|
Amit makes a good point, but |
Amit makes a good point here, although there is a difference between speculation, which is what people are doing on this thread, and what Amit does, which is to go much farther with working on a hypothesis that lacks scientific reason or logic. OK, yes, it does look like mainly far southern California has lit up, but with tiny quakes. I don't think this is so unusual; it is just different from the last month or more. We on this page have noticed that this happens from time to time, and no one has a good explanation. So, we can speculate. The obvious speculation is that something is going on; maybe there will be a bigger quake. But, the history of watching quakes like this (casually in my case), is that it does not mean anything. If you want some speculation with a tiny basis in geology, maybe some low-angle (closer to horizontal) regional faults system is creeping a little bit. So, why did I wake up wide awake at 2 AM? Probably just lack of exercise this week and things to worry about; not psychic. Follow Ups: ● Channel Islands, Santa Monica - heartland chris 11:44:43 - 1/11/2011 (77918) (1) ● Re: Channel Islands, Santa Monica - Canie 23:48:25 - 1/12/2011 (77929) (1) ● Re: Channel Islands, Santa Monica - heartland chris 05:50:23 - 1/13/2011 (77932) (0) ● Re: Amit makes a good point, but - Robert Baum 12:37:25 - 1/9/2011 (77911) (1) ● Re: Amit makes a good point, but - heartland chris 11:42:53 - 1/11/2011 (77917) (0) |
|