Lmst

Earthquake Lights Revisited – More Evidence Emerging

One of the most productive topics under my umbrella of Spooky Geology has been that of Earthquake Lights (EQLs). I began researching the best evidence for strange and doubtful earthquake precursors in 2006 and have followed the subject since then. In 2018, I produced my major writeup of relevant facts and opinions on the matter and have commented on EQLs in popular culture in additional pieces.

Capturing evidence is difficult

Five more recent journal papers (from 2019 to 2024) on the topic show that there is progress being made in examining EQLs with interesting results. Most of the evidence still remains anecdotal, which is the worst kind of scientific evidence, but the new research documents additional data that will undoubtedly change the way we think of earthquakes as part of an Earth system.

We are in the age of digital technology, with ubiquitous personal recording devices. Not only are people recording around them during quakes but outward facing devices are continually surveilling the outdoors. We should see more evidence of anomalies captured. Mostly, what has been recorded are the blue-white flashes that take place during the quakes, which I’ve discussed in several previous posts. There have also been images of rainbow clouds, glowing sky, and balls of light that may be associated with the event. Still, the results are not great and the concept remains questionable to seismologists.

As I described in previous pieces, it’s difficult to capture changes in the pre-quake environment. Earthquakes happen all over the world and in indeterminate time frames. To set up observations for EQLs and associated precursors, the scale and scope are huge. There are multiple variables that would need to be measured, and coverage in time and space must be adequate. Even in areas of known seismic activity, this will be very expensive and may not get the intended results.

There had always been inadvertent data collection that raised showed anomalies and raised questions. It is well-known that, in some areas, radon levels elevate in response to the time where the fault is “preparing” to let loose, when the rock is undergoing microfracturing. However, not all faults will produce the same, or any, precursors – each seismic event is unique, even on the same fault. Traditional research in seismology has focused on mechanical observations like ground deformation and prior events. Are seismologists looking in the wrong place? A relatively new concept of a interactive electrical earth system suggests this may be so.

Watching the ionosphere

The five articles I examined (in the References below) discuss the connection between seismic activity and the ionosphere. While it seems strange to find evidence for earthquake activity in the upper reaches of the atmosphere (where the aurora displays), in the last few decades, evidence is mounting for the lithospheric-atmospheric-ionospheric coupling model or LAIC. This model assumes that processes which happen when rock in the earth’s crust is stressed create electrical signals exhibited in the atmosphere. The seismo-electromagnetic phenomenon may be show up as anomalous electrical signals, magnetic field changes, ground temperature variations, atmospheric changes, and luminous phenomenon such as EQLs.

The ionosphere is the outer reaches of the Earth’s atmosphere.

In the crustal lithosphere – the location of the earth’s tectonic plates – pressure during the lead up to fault slip causes microfracturing in the rock. Radon and other gases are released and migrate through fractures and the fault area. Electric currents may also be generated. Different models of how this might work are proposed. Some researches focus on the freed (radioactive) radon that generates ionized air (positive and negative ions). Others propose that negative charges in the fracturing rock induce positive charges to collect at ground level. Localized ionization can increase water vapor condensation and variation in conductivity, and may potentially explain pre-earthquake anomalies such as “earthquake weather”, odd animal and plant behavior, electromagnetic anomalies, glowing ground, strange clouds, etc. Because the atmosphere is dynamic, the effects may rapidly appear or disappear. In the electromagnetic fault model, the ground and the atmosphere interact to produce EQLs of various types or odd clouds.

No layer of the Earth exists in isolation. It is not unreasonable to assume that a large energy event such as a major earthquake would show signals revealed in our earth system. The interactive model of effects contend that the electrical effects propagate into the atmosphere to the ionosphere where they are best observed via satellite. The French satellite DEMETER (Detection of Electro-Magnetic Emissions Transmitted from EQ Regions) operated between 2004 and 2010 specifically to detect electromagnetic phenomena related to quakes and volcanic eruptions. The DEMETER observed significant disturbances in the ionosphere 5 days before the Wenchuan/Sichuan, China earthquake of 2008. The deviation in ion density was observed within 200km of the epicenter. Chinese scientists established a monitoring station in the Sichuan province called MVP-LAI to assess the complex interactions for the future.

