This article is from “National Geographic News” dated October 28, 2010

The comments at the end, in blue,  are mine.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Can the Moon Cause Earthquakes?

John Roach
National Geographic News

May 23, 2005

Coast dwellers are accustomed to the daily rhythm of the tides, which are primarily lulled in and out by the gentle gravitational tug of the moon. Some scientists wonder whether the moon’s tugging may also influence earthquake activity.

“The same force that raises the ‘tides’ in the ocean also raises tides in the [Earth's]crust,” said Geoff Chester, an astronomer and public affairs officer with the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C.

Chester said the tides in the Earth’s crust are subtle—on the order of a few centimeters, as opposed to the several-meter ocean tides.

“We live on the crust, so we don’t really notice the deviation from what would be sort of the normal form of the geoid,” he said. “So the effect is small but nonetheless there.”

(The geoid is an imaginary outline that coincides with the mean sea level in the ocean and its extension through the continents.)

In theory, this slight deformation of the Earth’s crust could be sufficient to trigger an earthquake—like the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.

“Most earthquakes occur on preexisting tectonic lines, and the vast majority do occur as a result of geophysical processes, but there may be some correlation [between the moon] and earthquakes,” Chester said.

For example, he said that in general there is a higher incidence of earthquake activity in the Northern Hemisphere when the moon is north of the Equator and an increase in earthquake activity in the Southern Hemisphere when the moon is south of the Equator.

The moon’s orbit is inclined in relation to the Earth, causing the moon’s position in the sky to nod north and south on an 18.6-year cycle.

James O. Berkland is a Glen Ellen, California-based geologist and editor of Syzygy—An Earthquake Newsletter. He believes the gravitational tugs of the moon, sun, and other planets can influence earthquake activity. Berkland said he has accurately predicted tremors based on factors such as syzygy.

“Syzygy” refers to the alignment of three celestial objects. Syzygy of the sun, Earth, and moon occur twice a month, at the full and new moons. At such times, gravitational forces are at a maximum, especially when the bodies are close together, Berkland said.

The Earth and moon are closest together—at perigee—once a month. The Earth and sun are closest together—at perihelion—once a year. Perihelion currently occurs in early January. Maximum gravitation force occurs when a syzygy and perigee occur on the same day as perihelion.

According to Berkland, seismometers left on the moon by Apollo astronauts show that moonquakes occur most frequently at perigee.

“So we know Earth’s gravity triggers moonquakes. I don’t think any scientist disputes that,” Berkland said. “When I learned that, I went to my former [U.S. Geological Survey] colleagues in Menlo Park [California] and pointed out this really exists, so what’s so difficult about turning it around?”

According to Berkland, the U.S. Geological Survey said such a theory is ridiculous—the Earth is 82 times more massive than the moon. Though the Earth can trigger quakes on the moon, they said, the moon is too small to trigger any earthquakes. *****

But the moon is mostly solid and lacks a liquid core like the Earth, Berkland said. The Earth “is an active, living planet, and so it is not at all surprising that minor gravitational stresses can trigger earthquakes,” he said.*****

Using syzygy and other factors—such as the number of cats and dogs listed in the lost and found in newspaper classified advertisements—Berkland said he accurately predicted several earthquakes, including the October 17, 1989 earthquake in San Francisco, California. Berkland said the number of cats and dogs reported missing goes up prior to an earthquake. The numbers went up significantly prior to the 1989 San Francisco quake, he said.

At least two major quakes may suppoort Berkland’s theory. The December 26, 2004, magnitude 9.1 in Sumatra, Indonesia, occurred on the day of a full moon. Likewise, the March 27, 1964, magnitude 9.2 earthquake in Alaska occurred on the day of maximum high tide.

According to Berkland, such correlations are more than coincidences. They demonstrate a true connection between the moon and earthquake activity, he said.

But Bellini, the U.S. Geological Survey geophysicist, said, “There is still no known observation of an effect related to the moon and seismicity.”

In a follow-up email to National Geographic News, Bellini questioned the scientific validity of Berkland’s predictions. He said they appear to be “self-selected statistical analysis of historical seismicity rates and are so vague in time and location that they are certain to be correct.” *****

Is the observed correlation between the moon’s position in its 18.6-year cycle (or any other lunar phase) and earthquake activity a coincidence or something more? That question, Chester said, is best answered by the U.S. Geological Survey.

“There’s no evidence to support that,” said John Bellini, a geophysicist with the survey’s National Earthquake Information Center in Golden, Colorado. “There were some studies in the past that tried to link lunar effects to seismicity [the relative frequency and distribution of earthquakes and there was nothing found.”

