(Not that it's in any way relevant.)
Posted on 03/11/2011 10:56:09 PM PST by The Magical Mischief Tour
The devastating earthquake and tsunami that struck Japan early today (March 11) were "completely unrelated" to the approaching "supermoon," despite a news report that tied the earthquake to the upcoming lunar event, according to U.S. Geological Survey geophysicist John Bellini.
The supermoon will occur on March 19, when the moon is at or near its point of closest orbit — lunar perigee — and is also full. As we explained in our previous coverage of the upcoming supermoon, seismologists have found no evidence to believe that lunar perigees heighten seismic activity.
The best evidence that this earthquake was not caused by a supermoon is that it happened now — exactly a week away from the date the moon will be full, and almost a week after it was new, the two times that the moon exerts its greatest pull on the planet.
(Excerpt) Read more at space.com ...
Of course not... it was man-made CO2 that caused it. Invest in carbon credits now.
what do you by no evidence to prove lunar perigees responsible. How about gravity?
If the moon can effect water tides, why not earth’s plates and also water vapor in the air?
Come to think of it, earth’s crust is molten, so WHY CAN’T it effect the earth’s plate when it can effect water on the surface
Japan may have been lucky. Moon tides exist on land. The next perigee sounds like a make or break for a few thousand sites. :)
“The best evidence that this earthquake was not caused by a supermoon is that it happened now — exactly a week away from the date the moon will be full, and almost a week after it was new, the two times that the moon exerts its greatest pull on the planet.”
The lamest thing I’ve heard in awhile...
If plates are very near the threshold of slipping, the lunar tidal forces on the earth only need to push it past that threshold to cause an earthquake. The extra push needed could be lower than the peak coming on the 19th. It would all depend on how close the the plates are to the threshold needed to slip.
“not caused by a supermoon is that it happened now — exactly a week away”
That’s because this one is only a pre-cursor to the BIG ONE next week. AHHHHH!
This is BS, based on how they phrase it. The moon’s not going to suddenly jump 20,000km closer next week. It’s gradually drawing closer over time due to the eccentricity of its orbit. The 19th is just the date of closest approach. It’s damn close to that perigee now, and a week is only going to make a difference of a few hundred kilometers, if that. Also, just because the moon’s tidal effect is greatest at new and full, doesn’t mean that its gravity well can’t affect the planet at other times. We still have tides when the moon isn’t full, or new, why is this any different?
Further, as noted above, just because it didn’t happen at closest approach, doesn’t mean that’s the only time it *could* happen. If the plates were right on the edge of slipping, any small input of energy could be the erg that broke the subduction zone’s back, so to speak.
All that said however, we’re talking about a 20,000km difference in an orbit that averages about 375,000km in radius. So right now, the moon’s about 356,000km away. Our moon’s pretty dense, but is it dense enough to affect the earth that much at such a distance?
Well, just to be on the safe side, let’s blow her out of the sky!!
OMG!
I live on a mountain!
It’s gonna crash into me!
Aaaaaaaack!
When the Moon is full, the Earth is between the Sun and the Moon, so it's being pulled frm both sides like a tug of war. When the Moon is new, the Moon is between the Earth and the Sun so they pull together......
I wonder if anyone has correlated earthquakes with solar flares?
ROFL!
Yeah, real good idea, Gator.
I’m a romantic... I just can’t help it. LOL
(Not that it's in any way relevant.)
Yup.
Nothing charms the ladies quite like blowing up the moon.
I know ~I’d~ positively swoon over that.
;D
[we should ping Gunner...he’s the “Ah done blowed it up ~real~ good” guy]
The square of the closest distance (now) is 1.25 times larger than the square of furthest distance between the Moon and the Earth. IOW, the tug of the Moon’s gravity is now 25% greater than it is, when the Moon is at apogee.
Looks like a missile launch to me. I can tell from the pixels and from seeing quite a few missile launches in my day.
Seriously, the USGS and the compliant media and their parrots, et al, are quick to dispense with notions the Moon has any affect on Earth as astrology.
And it's true, the Moon was about 247,920 miles (398,988 km) away, during the onset of this seismic event affecting Japan. That's about the mean radius of the lunar orbit.
And, on March 19, just shy of about nine hours after the official moment of the next Full Moon, the Moon will briefly linger at an unusually close perigee of 218,943 miles away (352,354 km). Even so, the Moon is a lot further away than it appears. From limb to limb it's diameter is roughly the distance between New York and Las Vegas, for example. When the next Full Moon occurs, it will appear 16 percent wider than average.
But its hubris to deny the gravitational influence of our unusually large natural satellite, large in comparison with its primary, our home here on Earth, spread over the dry areas of its thin outer shell. The Moon relentlessly tugs at us in a way we can see, in the tides. Those same tidal forces lock the slightly heavier "nearside" of the Moon facing Earth.
The tidal force we see affecting the timing of high and near sea tides lag the Moon's apparent location in the sky by several hours, but there is another factoid most people don't consider.
The length of the radii of our Moon's orbit is measured from within a few kilometers of the Moon's center and the barycenter of the center of gravity of the Earth-Moon system, which is not the center of the Earth. The Earth revolves around that same point in the same time it takes the Moon to orbit once every 27.3 days. It's about one third the distance from the Earth's surface to its center, always within Earth but a long way away from its center, and not exactly synchronous with Earth's daily rotation.
The Moon has been slowly distancing itself from Earth, unwinding its angular momentum, a few centimeters further away each century, for a very long time so it's likely to have had an even stronger tidal affect on the Earth in the past than at present, and its possible the Earth's singularly active tectonics and strong magnetic field (for which I thank God) because of the proximity of our relatively large natural satellite.
Earth is almost entirely liquid, of fluid (perhaps even super fluid at its core) so considering all these facts its strange to discount the possibility of the Moon having an effect on the stresses along Earth tectonic lithosphere.
When the Moon is full, it is at opposition, on the opposite side of Earth from the Sun, and the next Full Moon occurs near the Equinox, for what its worth (probably not much). We already accept the tidal effects we can see, in calculating this tricky "three body problem," and take these forces into account when getting a vehicle from Earth to the Moon.
While I do discount the, so-called "Super Moon" as spectacular but not of particularly more affect than usual, I can't dismiss, out of hand, the possibility that the Moon may have a profound influence on the Earth's tectonics. It may not be any more predictable than other factors, but it simply has to tug and pull on tectonic plates, and may be the primary cause of Earth's unusually active plate tectonics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.