Thom wrote:
Where did you get get the information
about Sumatra? Are you sure of that information?

I heard it on the TV-news, on two different ocations. I am sure I heard it,
but I am not sure it is true.

Peter S/Y Anicula

Thom Stewart skrev i en
...
Peter,

Your questions are good questions. Where did you get get the information
about Sumatra? Are you sure of that information?

It would be difficult to get a good accurate Sun sight at this time of
Solstice. I would have a greater question about the sighting that shows
it moved 35 meters than how to prove it did.

The only answer I have for you is Sun Sights averaged over a few weeks.
The noon sight shouldn't be to hard to determine GMT Local Noon for
Longitude. It may take a lot of "Witch's Hats" to average Latitude.

Again, I'd really question the single sighting on Sumatra? That is the
one that sounds strange.

Good Luck on your questions.

We here in Western Washington are on a fault line but the Pacific Plate
is sliding under our Plate and our position has remained the same for
the thirty-five years I've been here but Mt St Helen has let us know
that changes are occurring under us

Ole Thom

I just read in today's paper that the source seems to be Ken Hudnut from the
US-GS. He has been quoted for saying something like:
"The earthquake changed the world map"
"Small islands in the Indian Ocean has been moved up to 20 meters, while the
north-western tip of Sumatra may have moved up to 36 meter."
(my translation from the Danish translation).

Erik Schou Jensen, from The Geological Museum at the University of
Copenhagen, thinks that Ken Hudnut has been misquoted, and says:
"What he (KH) is talking about, is a small splinter (?) of a plate located
on the sea-bottom north of Sumatra. This, he (KH) thinks, can have moved up
to 36 meter"
"It has not been possible to perform the necessary measurements, since the
Indonesian authorities has closed the whole area down (?) but the island can
have moved a few centimeters..."
"During the earthquake, it was the Indian plate that slid down under the
plate with Sumatra, so it would not have been Sumatra that moved, but the
sea-bottom under the Indian ocean and not more than five to six meter at one
time."

So it looks like it was just another example of the press not being able to
present the facts.

Peter S/Y Anicula



Overproof skrev i en
nyhedsmeddelelse:SBHAd.24735$Y72.23238@edtnps91...
Look you closet geologists...... if the friggin continent of Australia or
any related tectonic plate subduction resulted in a land mass move of that
severity in such a small time frame.... we'd be facing much greater
cataclysmic disturbances than an oceanic shock wave.

35 meters?...... Not! Hell... even the severest case of isostatic
rebound
doesn't amount to more than a centimeter every century.

"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
You didn't answer any of my questions.

There were only a earth quake in the western end of the plate.
The north part of New Zealand is on the same tectonic plate as Sumatra,
but
not on the same tectonic plate as the southern part, and I think it
would
not have gone unnoticed if half of the Northern Island (Auckland) had
moved
36 meter relative to the other half (Wellington). (yes they are on
different
tectonic plates).
So I can't see that it is simply the matter of the hole plate moving 36
meters.

Anyway my question was about the consequences for navigating the area,
using
GPS.

I also find it interesting to find out how the whole plate moved, but I
can't se that it could be as simple as you suggest.

Does any of our colleagues down under se any change in their GPS
positions
?


Peter S/Y Anicula

o
Capt. Neal® skrev i en
...
Understand this. Not just isolated islands moved. The entire tectonic
plate
in the area of the quake subsumed and everything on this plate moved
along
with the plate. If the tectonic plate moved three meters then Australia
moved three meters provided the whole of Australia is on that plate.

Pate tectonics are not hard to understand. Since Pangea plates have
moved.
Over the millennia Pangea broke up into the continents we see today
which
are
pretty evenly spaced around the globe.

CN


"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I heard that the island of Sumatra has moved 35 meter.

Is or was there any anomalies in GPS positioning on the "Australian
Plate"?
Is it regulated by the satellites ?
As far as I can guess, a datum change would be necessary ?

Does anybody know any reliable sources for answers to these questions
?