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I don’t know where this Bellini went to school but ask any high school physics student and he had better tell you that the gravitational force equals the gravitational constant times the product of the masses of the two bodies divided by the distance squared.

THE FORCE IS IDENTICAL ON EACH BODY.

Second, the Earth has a liquid core which, like the water on the surface is pulled into a pile, under the Earth’s crust by gravitational attraction from both the sun and the moon.

This would be sufficient to crack the crust producing earthquakes.

Moonquakes are less likely because, as far as we know, the moon is solid hence no pile up either on the surface or in the core.

HURRICANES AND SUCH

I started this BLOG in November 2007 and it has been my intention to terminate it after two years. It’s not because I am bored with it or that I do not have sufficient material to continue it.

Life is full of choices and there are many priorities that clamor for attention:

E-mails have to be read and answered, jokes need to be forwarded, the garbage must go out, wood for the fireplace must be brought in, snow must be shoveled and toilet paper rolls must be replaced when empty.

People say, “I wonder where the time went.”

That’s the answer. It was chewed up by trivia.

Anyway, the reason for this post is the goading by a very interesting and well-researched book that my granddaughter gave me recently, “Hot, Flat and Crowded” by Thomas L. Friedman. It is loaded with good information and a “must read” by Liberals and Conservatives alike.

I do take exception, however, that the author implies that all the ills of the modern world are the result of the policies of the United States in many areas.

First, a digression. I wrote and published  a novel in 1994, DESTINATIONS, which has been out of print for years.

I am seriously planning to have it reprinted soon. I have had to make no changes to the original after all these years because I feel it is more current today than when I wrote it.

In the story, I have a character ask the following:

“Who’s telling you what and why?”

This is something that everyone should ask themselves when they are presented with an argument that they are somewhat wary of.

Back to Friedman’s book. On page 147 I read something that made me take notice and I quote now:

“Many climatologists believe that Katrina’s unusual ferocity was fed by the warmer waters in the Gulf on Mexico, which, they believe, are partly attributable to global warming.”

Friedman stated that after World War II the United States increased its industrial output and as a result generated much more CO2, the major cause of Global Warming. This production increase, he claims, accelerated after the fall of The Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War.

Being the scientific skeptic that I am, I said to myself, “Wait a minute, what about other hurricanes before WWII?”

During the 1930’s the United States was in a deep depression and industrial production along with CO2 emissions would have been way down.

This led me to look at hurricanes of epic proportion.

The Labor Day Hurricane of 1935, was a Category 5 hurricane. The Hurricane of 1938 was also a Category 5 hurricane. These occurred before there had been significant  CO2 generation. Hurricane Camille in 1969 was a Category 5 hurricane. Hurricane Gilbert of 1988 was a Category 5 hurricane. Hurricane Andrew of 1992 was a Category 5 hurricane.

Katrina, however, came ashore as a Category 3 hurricane.

It was not a “ferocious hurricane”. The damage that it caused was not by high winds but by a poorly maintained levee system and people living below water level.

Significant rain along the Mississippi River basin could have created the same result without its being a hurricane.

What I am getting at is that the Hurricane of 1938 devastated New England without having traveled across warm Gulf water caused by the United States industrial CO2 pollution.

Now, my point is this. There is no question that the climate is changing. It does so on a daily basis. I have been keeping daily weather records for over 40 years because that is my nature; to observe and hopefully predict. As I stated in my first BLOG article, I am a scientist.

 The geological records of the planet shows the extremes of ocean levels that have occurred over time. These levels are a function of global warming and cooling. There is no argument there but the Earth’s temperature ranges are neither predictable as a function of time nor consistent in amplitude.

I live along the Connecticut coast. The railroad line from New York to Boston runs along this coast and a series of bridges had been built across the estuaries in Stonington, Connecticut that flow into Fisher’s Island Sound then into the Atlantic Ocean.

The clearance under these bridges leave barely enough room for small boats to pass under yet this clearance has been approximately the same during the past 100 years.

What does this mean? The oceans have neither risen nor fallen enough to cause a change in the clearance between the water level and the bottom of the bridge.

This is a “yardstick” cast in stone.

If this is true, then the ocean heights have not changed at Stonington, Connecticut, Samoa, Sri Lanka or Sicily.

People can say, “The beach used to be way down there but now the waves are lapping at my foundation. That proves that the ocean levels have risen.”

Wrong, that shows the effects of erosion at work.

