Here is a theory.

I baked a cake the other day.... it cracked.

I cooked a meatloaf... it cracked.

The earth is heating up.

It is cracking.

I don't think it has anything to do with plates or faults.

Do you have any evidence to back this claim in relation to these cracks, or just metaphors?

I ask because I own and have read a number of books concerning Geology and Earth Sciences. Based on what I've learned, your theory sounds unlikely unless you have something scientific to support it.

To back up which claim? That the earth is heating up (global warming)
or that it is causing cracks?

The crack in the video of the one in Michigan was giving off heat according to the guy who was filming it in 15 degree weather.

That's all I have.

Oh, and the ground there was raised up, the trees were leaning about 30 degrees in each direction.

Its just an idea.

Heat coming from the crack.

http://www.asylum.com/2011/01/12/warm-crack-in-michigan-sparks-panic-among-locals/

i think we are heading for a mini iceage than global warming... but i am wondering if some of the land masses are becoming unstable, like japan and new zealand, maybe a few others on that same fault line...

Heat often does rise from cracks caused by separating plates. Steam and toxic gas can be released, as happened at Lake Nyo in Cameroon where the gas actually killed an entire village. When plates separate, the crust and mantle of the Earth become thinner in that region, making it easier for venting of gases and for magma to rise to the surface, as is the case with the Mid-Atlantic Ridge which runs through Iceland.

As for a rise in Earth, like a bubble, that is likely a case where pressure beneath the mantle has caused the crust to open up. Unless there is venting, that could lead to a volcanic eruption as magma works its way through the mantle.

As far as Global Warming, at least part of that is due to cosmic factors rather than man-made ones. That is because the Earth just came out of a 400 year long "mini Ice Age" about 150 years ago. According to the Milankovitch Theory, this indicates that the Earth's orbit had a small anomaly which placed the Earth further from the Sun, thereby dropping temperatures enough to create cooler summers, longer winters, and glacial expansion at mountainous regions. With the end of that cycle, the Earth is now closer to the Sun causing a rise in average global temperature. The problem is that scientists had not accounted for this when researching global warming due to greenhouse gases. Therefore, we do not know the extent to which man has impacted climate change versus natural warming from cyclical changed in the Earth's orbit.

Plus as the Sun ages, it grows warmer. How much warmer has it grown in the past 500 years or so? I don't think we have a gauge for that. If that alone affected the Earth by 2 degrees Fahrenheit (about 1 degree Celsius), then when combined with the end of the mini Ice Age, there could be a 6 degree Fahrenheit change (3.3 degrees Celsius) over the past 150 years due to natural processes. Numerically, I am speaking hypothetically because I don't have access to the actual data. I do know that during ancient Ice Ages, average global temperature is known to have dropped 5 to 10 degrees Celsius. So I am taking a rough guess based on information I actually have seen.

Point is, the Earth is growing warmer, perhaps for a few reasons, but I don't think it is responsible for cracks in the earth. If someone provided me with access to credible scientific data that indicated I am wrong, I would take a look at it out of personal curiosity.

As far as another mini Ice Age, I would have to pull out one of my books to look at the cyclical charts. Off the top of my head, I do not think we will experience another mini Ice Age for at least a few hundred years.

As for unstable land masses, much of what is happening seismically appears to originate in the Indian Ocean, progressing through the Pacific region, and affecting North and South America. At the same time, the Atlantic continues to expand. India pushes further into the Asia. Eastern Africa continues to pull away from the mainland. This puts pressure on areas around Europe and Asia Minor, where there has been recent activity, but the bulk of activity has been around the Pacific Rim and the Caribbean. Central America appears to be the place where instability will cause ongoing problems which may then affect the Caribbean and the American West Coast. Until that runs its course, the entire Pacific Rim and regions near the Indian Ocean appear likely to continue seeing activity until enough plate tension is relieved.

One worrisome aspect of a shift in the Caribbean plate is that it could trigger a tsunami. If such a tsunami entered the shallower waters of the Gulf of Mexico, it could create damage equal to or exceeding Hurricane Katrina.

Once again, this is what seems to be happening from what little information I have gathered. I would love to hear an actual seismologist's thoughts just because I find the subject fascinating.

actionlynx,

Thank you so much for your input on this. I truly appreciate your knowledge on many subjects you comment on and I always look forward to reading your posts.

And thank you for being so kind to say so.

If I had known about Earth Systems Science when I was in college, I would have pursued it as my major. Back then it didn't exist. I have forgotten so much knowledge over the years though. I find it to be embarrassing, in truth. I used to read a lot more than I do now....used to read science magazines as well as books. I stopped after college though, and all that knowledge faded away.

Ah well, an IQ of 153, and nothing much in my life to show for it, except for a few awards from 20+ years ago. I honestly thought I would be on my way to an early retirement by now.

Early retirement from what? What do you do for an occupation?

Nothing that ever made me much money...

I've bounced between factory work, electrician, and cooking in restaurants. Most of my life adulthood has been split between being an electrician and a cook.

I never finished college....had planned to be an author, but found out I wasn't ready. Didn't know I had ADD back then, plus I didn't really want to go to the college I attended. I might have enjoyed it more, maybe applied myself more, if I had a vehicle while in college. You know, find better ways to have fun and relax rather than being stuck on campus all the time. Might have relaxed me enough to maintain better academic habits, plus less money spent on weekend parties. College was a depressing time. Rugby and midnight walks were two of the few things I undeniably enjoyed while there.

