Iran has been hit by an Earthquake....

[Hutzpa]

Looks like another mysterious earthquake has hit Iran, If you ask me I'll say this is a Nukulah earthquake. Just my opinion.

So they can't go to war with them, next best thing hit them with Nukulah (deliberate misspell) earthquake.

:shrug: :nuke:





Edit: to include smilies

[WilliamPitt]

1. Um...

What?

Nuclear earthquake?

Does this spring from the same UFO technology that caused the Asian tsunami and Hurricane Katrina?

My teeth hurt. Maybe from the signals.

You know...the signals.

[Hutzpa]

6. Could be 5.7 and 4.7 respectfully n/t

:tinfoilhat:

[katty]

19. hmmm, interesting timing-the day after Iran UN/US defiance.

[paul_fromatlanta]

2. Is this number 4 now? Last I heard the death toll was approaching 100 fro

from the first three.

[The Magistrate]

3. What Is Mysterious About It, Sir?

Earthquakes are common in the region.

[Hutzpa]

7. 13 tremors.....thriugh out the night

just too good to be true.

[Ediacara]

10. those are called aftershocks friend

And I'd say for the Iranians living there, it's not too good to be true.

[The Magistrate]

11. How So, Sir? What Is Atypical About That?

Earthquakes generally occur in reverbrations. There is not one nsap and all else stillness.

Are you seriously suggesting technology able to create earthquakes clandestinely exists?

[Hutzpa]

22. I'm just putting my tinfoil on

got to be cautious around me, with everything else happening....i've got to question everything.

[Generarth]

104. Don't stop at the hat.

tinfoil yourself right up.

[Kadie]

13. too good to be true?

Whaaaa????


:shrug:

[Kurovski]

15. "Too good to be true"? Think of what you're saying.

It's inconsiderate in the extreme.

This is the kind of thing right-wing columnists love to quote from DU...and sometimes they'll even "plant" stuff like that as well.

[file83]

53. spokane just means it's more than just a coincidence...

I disagree though. I'm pretty sure that earthquake clusters are a documented phenomenom.

[Kurovski]

100. I do understand what he means based on his premise.

But it's a heck of a way to put it.

It's almost too perfectly designed for a right-Wing columnist's rant. DU can't be maligned on its content too often as the community as a whole makes sense, follows logic and science, and has an excellent track record on calling a spade a spade.

So some in the media go fishing in pretty deep waters to brand DU a community of clueless, bush-hating crackpots. Some are here now.

Now read this out of context and imagine I reported to you that this is what someone wrote about the earthquake in Iran: "13 tremors.....thriugh out the night, just too good to be true."

It's fodder for a whole column. It's even MISSPELLED! Here is a possible title for the essay: "It's All Bush's Fault: Moonbats Say Bush Caused Iran Earthquakes."

What I'm saying is the OP is irresponsible. It is provocative, and it's unfair to our community.

It's one thing to speculate on far-reaching concepts based on evidence and carefully presented in its proper light, but the OP makes casual assumptions, tosses out a few cracks, some innuendo, then sits back to see what he can snag on his line.

And as for the Iranian earthquake victims, it would have been nice to at least have waited until prayers were said for the dead and the surviving before running off in such a direction.

A post on the Red Crescent Society at least. Geez.

http://www.ifrc.org/

[blm]

16. After the Northridge quake we had THOUSANDS of aftershocks in the weeks

following, many at 4. and above, and hundreds of thousands throughout that year.

[earth mom]

4. Makes you go...hmmm.

Sorry to hear this BTW.

[Ishoutandscream2]

5. Republican Jeebus taking his wrath out on Brown People

:sarcasm:

[Ediacara]

8. There is nothing mysterious about earthquakes in Iran

The Arabian plate is being subducted under the Eurasian plate. See:



That's why there are mountains and earthquakes in Iran...

[Ediacara]

17. See, this is the USGS's map

Right at a subduction zone....

