USGS Evidence Shows Power of the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

New Evidence Shows Power of East Coast Earthquakes
Virginia Earthquake Triggered Landslides at Great Distances

11/6/2012 8:30:00 AM

Earthquake shaking in the eastern United States can travel much farther and cause damage over larger areas than previously thought.

U.S. Geological Survey scientists found that last year’s magnitude 5.8 earthquake in Virginia triggered landslides at distances four times farther—and over an area 20 times larger—than previous research has shown.

“We used landslides as an example and direct physical evidence to see how far-reaching shaking from east coast earthquakes could be,”

said Randall Jibson, USGS scientist and lead author of this study. “Not every earthquake will trigger landslides, but we can use landslide distributions to estimate characteristics of earthquake energy and how far regional ground shaking could occur.”

“Scientists are confirming with empirical data what more than 50 million people in the eastern U.S. experienced firsthand: this was one powerful earthquake,” said USGS Director Marcia McNutt. “Calibrating the distance over which landslides occur may also help us reach back into the geologic record to look for evidence of past history of major earthquakes from the Virginia seismic zone.”

This study will help inform earthquake hazard and risk assessments as well as emergency preparedness, whether for landslides or other earthquake effects.

This study also supports existing research showing that although earthquakes  are less frequent in the East, their damaging effects can extend over a much larger area as compared to the western United States.

The research is being presented today at the Geological Society of America conference, and will be published in the December 2012 issue of the

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

The USGS found that the farthest landslide from the 2011 Virginia earthquake was 245 km (150 miles) from the epicenter. This is by far the greatest landslide distance recorded from any other earthquake of similar magnitude. Previous studies of worldwide earthquakes indicated that landslides occurred no farther than 60 km (36 miles) from the epicenter of a magnitude 5.8 earthquake.

“What makes this new study so unique is that it provides direct observational evidence from the largest earthquake to occur in more than 100 years in the eastern U.S,” said Jibson. “Now that we know more about the power of East Coast earthquakes, equations that predict ground shaking might need to be revised.”

It is estimated that approximately one-third of the U.S. population could have felt last year’s earthquake in Virginia, more than any earthquake in U.S. history.

About 148,000 people reported their ground-shaking experiences caused by the earthquake on the USGS “Did You Feel It?” website. Shaking reports came from southeastern Canada to Florida and as far west as Texas.

In addition to the great landslide distances recorded, the landslides from the 2011 Virginia earthquake occurred in an area 20 times larger than expected from studies of worldwide earthquakes. Scientists plotted the landslide locations that were farthest out and then calculated the area enclosed by those landslides. The observed landslides from last year’s Virginia earthquake enclose an area of about 33,400 km2

, while previous studies indicated an expected area of about 1,500 km2

from an earthquake of similar magnitude.

“The landslide distances from last year’s Virginia earthquake are remarkable compared to historical landslides across the world and represent the largest distance limit ever recorded,” said Edwin Harp, USGS scientist and co-author of this study. “There are limitations to our research, but the bottom line is that we now have a better understanding of the power of East Coast earthquakes and potential damage scenarios.”

The difference between seismic shaking in the East versus the West is due in part to the geologic structure and rock properties that allow seismic waves to travel farther without weakening.

Learn more

about the 2011 central Virginia earthquake.

No normalization outside the temple walls: Revelation 11

The Syrian National Coalition has condemned a reported decision by Hamas to restore ties with President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, ten years after it cut them off following the outbreak of the Syrian conflict.ShareFlipboardRedditWhatsAppTwitterFacebook

Hamas leaders had previously endorsed the uprising against Assad’s autocratic rule [Getty]

The National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces has said they oppose a reported decision by Hamas to restore ties with the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The coalition – which includes a number of groups opposed to the Syrian regime – labelled the move a “disregard for the lives of Syrians and Palestinians who were killed by this regime and its allies”, in a statement on Thursday.

The Palestinian Islamist group reportedly decided to restore ties 10 years after shunning Assad for his brutal crackdown on a peaceful uprising against his rule, Reuters said earlier this month.

The movement withdrew from Damascus, where it previously had offices, in 2012 and publically endorsed the revolution after the regime’s bloody suppression of the uprising.

An official – who requested anonymity – told the international news agency the two sides had embarked on “high profile meetings to achieve that goal”.

The Syrian opposition body has now called on Hamas to rethink its decision.

