber: Twenty-seven pence? Fuck off. There's more than that in the till. Mr Logic: Indeed, undoubtedly so. However your request was for *my* money. The currency in the till belongs to a third party and is therefore not "my money". However, if you are still desirous of said money I would suggest that you re-phrase your original statement to recognise and incorporate this important distinction. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2004-09-22 9:33:03 AM |
| #7 With the epicenter of the quake being at the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad and Poland being far, far from the major tectonic trenches, the thing being artificial isn't *that* insane. Everywhere in the world does NOT have big earthquakes to the same extent. Exceeding 5 on the Richter scale is common enough for greece, turkey, japan, california -- but not for Kaliningrad, Russia. From (http://www.sftext.com/map/seisms_maps.html) look: World Map Europe map I'm personally giving the explanation that it was natural about equal odds to the explanation it was not. Both seem to me equally rational. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-09-22 9:17:50 AM |
| #6 Here's a pic: http://tinyurl.com/5788g |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2004-09-22 8:46:41 AM |
| #5 The Kursk have a sister vessel? |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2004-09-22 8:37:01 AM |
| #4 Bah! Warsaw is a seismically stable as Charleston. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-09-22 8:36:20 AM |
| #3 Everywhere in the world has earthquakes. End of story! |
| Posted by: phil_b 2004-09-22 8:32:53 AM |
| #2 Come on! It's the Zionist Earthquake Machine! The Jews did it! |
| Posted by: nada 2004-09-22 8:10:46 AM |
| #1 "The quake exceeded 5 on Richter scale... [Polish] Scientists are at a loss to explain possible reasons for the earthquake as the region is not considered to be seismic. They have not exclude the idea that it might have been caused by a huge explosion somewhere along the Russian Baltic coast." Oh brother! They should stop smoking pot in Warsaw University. |
| Posted by: Zarathustra 2004-09-22 7:57:41 AM |
