OF THE
TIMES
All I see is a word salad. Question... (arguable) is a Trump win a win for anyone else, say you or me, it’s been a gargantuan win for Trump and...
Cash-strapped Kiev is seeking to make money by turning the country into a drug haven, Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service says. ...and the...
Nice try...I see a lot physical and kinetic evidence that disputes a lot of his assertions...just sayin'
Laughing and snorting coke...good times while people suffer and die...
Everytime I hear about unusual weather now, I wonder if it is manipulated. Getting a bit cynical, I guess. Stay safe everyone, it is really hot...
To submit an article for publication, see our Submission Guidelines
Reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the volunteers, editors, and directors of SOTT.net or the Quantum Future Group.
Some icons on this site were created by: Afterglow, Aha-Soft, AntialiasFactory, artdesigner.lv, Artura, DailyOverview, Everaldo, GraphicsFuel, IconFactory, Iconka, IconShock, Icons-Land, i-love-icons, KDE-look.org, Klukeart, mugenb16, Map Icons Collection, PetshopBoxStudio, VisualPharm, wbeiruti, WebIconset
Powered by PikaJS 🐁 and In·Site
Original content © 2002-2026 by Sott.net/Signs of the Times. See: FAIR USE NOTICE

Reader Comments
what I find more interesting is that all depth indicators are reading 0.0km... I saw one today at 0.1km. I know California, especially the sunny southern portion, is well known for its shallow disposition (all those star seekers no doubt), but this is a wee bit strand is it not? No wonder there is chatter about manga activity nearby... Oops, make that magma, though the previous would no doubt be much more illustrative of the point here. Even natural gas fracking goes deeper than that don't they?
[Link]
The 4.6 mag shock
Time2013-05-23 20:48:57-07:00
Location40.167°N 121.074°W
Depth14.0km
14 km!!! Now, that's deep.
But most of the others still come up 0.0 and this isn't happening elsewhere on the usgs site, so how many days should one give them to determine a depth for these? I do see a 1.1 and a 2 listed, but the majority still report as 0.0, and that doesn't seem to be normal or is this a new norm for a usgs site that seems to keep changing their layout?