“The Syrian National Coalition calls upon Hamas not to distort the history of the struggle for freedom and independence, by aligning with a criminal regime,” the coalition stated.

“Hamas will not be of any service for the Palestinian cause if it sides with sabotage, murder, rape and torturing [people] to death.”

The statement added that normalisation with the Assad regime would not represent the “just cause of the Palestinian people” living under Israeli occupation.



The New Arab Staff

It warned that Hamas would “lose its support in the nation” if it restored ties with the Assad regime, saying the regime had a “deep-seated grudge” against Hamas and all Palestinians.

The recently revealed 2013 massacre in the Damascus suburb of Tadamon – where many Palestinian refugees displaced by Israel in 1948 had resettled- showed the regime horrifically executing at least 41 people, some of whom are believed to be Palestinians.

During the Syrian conflict, the regime also imposed a starvation siege on the Palestinian Yarmouk refugee camp south of Damascus, which was captured by opposition forces.

The conflict in Syria began in 2011 and has seen over 500,000 people killed, most of them in bombardments of civilian areas by the regime and its ally Russia.

Syria was suspended from the Arab League in 2011 but since then several Arab states have restored relations with the regime, including the UAE, Oman and Jordan.

The Obama Deal is Dying: Daniel 8

Indirect talks in Qatar’s capital between Iran and the US on reviving a 2015 nuclear dealhave concluded with “no progress made,” a State Department spokesperson said late Wednesday.

The negotiations in Doha were an attempt to reboot long-running European Union-mediated talks on a return to the 2015 agreement between Tehran and world powers.

No time limit was previously announced on the most-recent negotiations, which had been taking place in a Doha hotel with special envoy Robert Malley heading the US delegation.

But by Wednesday night, a US State Department spokesperson said the “indirect discussions in Doha have concluded”.


The New Arab Staff & Agencies

“While we are very grateful to the EU for its efforts, we are disappointed that Iran has, yet again, failed to respond positively to the EU’s initiative and therefore that no progress was made,” the spokesperson told AFP in an email.

EU coordinator Enrique Mora had earlier said the parties engaged in “two intense days of proximity talks” in Doha that had “not yet” yielded the progress the EU team sought.

“We will keep working with even greater urgency to bring back on track a key deal for non-proliferation and regional stability,” he said on Twitter earlier in the day, posting a photo of himself meeting with Iran’s chief negotiator Ali Bagheri.

The comments came after Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman Nasser Kanani said that the talks would last only two days.

The parties have “exchanged views and proposals on the remaining issues”, he said.

An EU source told AFP that the discussions, which come two weeks before US President Joe Biden makes his first official visit to the region, were supposed to last several days.

‘Red lines’

Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian had said Iran was “serious” about finalising a deal in Doha, but that it wouldn’t cross its “red lines”.

“If the American side has serious intentions and is realistic, an agreement is available at this stage and in this round of negotiations,” he was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA earlier Wednesday.

IRNA has previously described the “red lines” as lifting all sanctions related to the nuclear agreement, creating a mechanism to verify they have been lifted and making sure the US does not withdraw once again from the deal.

Washington has “made clear our readiness to quickly conclude and implement a deal on mutual return to full compliance”, the US State Department spokesperson said after indirect talks concluded.

“Yet in Doha, as before, Iran raised issues wholly unrelated to the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) and apparently is not ready to make a fundamental decision on whether it wants to revive the deal or bury it,” the spokesperson said.

Differences between Tehran and Washington have notably included Iran’s demand that its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps be removed from a US terror list.

‘Trump method’

The arch-rivals have been meeting indirectly – passing messages from different areas of the same hotel – to try to break an impasse in attempts to restart the 2015 agreement.

That deal, which lifted sanctions in return for Iran curbing its nuclear programme, was abandoned unilaterally in 2018 by former US president Donald Trump, who reimposed biting sanctions.

Iranian officials earlier said they were hoping for progress in Qatar – but warned the Americans to abandon the “Trump method” of negotiating.

“We hope that, God willing, we can reach a positive and acceptable agreement if the United States abandons the Trump method,” Iranian government spokesman Ali Bahadori-Jahromi said.

He described the method as “non-compliance with international law and past agreements and disregard for the legal rights of the Iranian people”.

The international talks on reviving the deal began in April 2021 in Vienna, before the process stalled in March.

