AN UPDATE THE VIRGINIA QUAKE: USGS DATA
The USGS released its official data for the Virginia quake and I thought it bore updating here. You can find the data here:
As you look at this data, it is important to note that you should click the tabs at the top of the page to see all the USGS's most recent thinking about it.
There's a lot of speculation out there, including some by myself, that the Virginia quake could have been artificial. Arguing somewhat in favor of that hypothesis, but by no means nearly conclusively, is the fact that the USGS is reporting the quake to have occurred at a depth of 3.7 miles.
However, if one goes to the "Summary" tab at the top of the link above, one reads the following important information:
"The Virginia earthquake of 2011 August 23 occurred as reverse faulting on a north or northeast-striking plane within a previously recognized seismic zone, the "Central Virginia Seismic Zone." The Central Virginia Seismic Zone has produced small and moderate earthquakes since at least the 18th century. The previous largest historical shock from the Central Virginia Seismic Zone occurred in 1875. The 1875 shock occurred before the invention of effective seismographs, but the felt area of the shock suggests that it had a magnitude of about 4.8. The 1875 earthquake shook bricks from chimneys, broke plaster and windows, and overturned furniture at several locations. A magnitude 4.5 earthquake on 2003, December 9, also produced minor damage.
"Previous seismicity in the Central Virginia Seismic Zone has not been causally associated with mapped geologic faults. Previous, smaller, instrumentally recorded earthquakes from the Central Virginia Seismic Zone have had shallow focal depths (average depth about 8 km). They have had diverse focal mechanisms and have occurred over an area with length and width of about 120 km, rather than being aligned in a pattern that might suggest that they occurred on a single causative fault. Individual earthquakes within the Central Virginia Seismic Zone occur as the result of slip on faults that are much smaller than the overall dimensions of the zone. The dimensions of the individual fault that produced the 2011 August 23 earthquake will not be known until longer-term studies are done, but other earthquakes of similar magnitude typically involve slippage along fault segments that are 5 - 15 km long." (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/se082311a.html#summary, emphasis added)
What this means is that there is no really good geological explanation for the magnitude of the Virginia quake except the possibility that a new fault or fracture may have been created, like cracking a rock under stress. But what produced the stress to begin with? In the past, prior to similar earthquake and even the tsunami in Indonesia, witnesses describe seeing either large electrical storms prior to the event, or strange "globes of light" and other EM-type effects. It remains, now, to be seen if witnesses in Virginia described seeing similar things. Either way, to my mind, the USGS data leaves open both the possibility that it was a natural, though unusual, event, and an event possibly triggered by artificial means.
14 Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
It is rather difficult to reconcile recorded the data that we (now) see on the USGS site with the seismograph at Washington and Lee University in central Virginia that was published on 23 August 2011. See: http://www2.nbc17.com/news/2011/aug/23/13/59-earthquake-rocks-virginia-ar-1324668/
If…. And I say if this interview by David Wilcock with Benjamine Fulford contains any truth at all; Wow! Does it ever connect any number of dots that the good Dr. has been working on.
http://www.divinecosmos.com/start-here/davids-blog/975-undergroundbases
A word of caution. I’ve since tracked at least two parts of the story back to disinformation specialist davidbooth/sorchafaal. Unless there’s other confirming evidence, keep your salt shaker handy. Apologies to all.
Yeah, I’m listening to this interview right now. Check this link out:
http://theintelhub.com/2011/09/18/nuked-underground-base-causing-massive-sinkhole-in-virginia/
Post earthquake, there are sink holes appearing on VA.
http://www.seis.sc.edu/projects/SCSN/history/Publications/pageoph971/pageoph971.pdf
“There’s a lot of speculation out there…that the Virginia quake could have been artificial”-
do tell-
“What this means is that there is no really good geological explanation for the magnitude of the Virginia quake except the possibility that a new fault or fracture may have been created”-
do tell- but created by what/whom?-
even if one can spell HAARP there may be another faction at work here-
warmest regards to all-
Larry
Something no one has talked about is the “coincidence” of a fairly significant quake very near Denver within a day of the Virginia quake.
Why could this be significant? Just outside of Denver is the “little Pentagon” complex where much of the functionality of the Washington area Pentagon is duplicated. There’s even a smaller replica of the Pentagon building there.
Seems sort of like a shot across the bow, huh?
By little Pentagon outside Denver you arent talking about the Springs are you?
There is Fort Carson and the AFB and Cheyenne Mountain, but it doesn’t remind me of the Pentagon. Do pray tell please!
If the quake was artificially induced, then why were they so half-ass about it.
Why not make it a very high magnitude quake, or else why bother at all.
Maybe there is massive tunneling and cavern construction going on underground using small clean atomic bombs to hollow out circular cavern areas for cities….and maybe the surface earthquakes were just residual effects.
Why was Area 51 called Area 51…could it have anything to do with a 51st state, maybe an underground 51st state.
If someone was ‘attacking’ you guys in a covert earthquake war-lots of small quakes over time may be enough to set up a really really big one
Food for thought
The 2003 quake could also be artificial – it is well within the time frame of EM scalar weaponry (Bearden places the Soviet use as beginning in the 1960s).
The fact that no other significant quakes are mentioned between the 2003 quake and the 1875 quake either means there weren’t any, or that they are being ignored. The 1875 quake is in all probably natural, although there may have been some person or group with that capability then (Tesla’s EM tech was developed some 15-20 years later).
Choosing a location with some history of quake activity would provide a cover for covert EM use, and its proximity to so many important control centers of the US could also be used for a message.
The fact that a quake hit way back in 1875 and then nothing until 2003 and then again in 2011 is suspicious in itself. I wonder what was going on in world politics/economics around the time of the 2003 quake?
It looks to me that if we are to believe any “official” story about the quake that we are, yet again, expected to believe in a statistical anomaly.
However, giving USGS the benefit of a doubt that the Virginia quake COULD have been a natural event is not as anomalous as not one, not two, but THREE passports of alleged hijackers being found on 9/11.
Fulford has another theory that the white brotherhood set those off as a demonstration to the western elite that they can not hide in their deep bunkers. They must face the monster waking…
I’m more fascinated by the fact that both of those quakes (in CO too) were 111 miles from a similar named town which then if you take the midpoint between the two puts you in northern LA with the same named town which 111 miles northwestish is a little area called New Madrid. I live very close to that area…I am prepared as I can be, we all should be with the absolute power on display by our mother Earth.
Set those off – nukes…my bad. Another comment was lost to nothingness…happens a lot commenting here…at least for me.