Peter S/Y Anicula

That seems a whole lot more plausible Peter. Plate subduction can be extreme
at times of failure..... but what will be most interesting is the cause of
the massive plate movement in the first place.

Tectonic Plate subduction is the primary cause of "Earthquakes" as well as
volcanic formations. Fault line slip is not the culprit... it's the
weakpoint effected by amassing pressure due to tectonic plate movement.

I'm certain our lovable Bible Toting Bob will provide us with further proof
that his assumptions as researched on the internet are correct...... even
though he should admit it was God's Will that this occurred. Next thing we
know he'll be questioning "Creationism"

CM


"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I just read in today's paper that the source seems to be Ken Hudnut from
the
US-GS. He has been quoted for saying something like:
"The earthquake changed the world map"
"Small islands in the Indian Ocean has been moved up to 20 meters, while
the
north-western tip of Sumatra may have moved up to 36 meter."
(my translation from the Danish translation).

Erik Schou Jensen, from The Geological Museum at the University of
Copenhagen, thinks that Ken Hudnut has been misquoted, and says:
"What he (KH) is talking about, is a small splinter (?) of a plate located
on the sea-bottom north of Sumatra. This, he (KH) thinks, can have moved
up
to 36 meter"
"It has not been possible to perform the necessary measurements, since the
Indonesian authorities has closed the whole area down (?) but the island
can
have moved a few centimeters..."
"During the earthquake, it was the Indian plate that slid down under the
plate with Sumatra, so it would not have been Sumatra that moved, but the
sea-bottom under the Indian ocean and not more than five to six meter at
one
time."

So it looks like it was just another example of the press not being able
to
present the facts.

Peter S/Y Anicula



Overproof skrev i en
nyhedsmeddelelse:SBHAd.24735$Y72.23238@edtnps91...
Look you closet geologists...... if the friggin continent of Australia or
any related tectonic plate subduction resulted in a land mass move of
that
severity in such a small time frame.... we'd be facing much greater
cataclysmic disturbances than an oceanic shock wave.

35 meters?...... Not! Hell... even the severest case of isostatic
rebound
doesn't amount to more than a centimeter every century.

"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
You didn't answer any of my questions.

There were only a earth quake in the western end of the plate.
The north part of New Zealand is on the same tectonic plate as
Sumatra,
but
not on the same tectonic plate as the southern part, and I think it
would
not have gone unnoticed if half of the Northern Island (Auckland) had
moved
36 meter relative to the other half (Wellington). (yes they are on
different
tectonic plates).
So I can't see that it is simply the matter of the hole plate moving 36
meters.

Anyway my question was about the consequences for navigating the area,
using
GPS.

I also find it interesting to find out how the whole plate moved, but I
can't se that it could be as simple as you suggest.

Does any of our colleagues down under se any change in their GPS
positions
?


Peter S/Y Anicula

o
Capt. Neal® skrev i en
...
Understand this. Not just isolated islands moved. The entire tectonic
plate
in the area of the quake subsumed and everything on this plate moved
along
with the plate. If the tectonic plate moved three meters then
Australia
moved three meters provided the whole of Australia is on that plate.

Pate tectonics are not hard to understand. Since Pangea plates have
moved.
Over the millennia Pangea broke up into the continents we see today
which
are
pretty evenly spaced around the globe.

CN


"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I heard that the island of Sumatra has moved 35 meter.

Is or was there any anomalies in GPS positioning on the "Australian
Plate"?
Is it regulated by the satellites ?
As far as I can guess, a datum change would be necessary ?

Does anybody know any reliable sources for answers to these
questions
?

Peter S/Y Anicula

"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I heard that the island of Sumatra has moved 35 meter.

Is or was there any anomalies in GPS positioning on the "Australian
Plate"?
Is it regulated by the satellites ?
As far as I can guess, a datum change would be necessary ?

Does anybody know any reliable sources for answers to these questions ?


A report on the news tonight said that some Islands close to the epicentre
had moved 120 metres.