Russian Horn Vows Retribution Va Against NATO: Revelation 7

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov looks on during a press conference following talks with US counterpart on soaring tensions over Ukraine, in Geneva, on January 10, 2022. - Russia told the United States at tense talks that it had no plans to invade Ukraine, as the two sides agreed to more efforts to keep tensions from turning into a full-blown confrontation. After more than seven hours of negotiations in Geneva, the Russian and US negotiators both offered to keep talking, though there was no sign of a major breakthrough. (Photo by Fabrice COFFRINI / AFP) (Photo by FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images)

Russia Vows Retribution for NATO’s ‘Historic,’ ‘Transformative’ New Moves

A bungled campaign in Ukraine leaves a little Russia with fewer – and more dangerous – options for retaliation against NATO’s dramatic new deployments.

Russia on Wednesday threatened to further escalate its military posture in Europe to defend against new deployments by NATO that leaders within the alliance call “historic” and “transformative.”

“What is happening will invariably lead to compensatory measures on our part,” Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told reporters Wednesday morning. “We have the capabilities and resources. Security will be 100% guaranteed.”

Ryabkov was responding to announcements out of the ongoing NATO summit in Spain that the alliance would increase its high-readiness force to well over 300,000 troops, that the U.S. would station a major military headquarters in Poland – the first permanent basing of American forces on NATO’s “eastern flank” – and that the historically neutral Nordic countries Sweden and Finland on Russia’s northern periphery now face a clear path to NATO membership.

The sudden developments – many unthinkable at the end of last year – come as the U.S. and its Western partners seek new ways to impose costs on Russia for its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine in late February, gambling that what they consider acts of deterrence won’t, in fact, push Russia into expanding its war into other parts of Europe.

And the potency of Russia’s response also remains a question as it continues to sustain its war in Ukraine by diverting the bulk of its military capabilities there – though stopping short of declaring war and fully mobilizing its forces. An at-times bungled campaign has created intense strains on many of its reserves, leaving the Kremlin and Putin to rely instead on more malevolent forms of posturing, including growing references to its nuclear arsenal.

“We are sending an unmistakable message that NATO is strong, united,” President Joe Biden said at the summit on Wednesday morning. “In our meetings today we are going to approve a new NATO strategic concept and reaffirm the unity of determination of our alliance to defend every inch of NATO territory.”

“Putin was looking for the Finlandization of Europe,” Biden said, referring to Russian leaders’ historic pressure on their consequential northeastern neighbor with a border roughly 100 miles from St. Petersburg. “He’s going to get the NATO-ization of Europe.”

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the allies were meeting “in the midst of the most serious security crisis we have faced since the Second World War,” adding, “This will be a historic and transformative summit where we will make decisions that will actually change this alliance for many years to come.”

The summit comes as the alliance drafts a new strategic concept to include permanent deployments of aircraft to the U.K., navy destroyers to Spain and other rotational forces to Romania and Poland. As evidence of how much European security has changed since Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014, the last time the alliance drafted a strategic concept – in 2010 – it referred to Russia as “a strategic partner.”

Putin also finds himself further isolated by previously friendly governments. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan – whose autocratic tendencies have included closer ties with the Russian leader in recent years – announced this week that he would not block the ascension of Sweden and Finland to join NATO despite previously expressing concerns about their support for Kurdish groups that Ankara consider terrorists.

The alliance’s latest moves put further pressure on mainland Russia but also on the isolated oblast of Kaliningrad, the strategic bastion of Russian territory encircled by Lithuania, Poland and the Baltic Sea. A burgeoning diplomatic crisis has emerged there in recent weeks after Lithuania limited the transit of goods there.

Despite Russia’s latest threats, it remains unclear whether it could field an army of any consequence in response to the buildup from Europe. It has relegated itself to unearthing mothballed tanks to replace those destroyed by Western-supplied precision weapons in Ukraine, and has had to reactivate retired generals – some of them visibly unfit for combat – to command forces on the ground as a replacement for the dozen or so that have been killed at the front lines.

Western intelligence indicates that many of these forces appear unfit for battle, with Russian commanders cannibalizing units with reservists with combat experience to fill out its front-line battalions.

The U.K. Ministry of Defense’s military intelligence concluded in an assessment this week that the Russian leadership likely remains reluctant to order a general mobilization, “despite a continued shortfall in the number of deployable reservists for Ukraine.”