[Kurovski]

9. Is this anything like Creationism?

Unless you have links to credible sources backing up your theory, Please stop. :-)

Or maybe there's a Harry Potter, or Star Wars forum this can be moved to? :-)

[gatorboy]

12. Harry Potter started an earthquake???

Harry, why do you hate the muggles so much?

[Kurovski]

20. Okay, okay! A fantasy forum, then!

:-)

[WilliamPitt]

40. The next book: Harry Potter and the Persian Shake

Available in bookstores soon...

[Kurovski]

46. Followed by: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Cyclone.

Projected release date sometime in 2008.

[earth mom]

57. Not funny-but rather cruel considering people have died.

Just calling it as I see it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060331/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_quake

[Kurovski]

99. Cruel perhaps to spokane, but really more of a gentle chiding

based on the broadness of the OP's speculation.

[Hutzpa]

34. Here is a link for to read

http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/haarpFactSheet.html

[Kurovski]

47. Earthquakes occur underground, not in the atmosphere,

at least according to my tattered recollection.

[file83]

55. Yes, but HAARP electro-magnetic transmissions can penetrate the

Earth's surface as well. So, the possibility is there.

[Ediacara]

63. OMG!

electromagnetic transmissions from my foot when I stomp can penetrate the ground too! Is my foot part of the HAARP conspiracy?

[file83]

82. Hyperbole much?

[Ediacara]

83. it's not hyperbole when it's true

[file83]

88. Yeah, whatever you say there, DinoBoy.

[RoyGBiv]

14. Plate Tectonics ...

Science has allowed us to develop a fairly good understanding of what causes earthquakes. Of course I realize science isn't all that popular right now, what with all the perfectly good mythology floating about to give us answers, but I'll stick with scientific explanation, thanks.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ediacara]

21. Seeing as HAARP allows you to take tours of the entire facility

I don't think it does what you think it does.

Additionally, HAARP instruments work in the ionosphere. Weather doesn't happen in the ionosphere.

[RoyGBiv]

23. Ironically ...

Neither do earthquakes. :-)

I've never quite understood how these "the government started an earthquake" threads automatically tie into "the government is controlling the weather" threads.

[shance]

26. Is presenting facts like the "Weather Modification Law" implementation

wrong?

Would you like to prevent discussing information about important information that involves our weather?

What does that gain anyone?

[RoyGBiv]

27. How does this relate to earthquakes?

I could present a lot of stuff in this thread about my personal obsession, copyright law and how the government and corporations are using it to control the public. Is it relevant? No.

[file83]

49. Well, you might find this interesting...

...or, maybe not. :shrug:

From the HAARP website:

The Department of Defense (DoD) conducts Arctic research to ensure the development of the knowledge, understanding and capability to meet national defense needs in the Arctic. Interest in ionospheric research at HAARP stems both from the large number of communication, surveillance and navigation systems that have radio paths which pass through the ionosphere, and from the unexplored potential of technological innovations which suggest applications such as detecting underground objects, communicating to great depths in the sea or earth, and generating infrared and optical emissions.

("unexplored" - yeah, right)

So, this tells us that the technology at least has the potential to penetrate the Earth's surface, otherwise, why would they even mention it?

I know that "detecting objects" is most definitely NOT the same as "causing earthquakes", however, it does cause one to wonder about what we do and don't know concerning the technological capabilities of HAARP. If they can "detect" subsurface structures, could they simply shift the same EM energies into a mode that might "disturb" those same subsurface structures? I have no clue, but I wouldn't rule it out. Afterall, we know that sound can be used to "detect" objects, but sound can also be used to "disturb" objects.

We know that microwaves can be used to transmit information AND heat objects. So, I'm just saying, it's not impossible. And if I know anything about the DoD/Darpa, if it isn't impossible, they'll try and figure out a way to do it...