Regards


Donal
--

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I heard that the island of Sumatra has moved 35 meter.

Is or was there any anomalies in GPS positioning on the "Australian
Plate"?
Is it regulated by the satellites ?
As far as I can guess, a datum change would be necessary ?

Does anybody know any reliable sources for answers to these questions ?


A report on the news tonight said that some Islands close to the epicentre
had moved 120 metres.

Do you have any idea of how ridiculous that sounds.??

CM

Do you understand how ridiculous you sound?

The Himalayas grow about 1 meter every 100 years as the result of relative
movement of tectonic plates.

Amen!

BC

"Overproof" wrote in message
news:2DKAd.35231$dv1.5881@edtnps89...

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I heard that the island of Sumatra has moved 35 meter.

Is or was there any anomalies in GPS positioning on the "Australian
Plate"?
Is it regulated by the satellites ?
As far as I can guess, a datum change would be necessary ?

Does anybody know any reliable sources for answers to these questions ?


A report on the news tonight said that some Islands close to the
epicentre
had moved 120 metres.

Do you have any idea of how ridiculous that sounds.??

CM

"Bob Crantz" wrote in message

The Himalayas grow about 1 meter every 100 years as the result of relative
movement of tectonic plates.

Amen!


Bwahahahahahahaaaaa........ Yeah Bob.... India absorbs almost nothing in
regards to plate movement..... it's all miraculously transferred to
foliating the gneiss of the Himalayas a thousand miles inland!

Next you'll be preaching to me how God formed the Rockies!

CM

http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/dec-2004/29/index2.php

Two USGS PhD's seem to disagree with you. Remember, movement is relative -
relative to what?



"Overproof" wrote in message
news:2DKAd.35231$dv1.5881@edtnps89...

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I heard that the island of Sumatra has moved 35 meter.

Is or was there any anomalies in GPS positioning on the "Australian
Plate"?
Is it regulated by the satellites ?
As far as I can guess, a datum change would be necessary ?

Does anybody know any reliable sources for answers to these questions ?


A report on the news tonight said that some Islands close to the
epicentre
had moved 120 metres.

Do you have any idea of how ridiculous that sounds.??

CM

How about relevant to the established datum... at the time that data was
collected.... and the accuracy of the equipment utilized to derive it.

BTW - Lots of people disagree with me.... none that count though.

CM


"Bob Crantz" wrote in message
k.net...
http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/dec-2004/29/index2.php

Two USGS PhD's seem to disagree with you. Remember, movement is relative -
relative to what?

I see you here administering a severe beating to CM with your
every post. Who says men of the cloth are narrow-minded and
ignorant? You, sir, prove otherwise with your every erudite,
factual and insightful post. Your grasp of the physical world
is ever so much worldly than a certain, drunken, Nova Scotia,
neophyte sailor's ever will be.

In spite of being soundly pummeled about the head and
shoulders, I see CM remains in total denial. How is it some
folks can't seem to accept reality, admit their mistakes
and step out of the pyre that consumes them?

Could it be they are so possessed by Lucifer that they have
come to enjoy ignorance and pain? Surely such as CM will
have their immortal souls reincarnated in canine form so
they will have two more feet to chew off when they get
caught in the inevitable bear trap of their own stupidity.

Praise! Glory.

CN



"Bob Crantz" wrote in message k.net...
http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/dec-2004/29/index2.php

Two USGS PhD's seem to disagree with you. Remember, movement is relative -
relative to what?



"Overproof" wrote in message
news:2DKAd.35231$dv1.5881@edtnps89...

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Aniculapeter" wrote in message
...
I heard that the island of Sumatra has moved 35 meter.

Is or was there any anomalies in GPS positioning on the "Australian
Plate"?
Is it regulated by the satellites ?
As far as I can guess, a datum change would be necessary ?

Does anybody know any reliable sources for answers to these questions ?


A report on the news tonight said that some Islands close to the
epicentre
had moved 120 metres.

Do you have any idea of how ridiculous that sounds.??

CM