Quote:According to the legend, green is just below the middle, not as low as the blue surrounding it, which is not as low as white. You do see the blob of yellow and smaller blob of orange (?) in Oklahoma, don't you?
And even white doesn't mean there won't be an earthquake. Melbourne FL had a Richter scale 5 quake in the 1980s.
You said prone, not I. The figure says the risk is less than moderate to moderate for Earthquakes...looks fairly similar to Georgia or South Carolina. Neither of those states are prone, or have a natural inclination or tendency, to experience earthquakes. Stop reaching you may pull something.
Quote:You said prone, not I. The figure says the risk is less than moderate to moderate for Earthquakes...looks fairly similar to Georgia or South Carolina. Neither of those states are prone, or have a natural inclination or tendency, to experience earthquakes. Stop reaching you may pull something.
You could have saved a lot of typing and just said you were wrong.
Quote:You said prone, not I. The figure says the risk is less than moderate to moderate for Earthquakes...looks fairly similar to Georgia or South Carolina. Neither of those states are prone, or have a natural inclination or tendency, to experience earthquakes. Stop reaching you may pull something.
Actually, Oklahoma experiences approximately 50 earthquakes per year.
Stop reaching you may pull something.
Quote:<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entryname=EARTHQUAKES'>Actually, Oklahoma experiences approximately 50 earthquakes per year</a>.
Stop reaching you may pull something.
Oklahoma is within the stable interior of the United States. Except for the Meers Fault, the state has had almost no significant tectonic activity since the Pennsylvanian and Permian periods of geologic time (325 to 245 million years ago).
From your own source. Saying they are prone to Earthquakes is like saying the Jaguars are prone to winning because they won 2 games over a six week stretch. Go to rehab. You tore something.
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://science.sciencemag.org/content/341/6142/1225942'>http://science.sciencemag.org/content/341/6142/1225942</a>
Advances
Microearthquakes (that is, those with magnitudes below 2) are routinely produced as part of the hydraulic fracturing (or “fracking”) process used to stimulate the production of oil, but the process as currently practiced appears to pose a low risk of inducing destructive earthquakes. More than 100,000 wells have been subjected to fracking in recent years, and the largest induced earthquake was magnitude 3.6, which is too small to pose a serious risk. Yet, wastewater disposal by injection into deep wells poses a higher risk, because this practice can induce larger earthquakes. For example, several of the largest earthquakes in the U.S. midcontinent in 2011 and 2012 may have been triggered by nearby disposal wells. The largest of these was a magnitude 5.6 event in central Oklahoma that destroyed 14 homes and injured two people. The mechanism responsible for inducing these events appears to be the well-understood process of weakening a preexisting fault by elevating the fluid pressure. However, only a small fraction of the more than 30,000 wastewater disposal wells appears to be problematic—typically those that dispose of very large volumes of water and/or communicate pressure perturbations directly into basement faults.
Quote:Oklahoma is within the stable interior of the United States. Except for the Meers Fault, the state has had almost no significant tectonic activity since the Pennsylvanian and Permian periods of geologic time (325 to 245 million years ago).
From your own source. Saying they are prone to Earthquakes is like saying the Jaguars are prone to winning because they won 2 games over a six week stretch. Go to rehab. You tore something.
Why don't you quote the whole thing rather than just cherry pick certain parts?
Quote:
Approximately fifty minor earthquakes occur in Oklahoma each year, but only an average of one to two are reported felt.
Let me quote a bit more.
Quote:
In 1977 a statewide network of seismograph stations was installed to improve earthquake detection and location. More than 1,550 additional earthquakes occurred in Oklahoma from 1977 through 2002.
Typical Oklahoma earthquake magnitude values range from 1.8 to 2.5, and focal depths are generally shallow (less than three miles). Earthquakes have occurred in seventy-three of Oklahoma's seventy-seven counties
. Only Washington, Nowata, Craig, and Adair counties have had no known earthquakes.
Actual facts not liberal bias.
Quote:Why don't you quote the whole thing rather than just cherry pick certain parts?
Let me quote a bit more.
Actual facts not liberal bias.
No one is concerned with low magnitude earthquakes. Read the paper from Science or is that a liberal biased scientific journal?
The withering snake should get back into it's den before reality comes crashing down in a catastrophic event, resulting in even more brain damage.
Quote:Science is political.
It's only political if it doesn't confirm to your own political biases. I'm sure you guys were the same people that said CFCs don't destroy the Ozone layer.
Quote:According to science they don't.
Which science? Conservascience? In my Environmental and Atmospheric Chemistry class we learned that that CFCs most definitely wreck havoc with Stratospheric Ozone molecules.
Peroxyls
Hydroxyls
Nitric Oxides
CFCs (Chlorine)
Quote:It's only political if it doesn't confirm to your own political biases. I'm sure you guys were the same people that said CFCs don't destroy the Ozone layer.
Actually, I think it's all political because someone has enough interest in the outcome to pay for the research. Science might be pure, but scientists are only human.
Quote:In what outcome?
Whatever conclusion at which the scientist eventually arrives. Look, I know that you're a scientist and, as as result, you believe strongly in the purity of your profession. The truth is that your profession is filled with people, and people aren't pure in the least. We've seen that overwhelmingly with the half-truths on both sides of the AGCC debate. The same concept applies to why we have to keep government small and under tight control, because the people who populate it are fallible. Science, but the nature of needing a funding source, is politics.
Quote:Exactly. Chlorine breaks down ozone, not CFCs.
The oceans are a large natural source of chlorine in the atmosphere. The amount added by CFCs is insignificant.
Are those "alternative" facts?
What do you think CFCs stands for? I'll wait.
The oceans aren't a large source of chlorine in the atmosphere. Thank God they aren't as chlorine is poisonous.
I believe you have no idea what you're talking about.
Quote:Are those "alternative" facts?
What do you think CFCs stands for? I'll wait.
The oceans aren't a large source of chlorine in the atmosphere. Thank God they aren't as chlorine is poisonous.
I believe you have no idea what you're talking about.
You call yourself an environmental scientist and you don't even know that the concentration makes the poison? The chlorine in the atmosphere is mostly in the form of NaCl and HCl, but even if it were all in the form of free chlorine the concentration is insignificant health-wise. The NaCl and HCl in the atmosphere is still way more abundant than CFCs.
The whole idea of CFCs contributing ozone depletion is that they are carried into the upper atmosphere where UV breaks them down.
The CFC molecule has no effect on ozone, which is what I originally stated. The CFC has to be broken down to create free chlorine in order to deplete ozone (so does NaCl and HCl).
But what should be an alarm bell for you is that the CFC=evil claim came about just at the time that Dupont had created a new fully-patented replacement (the freon patent had expired). Funny coincidence, no? And what's even funnier is that the replacement also has chlorine in it.