[Ediacara]

50. what this is in reference to is reflection

it's like radar or sonar in the ground. Not triggering earthquakes, not penetrating the surface. This could penetrate the durface of the earth and trigger earthquakes as much as stomping your foot could....

[file83]

54. But radar is a narrow frequency range, and sonar is acoustic....

HAARP is capable of generating a much wider range of frequencies in the electro-magnetic spectrum. They can also focus and amplify energies with resonance and harmonics. They have their own power plant. HAARP is more than just a fancy radar system placed near the artic circle in the middle of nowhere.

[Ediacara]

60. Jesus tapdancing Christ!

It's the same idea. Understand? The concept in radar and sonar is the same, and that's what the ground penetration studies at HAARP are attempting to do: radar/sonar in the ground. I don't care if they have their own power plant, it can't produce enough power to create earthquakes or control the weather. It has its own power plant because it's in the middle of nowhere and nothing nearby would have been sufficient.

[file83]

64. Calm down DinoBoy. No need to shout about the similarities between

Radar and Sonar. We know that. But what you aren't paying attention to are the differences.

While both use the reflection of signals to "detect" objects/features of the environment around them (or in the direction they are aimed), they are based on completely different mediums. Radar is electronic, Sonar is physical sound wave propagation.

Radar utilizes electromagnetic waves as its transmitter/detector. Sonar uses sound waves underwater as its transmitter/detector.

This is important because HAARP uses EM, not acoustics. More importantly, EM can utilize microwave frequencies which we ALL KNOW can have direct effects on physical objects. At one fine tuned frequency, it can disturb water molecules making them heat up (aka Microwave oven). At other frequencies it can disturb different molecules. And that's just microwaves.

Who knows what kinds of energy/heat they can transmit with HAARP into the ground to locations around the world? I have no clue - but to brush it off as completely implausible reveals a naive assumption about the lack of technological prowess our government could have under wraps. If you don't want to believe it's possible, fine. But I'm not going to be convinced with claims that HAARP is the same as Sonar, when it most obviously isn't.

(on edit, punctuation)

[Ediacara]

68. Um, if you say so...

Sound energy is a product of electromagentism... Sonar and Radar are the exact same technology, but use different sources for their signal.

Even if I concede that you're right (which you aren't remotely) and that HAARP really is a big-bad project to control earthquakes and hurricanes, I still don't understand how ground-penetrating EM signals could cause earthquakes. Can you explain this? The moon is hit by microwaves and gamma rays from the sun all the time, yet moonquakes are few and far between. I mean honestly, planting nukes at fault zones would be a much more possible (although just as implausible) way of causing earthquakes. Additionally, you've yet to explain how this thing is powered. To create signals doing what you think they do, you'd need a power supply so fantastic, it could only be a star.

Does HAARP have a star in their basement?

[file83]

76. Well, they may not have a "star" in their basement, but perhaps

a fission nuclear reactor might suffice? :shrug:

Like you said, light rays (plus gamma, x, infrared, etc..) from the sun hit the surface of the earth all day long. Nothing seems to happen. But if you take a simple magnifying glass and focus that light energy properly, you can start a fire or burn ants. Likewise, if there is some sort of way to "focus" the vast amount of energy coming from the sun (gamma rays/x-rays) by temporarily manipulating the ionosphere with HAARP to subsurface fault lines or atmospheric storm cells/systems, maybe they could "influence" them in some way.

My point is, they obviously can't "control" the weather or "control" earthquakes, but they certainly could influence small storm systems or perhaps make fault lines more predisposed to slip. If they focus a tremendous amount of energy from the sun (using HAARP as the "magnify glass") in or near a storm cell/hurricane wall or to subsurface geologic structures (groundwater too), they could disrupt the system/fault just enough to have some sort of desired effect. Whether or not they are trying to decrease or increase destructive weather, maybe they could do both. Same goes for earthquakes.

It sounds far out until you actually think about it. At one point, flying airplanes seemed far out. Same goes for nuclear weapons, sending robotic probes to Mars, putting a man on the moon, MRI's (magnetic resonance imaging), etc...