In 1952, on the northwest shore of Oahu, Hawaii I have photos that show about 50 yards of beautiful sandy beach. When I returned in 1953, the beach was only about 20 yards wide with about a six foot drop to the water of hard black lava.

At the time, I asked one of the “locals” about it.

He said, “The sand comes and goes. It will come back.”

In 1954, the wide sandy beach was back.

He understood.

Fishermen who leave Chatham, Massachusetts on Cape Cod in the morning often must return in a different channel because the sand bars shift daily.

Let’s not confuse beach erosion with ocean heights. 

Before we become “Chicken Little” and scream that the sky is falling down, let’s get some solid data that does not favor some scientist’s job, does not support a political party’s agenda and does not allow someone to make a fortune at taxpayer’s expense.

Keep an open mind and a clear head and ask:

“Who’s measuring temperature and where?”

“Who’s measuring ocean heights and how?”

And finally, “Who’s telling you what and why?”

   I receive many e-mails asking why I don’t post articles to this log more often.

The reason is that like most people I find that the trivia that one encounters in everyday living consumes time that could be better spent in creative pursuits

   I write when I encounter either ignorance or stupidity so overwhelming that I have no choice.

   Ignorance can be excused but stupidity is something else entirely.

   People who have not been exposed to fact, for whatever reason, can be excused but when facts are available and well-circulated then those who, again for whatever reason, chose not to accept those facts are truly stupid.

   Stupidity has no place in civilized countries. The people therein have had access to schools, libraries and recently to TV and the Internet.

    There are countless documentaries on TV with well-developed time-lines of the evolution of the surface, forests and landscape of our planet. The rise and fall of ocean levels and the formation and melting of glaciers has been a continuous process.

   Core samples taken from ponds indicate, from very durable pollen samples, the plants that grew in the areas and the temperatures and moisture necessary for those plants to exist.

  The planet Earth has warmed and cooled for eons before there were people, power plants and automobiles.

  Even a fifth grade level geology book would enlighten people to this fact so why are so many people resistant to truth?

   What is it going to take to convince those people who make decisions that can wreck the economies of the entire planet to change conditions that are unchangeable?

   Is it politics alone that so blinds people or is it a more sinister hidden agenda that is determined to revert us back to living in caves and eating roots and berries.

  There are no more new caves and many many more people today so expect violent competition for survival.

   We also know with certainty that land which was deep under the oceans is now the tops of some of the highest mountains.

   The planet and life on the planet are in constant flux. Species that had existed in the past are no longer here and their absence is not because of man but because they either could not adapt in their present form or they adapted by changing their physiology to conform to the new conditions.

   A couple of days ago it was reported that more than usual dead baby penguins were washing up on the shores of Brazil. The article stated that biologist Erli Costa of Rio de Janeiro’s Federal University feels that this is the result of changing weather patterns around Antarctica caused by global warming which is causing rougher seas and stronger currents than the baby penguins are able to cope with.

    A food scarcity caused by over-fishing may be forcing the young penguins to swim further from shore and they are unable to out-swim the currents.

   What will be the consequences of this situation?

The stronger young penguins will survive and contribute to the gene pool of the remaining penguins. Antarctic penguins will evolve into a stronger breed.

   There is historical evidence of this rapid evolution as is seen in the Hawaiian people. The indigenous Hawaiian was a very powerful and large person of great endurance and very acute eyesight.

   Those were the characteristics necessary for survival by paddling a canoe across great distances of open ocean. To get to Hawaii these people had to paddle against the Pacific North Equatorial Current, had to travel long distances without food and had to be able to see the tiny specks of clouds in the distance that formed over islands.

   The open ocean traveler without those characteristics perished just as the weaker Antarctic penguin of today.

   That is the way of life. If the Earth warms, those people who can survive the climate change will survive and reproduce. When the Earth cools again, the process will reverse itself. This has always been the pattern and will continue to be so in the future.

   Humanity will not simply disappear.

   There is one cold hard fact that alters the natural selection of those who contribute to the gene pool. Today, through emotion, humanity is interfering with the process.

   We are promoting “survival of the weakest” by spending millions of dollars keeping babies alive who are too weak to survive on their own.

   That may sound like a cruel and insensitive statement but it is nevertheless true.

   These infants, who are too unsuited for life on the planet, will be contributing to the gene pool and eventually we may be the cause of our own extinction rather than climate change.

   I know that this is a cold statement but it is true.

   Remember, that is the reason why I write these articles.

Truth– rather than emotion, politics or prejudice–will ensure our economic, cultural and physical survival.