The Institute for the Study of War, which has tracked Russian movements, documented earlier this month that Moscow was sending some recruits into battle with less than a week of training.

“Russia continues to deploy insufficiently prepared volunteer and reserve forces to reinforce its ongoing operations,” it concluded in an analysis note published June 13.

These realities don’t necessarily mean that Russia is without options to intimidate its Western adversaries.

Following its standoff with Kaliningrad, Lithuania suffered a massive cyberattack on the scale of what other Western countries expected would follow their condemnation of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. A Russian hacker group claimed credit for that attack and said they would continue until Lithuania acquiesced to Moscow’s demands.

And, more dramatically, Putin this week noted he planned to move nuclear-capable missiles into Belarus, one of his few remaining allies along Ukraine’s northern border. The Pentagon blasted his rhetoric as “cavalier.”

“I can’t think of a more irresponsible thing for a senior leader to say than talk about the employment of nuclear weapons in this case,” a senior defense official told reporters from the Pentagon on Monday.

Threats from the China Nuclear Horn: Revelation 16

Why China’s H-6 Bomber Makes Taiwan Freak Out

ByBrent M. Eastwood

1 day ago

The H-6 bomber is no B-2 or even B-1B Lancer, that is for sure and is quite old by comparison. And yet, China keeps upgrading this weapon of war to keep getting ever more dangerous as time passes. Here is what one expert said about the bomber: When China wants to intimidate Taiwan and deliver a show of force with warplanes over the Taiwan Strait it inevitably includes the H-6 strategic bomber in the mission. China often flies to Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) to make political statements against Taiwan’s yearning to be recognized as an independent and sovereign state. The Xian H-6 has ample range and a large bomb payload that can include nuclear weapons. Let’s take a closer look at the H-6 to see why China depends on it so much to bully Taiwan.

A Game of Cat and Mouse 

An H-6 entered Taiwan’s ADIZ on May 19 surrounded by five fighter jets including the J-16. When this happens, Taiwan scrambles a quick-response air patrol, broadcasts radio warnings, and makes sure surface-to-air-missile systems are ready to fire. This chain of events is a regular occurrence, and on this particular May flight, only seven airplanes crossed into the zone. The biggest incursion into Taiwan’s ADIZ has been at least 39 airplanes in January. Bombers are typically part of the package.

H-6 Usually Causing a Stir

The H-6 bomber is based on the Soviet Tupolev Tu-16. China has an updated version of the H-6 called the H-6K. China has about 150 H-6s and variants in service. The H-6 is a dual conventional and nuclear threat. Several of the bombers have landed in the past on disputed territory such as Woody Island in the Paracels group of islands, rocks, reefs, and atolls in the northwestern part of the South China Sea, to which China claims rights.

Equipped with Carrier Killer Missiles

The later variants that have entered operations such as the H-6J and H-6K appeared in the 2010s. These bombers have a dangerous payload that could also threaten American ships including aircraft carriers. One of these missiles is the YJ-12 that when fired in numbers can possibly overwhelm U.S. Navy air defenses. The YJ-12 has a long-range and is particularly fast at up to MACH 3. The warhead is big enough to fatally damage large ships. They are also accurate with an inertial navigation system linked to satellite guidance. One can see how dangerous the YJ-12 would be against Taiwanese shipping.

Other munitions can be carried such as the nuclear-capable CJ-10A, which also doubles as a “carrier killer” cruise missile. This weapon’s range is 1,367 miles.

H-6 Has Been Upgraded Over the Last Decade

The updated H-6K itself has an extended range with larger fuel tanks. The H-6K has improved Russian Saturn D-30KP-2 turbofan engines that give the bomber more thrust and greater range. The old 23mm gun positions have been replaced with electronic countermeasure systems. The H-6K has been upgraded across the board to include improved “avionics, search and attack radar, navigation, fire control, and weapons precision,” according to

More Chinese Incursion?

The H-6 and its variants will continue to be the featured bomber when flights of Chinese warplanes enter Taiwan’s ADIZ. But what is China’s objective? China makes an incursion and then Taiwan reacts and both sides get simulated combat training. China has not fought in a war since it invaded northern Vietnam in 1979.

But China continues to claim sovereignty over Taiwan. Beijing sends a message to Taiwan when Taipei buys arms from the United States or if Taiwan’s politicians speak about independence. China also coincides its aerial incursions on major holidays such as “National Day.”