(on edit: spelling)

[Ediacara]

77. The thing is

Flying airplanes and landing on the Moon aren't impossible. Using the ionosphere to create a lens to focus radiation from the sun? That's impossible (not to mention that our magnetosphere diverts almost all of the high energy radiation away from us...).

Additionally, even if we could do that, how is that the stuff under the area of focus isn't fried? If you focused an ionospheric lens over Iran, how is that hundreds of thousands of Iranians aren't simply turned to ash? How is that the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Africa isn't boiled off?

ON EDIT: I don't mean a fusion reactor, that doesn't provide enough energy. I mean a star.

[file83]

80. Impossible? How do you think they are able to "focus" a laser

so that it can pass through some body tissue (not burn it) and yet burn the tissue beneath it? Same idea, just different wavelengths of the EM spectrum.

Concerning the magnetosphere, atmospheric scientists are starting to learn that even lightening may, in some ways, be influenced by the sun:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/planetearth/space_lightning_991216.html

This means that energy is moving through/around in ways we don't fully understand. Maybe the USG has figured something out and is keeping it all to themselves. Perhaps.

Not to mention, it's been observed that even gamma rays from outside our solar system can reach and influence our ionosphere:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/su-rgf021706.php

So, let's not rule these possibilities of the energy source out just yet. :-)

[Ediacara]

84. Oh, ok

So having a high power laser pass through centimeters of tissue is the same as focusing barely present radiation in a not-present ionospheric lens so this barely present radiation can pass through kilometers of rock?

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[file83]

94. I know nothing! Absolutely, noth....ing!

:rofl:

[Hutzpa]

70. HUAH!!! very well explained n/t

[Hutzpa]

67. Dino here is the link again

The first stage of both models is an increase of elastic strain in a rock that causes them to undergo a dilatency state; which is an inelastic increase in volume that starts after the stress on a rock reaches one half its breaking strength. During Dilatancy State, open fracture developing the rocks. So it is in this state the first physical change takes place indicating future earthquake. Here the two models diverge. The U.S. model suggest that the dilatancy and fracture of the rocks are first associated with a low water containing dilated rock, which helps in producing lower seismic velocity, lower electrical resistivity and fewer minor seismic event.

The pore water pressure then increases due to influx of water into the open fracture, weakening the rock and facilitating movement along the fracture, which is recorded as an earthquake.

In contrast the Russian model state that the first phases is accompanied by an avalanches of fracture that release some stress but produce an unstable situation that eventually cause a large movement along a fracture.

Seismic gaps are defined as an area along active fault zones, capable of producing large earthquake but that have not recently produced an earthquake. These areas are thought to store tectonic strain and thus are candidate for future large earthquake.

this came from this link:

http://www.gisdevelopment.net/application/natural_hazards/earthquakes/nheq0011.htm

[Ediacara]

72. It's clear to me that you have either

1) Not read the link in question or 2) Have a very limited knowledge of the earth sciences. This is not meant as a dig, but if I may speak as someone who has taken a great deal of time to become educated in the earth sciences, this link does not say what you think it says. Not remotely.

The paper is not about controlling earthquakes, it's about better preparing India for earthquakes, and managing the aftermath of earthquakes in India. Just because the words "controlling" and "earthquake" are found in succession in the title of the page, it does not mean this is about "controlling earthquakes."

You'll notice the authors state in the second paragraph,

Still we have not been able to make enough inroads into the areas of their identifications, prevention and control, earthquake can still strike without any warning and there is no way to control them prior to its occurrence, except than some post earthquake rehabilitation measures.

That doesn't sound like they think they can control earthquakes to me.

The section of text you quoted above describes two models of how earthquakes happen. It isn't meant to imply that they can be caused. Again the amount of effort and energy needed to create a minor earthquake would be astounding.

Seriously, did you even read this?