Anyway, I was supposed to have published my third novel by now. I had to keep studying writing on my own. Plus having the discipline to write steadily has always been problematic with ADD. I wish I had known I had it years ago. There would have been a lot fewer wasted years. A lot more would have been accomplished.

I've always dreamed of being a writer. Sort of like "Murder she wrote." I don't know if I have the patience for it, so I am an artist instead.

I am interesting in writing though. I like to create book titles, and then design the cover. Then sketch out an idea for the story... that's as far as I usually get. I need someone to ghost write it. I'm no good at developing characters, I don't have writing experience and I don't really read novels much....

here more detailed information on this...

http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2011/07/22/mexico-city-is-sinking-more-gigantic-earthcracks-in-valley-of-mexico/

When I first looked up the Chalco region, maps placed it much further south than Mexico City. This new info definitely alters the perception.

Though I knew Mexico City was built atop a lake bed, I did not know they also had cracks there, or that the city had been sinking for over 100 years. I also did not know that such a large city was still pumping water from underground to feed a city that large. That's just poor civil planning right there - built on a lake, and sucking water from the ground for what is the largest city in the world. Of course it's going to sink!

And with the water gone, eventually the limestone under the city will crumble under the weight above it. It has the makings of one of the most destructive sinkholes ever. Add in any possible seismic activity, and Mexico City is headed towards one of the worst urban disasters ever.

Not good.

and add the earthquake factor in, and mexico city could just be swallowed up...the last earthquake that got mexico city in 1985 was over 400km away, on the cocos plate, and registered a 7.1 in mexico city, because of the way the ground is there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Mexico_City_earthquake

The United States split apart....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3WlSwAL48E&feature=related

I didn't even have to watch 3 minutes of this to know that it was bunk.

When I was younger, I read a bunch of the New Age books out there. I even read the theories about the lost continents of Mu and Lemuria. I read the writings of Edgar Cayce. I stopped reading such books because eventually I realized: a) there is no geological evidence, b) there is no scientific evidence, c) such books used speculation and "visions" as evidence rather than supporting them with evidence, and d) later books claimed evidence, most of it falsified, unsubstantiated, and analyzed with a profound lack of scientific method. The credentials of such authors were dubious at best, many being amateurs who spent little time at any one site. In other words, they did not test their theories, but rather only took what they wanted to see to support their own claims. Such pseudo-science places the majority of burden on faith, much like the old snake-oil salesman. Yeah, I believed it for a while too....then I came to my senses.

Getting back to the book, one of the first things this woman mentions is a collision with an asteroid. This is straight from Biblical Armageddon, the meteor "Wormwood". That was a red flag. Second, she is relying on psychic visions with no scientific training. This is another red flag. Put together with the asteroid comment, it raises a third red flag.

She mentions rising oceans. There has been tremendous glacial melt over the past 200 years - more than the average person is made aware. Mountain glaciers are rarely mentioned. Instead the focus in on polar glaciers. The vast majority of glacial melt makes it way into the oceans, even from landlocked glaciers. So why haven't oceans already risen to threaten coastal cities? Both coastal erosion and ocean rise is already well documented. While there is warming around the poles, there is still substantial snow and freezing during the winter. This helps to offset polar glacial melt since this is the process that forms glaciers in the first place. Even during an Ice Age, there is substantial glacial melt during summer months. I have rocks in my yard which are proof of that - their type can only form from sediments, water, and pressure underneath a glacier. Look at the glacial melt in Greenland - it's substantial, and yet how much have oceans risen in the past 20 years that melting has occurred? Truth is, these prophecies are IF glacial melt happens in a period of years rather than decades. It also fails to account for evaporation which then fuels the increased number of storms. The scenario she presents is an absolute WORST CASE.

The truth is much more complicated than she presents. The simplicity of arguments like hers is what is so alluring to those who are unknowing. It is the oversimplification which makes it so easy to believe. Yet, when you dig into it, research it, learn some of the science and the data surrounding it, you find just how many factors truly enter into the equation. This complexity is exactly why scientists argue over global warming and climate change.

As I've said, I believe global warming is happening, but maybe not for all the same reasons many of us have been led to believe. I do believe we should become more conscious of the world around us, trying to reach a more balanced approach. The problem is that videos like this are scare tactics which only serve to be more divisive than constructive. It is like a rash knight charging into battle hoping his gallantry and courage will unnerve his enemy, but in truth, dies on the end of a pike looking like a fool.

I've made that "charge" a few times, and learned my lesson from it.

RED FLAGS

I watch for those things you call 'red flags' too.

Gloom and doom sayers who have a religious agenda.... red flag.

Gloom and doom sayers who want to sell you a years supply of food and survival gear....... red flag.

Chaos pushers who avoid one glaring fact and attempt to distract you from something else...... red flag.

Fortune tellers who have a vision and want to sell their latest book or do a reading for you.... red flag.

Anyone who wants you to join their cult........... red flag

People campaigning against one political party or another... red flag.

This is not to say that you can't get a ton of information from these people, just don't count on it being the gospel truth.

Every single point of view has something to offer.

You just have to look for agendas.

Very true.

Some people who look only to make money off those who will accept 15 minutes of fame.

Others use these same people to promote an agenda.

Like the woman in this video, she may believe what she says beyond a doubt, even if she is wrong. Ultimately, she is a pawn to be used by others....the sacrificial lamb that leads the charge while someone else sits in the shadows.

It would be crazy if what she dreamed about actually happened. I don't know about her, but I believe the Bible. That's a totally different thread & forum....

I live in Colorado.... so I guess I'm safe.