From: tadchem on
On Jan 13, 7:15 pm, Just Me <jpd...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Think they're not related?  It's only a coincidence?
>
> Both quakes occurred off the perimeters of the North American plate.
> See the North American plate . . .

Far more telling is the fact that the Haiti quake was almost perfectly
*antipoda*l to the 9.0 Sumatra quake not too long ago.

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
From: Androcles on

"tadchem" <tadchem(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4dd72ceb-6d3e-43e3-9750-efe532ecb428(a)r19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 13, 7:15 pm, Just Me <jpd...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Think they're not related? It's only a coincidence?
>
> Both quakes occurred off the perimeters of the North American plate.
> See the North American plate . . .

Far more telling is the fact that the Haiti quake was almost perfectly
*antipoda*l to the 9.0 Sumatra quake not too long ago.

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA

===========================================
Now that is a coincidence. If it had any validity there would
be a plate boundary antipodal to San Francisco, in the South
Indian Ocean; and a record of an earthquake there that could
be connected in time to the quake of '89.







From: jmfbahciv on
tadchem wrote:
> On Jan 13, 7:15 pm, Just Me <jpd...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Think they're not related? It's only a coincidence?
>>
>> Both quakes occurred off the perimeters of the North American plate.
>> See the North American plate . . .
>
> Far more telling is the fact that the Haiti quake was almost perfectly
> *antipoda*l to the 9.0 Sumatra quake not too long ago.
>
Is there software which can run the fluid dynamics with a crust which
can show a relationship?

/BAH