As I see it there are four  types of poverty:

1. By birthplace.

2. By circumstance.

3. By choice.

4. By mental inability to survive in a social setting.

Taking the first case, poverty by birthplace. There are children who are born into areas that have had their natural resources depleted by either overpopulation, warfare or weather changes. Usually weather alone is not the cause. Overpopulation results in depletion of wood both for building, cooking and heating.

Regarding wood, I experienced a startling example of this a few years ago when we had our motorhome at a campground in the New Hampshire woods. The sites were separated by about 200 feet and all around was fairly dense forest.

Because of the distance from our home we only went to the campground about 5 times a year during the summer months and stayed for 3 days at a time.

We used ‘windfall’ wood and we only used it for cooking.  There were 2 meals cooked the first day and only breakfast the last for a total of 9 meals each trip or a total of 45 meals a year.

For cooking alone I had used all available wood without cutting any trees or branches or going into the area of the other campsites that is, an area of  approximately 20,000 square feet.

Imagine the wood requirement for even a small village using wood for cooking, heating and building shelter.

In addition to windfall wood, trees would need to be cut down to support the requirements of the people. If the population was sufficiently dense in a very short time the area would be bare and subject to erosion by rain which would wash away the fertile topsoil and preclude any possible survival by agriculture. This scenario is well documented in Jared Diamond’s excellent book, “Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed”.

Inter-tribal warfare for competition of any available resources would end the possibility of survival.

This has been going in many places since antiquity and particularly in Africa today.

Poverty by circumstance is the result of natural disasters—floods, fires, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis and mudslides. This can occur to anyone regardless of where they live. It can happen in jungles or in the most populated cities.

Those affected may range from those already living in poverty to the extremely wealthy. The wealthy usually have investments away from the area of disaster so they can survive. The poor lose everything. Even the middle class can lose everything unless they have excess money in banks or other investments. Today, the middleclass is so deeply in debt that it is unlikely that they can survive catastrophic events.

When an area suffers widespread devastation to the point where employment is not possible members of the middle class can be pushed into poverty from which they may never recover. (See Malcolm Gladwell’s “The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference“)

The third type is poverty by choice. It occurs in First World countries which permit people to choose if they wish to work or not. Those choosing not to work are provided with assistance from the Government, churches and groups of people who feel guilty because of what they have.

The majority of those who ‘have’ have achieved it by hard work but are made to feel guilty about it. Ayn Rand’s novel, “Atlas Shrugged”, deals with this subject and what can eventually occur if this attitude by the ‘takers’ becomes powerful enough.

 It is sad that in this country that there are so many ‘taking out of the pot’ when they are fully capable of adding to the pot to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves.

The final group is comprised of those who cannot fend for themselves either through sickness, old age or mental incapacities. There are some who have either never adjusted to living in a society or are incapable of doing so.

In the area where I live don’t know of any remaining state-funded institutions that care for those who are mentally incapable of interacting with society. The “State Hospitals” have closed and dumped the mentally ill onto the streets

When I lived in New Hampshire years ago there was a truly humane system in place. It was a cooperative called a “County Farm”. Indigent people were provided a place to live but they contributed by growing food and taking care of the buildings, grounds and each other.

I would like to see this system brought back on a national level where instead of compulsory military training every high school graduate or school drop-out would be required to spend a mandatory year in social service to their country. Besides making life a lot easier for the truly poor and infirm it would generate responsibility in our future generations.

I am in no way advocating socialism or communism just public service

Finally, we should not group those people in the world who are living as their ancestors did as living in poverty. Comparing them to a First World country one would assume that to be true. If those people have sufficient food, shelter and enough free time to enjoy life, they are not living in poverty.

It is only when you compare their annual income to that of those who live in First World countries would you consider that.

People who live in First world countries require houses with electricity, heat and sanitation by definition. Large populations cannot exist in close proximity without that. Large tightly-packed societies require a means of food distribution and waste removal. To satisfy those conditions an infrastructure of roads and administration is required which requires that the inhabitants must be gainfully employed to pay for those services.

Therefore a much higher level of income is required to survive.

Regions that are so completely devastated as has happened in Africa present  an incredible problem. Some groups have attempted to start “cottage industries” by supplying materials and instruction to small groups of those people but if there is no market for their products it becomes a futile effort.

This approach also creates resentment by those who have not received the same help and leads to theft of the materials.

Giving seeds to people who are starving so that they can plant next year’s crop is ludicrous because they will eat the seeds immediately.