[file83]

78. Yes, but interesting, isn't it, how much they refer to water in the

subsurface structures having an influence on the fault lines?

If there was just some way they could heat that water, maybe they could influence the probablility of fault slippage occuring.

Now how could they find a way of doing something like that? Hmmm....

[Ediacara]

79. *sigh*

Geothermal heat would heat the water, friend. No need to create a lens in the ionosphere...

If you're so certain I'm wrong, why don't you talk about this with the USGS, or the geology department of your local university?

[file83]

81. *sigh*....*sigh*

It's not that the water deep below the surface isn't hot. It is. But if they can create big enough differences in temperature making some areas even hotter..... Temperature differences increase pressures...(no need to call the USGS!)

[Ediacara]

85. No need to call the USGS?

Dang, I was all ready to tivo your joint press conference on seismicity!

Let me ask you, have you ever been educated in earth sciences? Any sciences?

[file83]

86. Yes I have. What, are you a professor or something? Is your brain

smarter than mine? :sarcasm:

Are you really going to regress to this "my education is better than yours!" type of childish side track?

Please, fax me your resume and copies of your degrees, I'd love to go over them.

[Ediacara]

91. All I'm pointing out is that your knowledge of the geosciences

is clearly minimal. What you're saying happens can't actually happen (atmospheric lensing) and even if it could, it wouldn't produce the desired results anyway (hurricanes and earthquakes). I fully understand what I'm doing is a form of argumentum ad verecundiam, but quite simply stated: I know what I'm talking about, and it appears you do not.

It's not that my education is better than yours, or that my brain is smarter than yours (both of which simply don't matter), it's that my education is more complete in this area than yours, therefore I am better qualified to comment on the plausibility of what you're proposing when it ventures into the realm of the geosciences.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ediacara]

95. As a matter of fact friend

I stated that all academic opinion on this matter regards weather control and artifical earthquake causation as impossible. I stated that for it to be even plausible, HAARP would need a powersource akin to a star to even try to create earthquakes or control weather.

You've since changed your tune and claimed that oh no, HAARP creates some sort of lens in the ionosphere (how it does this, and with what materials, no one knows) that can focus gamma rays and microwave radiation from the sun (which are almost entirely deflected by our magnetosphere) and that that's what causes earthquakes and controls weather.

This is impossible for a number of reasons as I previously stated, most important is that the power source again would need to be phenomenal to do this. In addition to that, the HAARP station would really only have an effect in the immediate area around the station in Alaska. On top of that, almost all radiation hitting the ground is defelcted in the first meter, which makes focusing a beam several kilometers down impossible. Lastly, there is simply no mechanism to cause a very thin atmosphere to form into any sort of useful lens.

Earthquakes happen, and they happen all the time. There is nothing unusual or sinister about this earthquake. It wasn't even particularly strong.

And as a matter of fact, I do have a degree in earth sciences. Do you?

[file83]

98. How can you claim to know how much power is required for a

techology you don't even understand, not to mention, question its very existence? That's one thing I'd like to learn from you.

The other part I'd like to learn from you is how you come to this conclusion:

...the HAARP station would really only have an effect in the immediate area around the station in Alaska.

Say what? The ionosphere encompasses the entire earth. So, since HAARP is specifically designed to interact with the ionosphere, its effects can span the globe, though not all at once, only in specfic localized areas.

But don't take my B.S. in Psychology's word for it, let your Earth Science's degree help get you up to speed from HAARP's very own website:

The ionosphere provides long range capabilities for commercial ship-to-shore communications, for trans-oceanic aircraft links, and for military communication and surveillance systems. The sun has a dominant effect on the ionosphere and solar events such as flares or coronal mass ejections can lead to worldwide communication "blackouts" on the short wave bands.

They even have fancy graphics illustrating the concept:



I keep learning everyday and I don't limit my areas of interest to just Psychology. Maybe that's why I'm more informed about the capabilities of HAARP than even a "Earth Sciences" graduate is. Maybe. You brought this up, not me.