The H-6 and its variants are impressive airplanes loaded with powerful missiles. China can also deploy its J-16D electronic warfare airplane to neutralize Taiwan’s air defense system to pave the way for the H-6 to make its bombing and missile launch runs. So, the H-6 is formidable and a valuable piece for China to intimidate Taiwan. It has a psychological effect on Taiwanese civilians because residents do not know what to expect next from the Chinese. It is clear that China’s incursions into Taiwan’s ADIZ will negatively affect peace and security in the region.

Now serving as 1945’s Defense and National Security Editor, Brent M. Eastwood, PhD, is the author of Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare. He is an Emerging Threats expert and former U.S. Army Infantry officer. You can follow him on Twitter @BMEastwood.

70% of Australians support the Australian nuclear horn: Daniel 7

70% of Australians support nuclear submarines under AUKUS

Country’s public increasingly views Russia and China as threats in new poll

SYDNEY — Australia’s plan to acquire nuclear submarines under the AUKUS trilateral security partnership enjoys support from 70% of the country’s public, a poll released Tuesday shows, as a growing number of people view Russia and China as threats.

The results of an annual survey by the Lowy Institute, a Sydney-based think tank, come after Australia, the U.K. and the U.S. unveiled AUKUS in September.

As part of the pact, the two other members will help Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines. Lowy’s poll found 33% of respondents were “strongly in favor” of Australia obtaining the submarines, while another 37% were “somewhat in favor.”

Only 11% were “strongly against” the move while 17% were “somewhat against” it.

This contrasts sharply with the general antinuclear sentiment in Australia. A full 63% of respondents in the poll either strongly or somewhat opposed Australia acquiring nuclear weapons. Just 11% strongly favored obtaining nuclear weapons, while 25% were somewhat in favor.

Lowy asked respondents to rank a list of potential threats to Australia’s vital interests over the next decade. “Russia’s foreign policy” was picked as a critical threat — the most serious kind — by 68% in the latest poll, which follows Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

China’s foreign policy was seen as a critical threat by 65%. This edged a military clash between the U.S. and China over Taiwan, which came in at 64% of respondents. Climate change was regarded as a critical threat by 62%.

Russian and Chinese foreign policies had been viewed as critical threats by 32% and 36%, respectively, in Lowy’s 2017 poll. Meanwhile, the share of people citing international terrorism declined to 48% from 68% over the same five years.

When it comes to countries that can be trusted to act responsibly in global affairs, the U.K. and Japan topped the list with a score of 87% each. France ranked third at 82%, while the U.S. was fourth at 65%.

China trailed at 12%, slipping by 4 points from last year’s poll. Russia lost 21 points to sink to 5%.

The poll collected responses from roughly 2,000 Australian adults, mostly in March.

No Obama Nuclear deal in Qatar

Iran report: Nuclear talks with US end without deal in Qatar

by Naharnet Newsdesk 8 hours ago

Indirect negotiations between Iran and the U.S. over Tehran’s tattered nuclear deal with world powers have ended without breaking a deadlock over the talks, a semiofficial Iranian news agency reported Wednesday.

The U.S. State Department and the European Union, which is mediating the talks in Qatar, did not immediately acknowledge the end of the negotiations in Doha.

However, the semiofficial Tasnim news agency, believed to be close to Iran’s hard-line Revolutionary Guard, described the negotiations as finished and having “no effect on breaking the deadlock in the talks.”

U.S. Special Representative Rob Malley spoke to the Iranians through EU official Enrique Mora during the talks. Mora then took messages to Iran’s top nuclear negotiator Ali Bagheri Kani.

Tasnim claimed that the American position did not include “a guarantee for Iran benefiting economically from the deal,” quoting what it described as unnamed “informed sources.”

“Washington is seeking to revive the (deal) in order to limit Iran without economic achievement for our country,” the Tasnim report claimed.

Iran and world powers agreed in 2015 to the nuclear deal, which saw Tehran drastically limit its enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. In 2018, then-President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew America from the accord, raising tensions across the wider Middle East and sparking a series of attacks and incidents.

Talks in Vienna about reviving the deal have been on a “pause” since March. Since the deal’s collapse, Iran has been running advanced centrifuges and rapidly growing stockpiles of enriched uranium.