[Ediacara]

29. Look

For HAARP to actually control the weather, they'd need some sort of power source that would be the equivalent output of a star. Do you think they have a star hidden in their basement in Alaska?

Any mention on "official documents" about fantastical nonsense like weather control is purely to beef up budgets so various facilities can have money to do actual experimentation....

Or maybe it's so they can build a star in their basement?

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ediacara]

36. What?

All I'm saying is that if you wanted to have a device that could control the weather, you would need a power source with the output of a star. If you think bringing reality into the discussion is "preventing true discourse" so be it.... I happen to believe that the first step in informing and educating oneself is to learn about reality.

[The Magistrate]

35. The Law In Question, Sir

Is a proposal to study cloud seeding, and suggests, if recollection serves, a budget of sixty millions over ten years: the Federal equivalent of my grandsons finding a couple of pennies in the couch in relation to our household finances.

When it is trotted out as somehow proving the government has the means to create hurricanes and earthquakes and the like, it loses any legitimate factual character.

[shance]

24. Not true. There is more than one HAARP facility. There is one

that you mentioned which may be open to the public.

Another larger facility is not opened to the public.

[Ediacara]

25. link?

Or is this the super secret one not on the internet that no one but you knows exists?

ON EDIT: I'd still like to know how you think that exciting some gasses in the ionosphere can create hurricanes in the troposphere and earthquakes?

[Hutzpa]

31. Heres a link

Scroll down and you will find DOD!!



http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/haarpFactSheet.html

[Ediacara]

38. Wow, nice dodge!

I asked about the second, larger, secret facility. You linked me to HAARP's fact page and a discussion of why the DoD is involved. They state:

The Department of Defense (DoD) conducts Arctic research to ensure the development of the knowledge, understanding and capability to meet national defense needs in the Arctic. Interest in ionospheric research at HAARP stems both from the large number of communication, surveillance and navigation systems that have radio paths which pass through the ionosphere, and from the unexplored potential of technological innovations which suggest applications such as detecting underground objects, communicating to great depths in the sea or earth, and generating infrared and optical emissions. Expanding our knowledge about the interactions of signals passing through or reflecting from the ionosphere can help to solve future problems in the development of DoD systems, and could as well enhance the utilization of commercial systems which rely on the expedient transfer of real-time communications.

Gee, that sure sounds like they're 1) causing earthquakes, 2) controlling weather, 3) have a second large secret facility, and 4) are building a star in their basement.

[Hutzpa]

43. Hope this link helps

http://www.gisdevelopment.net/application/natural_hazards/earthquakes/nheq0011.htm

[WilliamPitt]

41. "There is more than one HAARP facility"

Are you talking about the place where they encased Wolverine's bones in Adamantium?

Those bastards.

[Ediacara]

42. Nice one Will!

[WilliamPitt]

44. We don't have to worry

Last I heard, the place was destroyed in a flood.

[Hutzpa]

66. Did you read this link that i provided for you earlier?

please try and understand what is going on, whatever they have done to find out how an earthquake form is the same way they can reverse the order.


http://www.gisdevelopment.net/application/natural_hazards/earthquakes/nheq0011.htm

[Ediacara]

73. This link doesn't say what you think it does

You should actually read it.

[DaveJ]

28. Thank you for making that point.

Technology is capable of many things that we as private citizens know nothing about. What businesses do with technology, and what the defense department does, are two completely different things.

[tkmorris]

39. True enough but

Technology does not equal magic. Technology, whether known or unknown to the general public, is bound by the same physical laws that dictate all other activity in the universe. It is absurd to say that any governmental secret program posesses some ability that flies in the face of basic physics and then state that it is "technology" as if it explains anything.

[Cleita]

30. Explosions shake the earth with a different rythm than earthquakes.

I spent some time growing up in a mining camp in northern Chile a place very prone to earthquakes. There is a difference. Although the dynamiting of the mines shook the ground, it was different from the earthquakes like sonic booms are.

These are earthquakes. Even a nuke wouldn't cover the vast number of miles a fault earthquake does.

[Hutzpa]

37. You'll be surprised n/t

[DaveJ]

45. I don't think anyone believes that.

The question is whether a nuke can cause a plate to shift. I don't know, but that doesn't sound too unreasonable. What's the big deal in raising the question?

[Ediacara]

51. you'd need a prohibitively large nuke

and well, our boys in Iraq would have been blinded by the flash (and possibly insinerated). So no, there was no nuke...

[Hutzpa]

52. They do have Nuke that

explodes underground, without any reflection, Have you seen the movie 'Broken Arrow' just a thought.

[Ediacara]

61. What?

You're basing your premise off of a movie? WHO has this nuke? WHAT do you mean by reflection? HOW would it cause an earthquake?

[Hutzpa]

65. I was just trying to get

you to understand how a nuclear can detonate underground, not based on movie.

[Ediacara]

69. Of course they can detonate underground

Are you implying that we nuked Iran? Are you implying that Iran had a nuclear test?

If you're implying either, I have to ask, why is that no other nuclear bomb, or underground nuclear test ever triggered aftershocks despite many being in earquake zones?

[Hutzpa]

71. Nuclear Aftershocks can be referred to as IMPULSES

works just the same as you would with mother nature, which are the tremors you get after a major earthquake. Another link for you:




http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/eng99/eng99354.htm

[Ediacara]

74. Again

this link doesn't say REMOTELY what you think it says.

ON EDIT: I still would like to know if you're implying that Iran had a nuclear test, or that we nuked Iran.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. Pat Robertson will demand more donations for getting Gawd to step in.

[Radio_Guy]

48. Why did this get moved?

Why did this thread get moved to the 9/11 forum? :wtf:

[file83]

56. Because.... ummm ..... Earthquakes in Iran caused 9/11!!!

I have no idea why the moderators sent this to the 9/11 dungeon. They should just call this the "conspiracy theory" forum. It's not fair to the 9/11 researchers...oh well.

[Hutzpa]

58. Beats me n/t

:shrug:

[file83]

59. spokane, just to point out a funny coinky-dink....

Have you seen the movie "Conspiracy Theory" with Mel Gibson?

At the beginning of the movie, Gibson's character, "Jerry Fletcher" posits a theory that the NASA has seismic weapon technology. He points out that the last 6 major earthquakes around the world happened while the Space Shuttle was in orbit, every time.

He notices that the President's planned visit to a city near a major fault line in Turkey is coinciding with the launch of an up coming Space Shuttle mission. His theory is that NASA is going to try and kill the (fictional) President because he's going to cut $50 billion dollars of funding for NASA. At the end of the movie, sure enough, there is an earthquake in Turkey exactly where he said it would be...

Here we are, in real life, suggesting secret Earthquake technology! I'm with you on it though, as a possibility. Maybe there is a little "truth" in fiction afterall...:shrug:

[Name removed]

75. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Twist_U_Up]

87. WTF does this have to do with 9-11 ?

This place is getting more and more bizarre by the day.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hutzpa]

97. Do you have a problem with this thread...

if you don't have anything to add, why don't you just passby.

[file83]

101. Exactly - why is it okay for that guy to call us "fruitcakes"?

If you say anything about another category of DU'r here, it gets deleted, for good reason. Apparently it's okay to call us "fruitcakes". Nice.

Welcome to the Dungeon.

[Generarth]

103. Diddums

This sort of theory is just so far out there that I can think only one thing and it ain't 'fruitcake'.

[Generarth]

105. Oh and what a surprise

Registrant:
Domains by Proxy, Inc.

[Twist_U_Up]

102. kick

[HamdenRice]

106. Why is this in the 9/11 forum? nt

[file83]

107. Don't ask. Who knows....