I must stress that the relationship between ionospheric anomalies and earthquakes is highly debated. Some previous studies were weak and are refuted. There is difficulty in using satellite observations. Geomagnetic disturbances and meteorological events will interfere with any effects coming from a quake. The proposal that these signals might be used as a warning of a coming quake days or even months ahead creates serious problems with prediction and social ramifications. They remain unreliable, but the ideas are very intriguing and the data is accumulating.

Examples

For various examples of EQLs and anomalies, see my previous article that details the observances in Saguenay, Canada (1988), Matsushiro, Japan (1968) and several other examples include the rainbow cloud from Sichuan 2008. More about this phenomenon has come to light since then.

Sichuan/Wenchuan 12 May 2008
In addition to the DEMETER data, this quake is associated with the infamous “rainbow cloud” that was seen and photographed within several hundred km from the epicenter 10-60 minutes before the quake. Enomoto (2024) concludes this was not the common optical phenomenon known as a circumhorizon arc because it was not localized and was not at the correct angle of the sun. He suggests that it was a different type of light dispersion related to an atmospheric electrical anomaly. The total electron content (TEC) in the atmosphere was noted to increase above the epicenter 37 minutes prior.

Screen capture from video taken over 400 km from the Sichuan 2008 quake.

Fukushima-oki Japan, 13 February 2021
Multiple parameters were observed by researchers, but the most convincing, according to authors Hayakawa and Hobara (2024), were the ultra and extremely low frequency (ULF/ELF) radio waves that they observed about 1 week prior to the quake, up to the day of the quake. See more below on the second Fukushima event in 2022 that produced flashes.

Kobe, Japan 1995
Luminous clouds were observed an hour before and 27 minutes after this quake accompanied by pulsed radio emissions. The clouds were described “like a fire breathing dragon” by a photographer. The quake area also was host to an unusual spiral cloud eight days prior. A fisherman reported to Enomoto that he observed electric sparks at ground level. Later, Enomoto discovered that a portion of ground area along the fault had been blackened and the grass charred. After analyzing the fault gouge material, and conducting experiments, he concluded that the clay minerals in the fault zone had been subject to a significant current discharge, altering the material that was not found elsewhere. This was published in a separate paper with others in 2001 (noted in my previous post). The Kobe area has a belt of granite that hosts numerous radon springs. Enomoto suggests that released water vapor can carry radon or methane upwards out of the fault area into the atmosphere.

From Enomoto, 2024. Model explaining the change in color of the clouds as a result of radon ionization emitted from the fault.

Japan’s historical quakes
Enomoto’s 2024 study looked at a historical list of 872 quakes in Japan and found that 9% of damaging quakes had some mention of EQLs. He took a closer look at 21 of these quakes, including the Kobe even, concluding that the interaction of earth layers are the probable cause of the anomalies, and that it might be possible to predict quakes based on this signals. Some of the other examples mentioned in the historical records include soundless lightning or flashes on a sunny day in various quakes whereby he surmises that an electrical anomaly different than lightning was occurring. Additionally, there were reports of more intense lightning strikes during bad weather associated with quakes. Methane may be implicated in some manifestation of EQLs as the gas could be ignited by frictional heat or static electricity as its emitted from the ground. Methane hydrate eruptions triggered by underwater landslides could appear as glowing seas and pillars of fire off the coast. Reports of these phenomena differ from luminescence produced by phosphorescent organisms.

The Enomoto paper is readable and contains helpful illustrations and diagrams. I recommend checking it out. I would like to share more of the interesting examples in that paper but this post is extensive enough.

Flashes

I have detailed in other posts tagged as “earthquake lights” the obvious misidentification of flashes during a quake. There are definitely flashes that are attributable to transformer explosions and electric arcing from downed wires. Here is an example of that happening during shaking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65aE8JiPL0

Previously, I held the opinion that all such blue-white flashes filmed at night during quakes were attributable to the electricity distribution network, even though they are now frequently called EQLs by the media. That view has been shaken a bit by the paper by Xie, et al. (2023) related to the Fukushima earthquake of 16 March 2022. During the shaking, a flash burst out from the surface at the Sendai city and airport area. This was captured on two different cameras with one camera capturing two flashes close to each other while the second camera was interrupted so only one was caught. Using the overlap zone of two cameras, the position of the flash area was estimated. Here is the zinger that caught my attention:

“[W]e also collected maintenance reports on electrical facilities after the shock to rule out the possibility of the flashes being caused by explosions in transformers or power supply facilities. The reports on the locations of the malfunctioning power stations showed that some of the power stations along Sendai’s eastern coast did malfunction, but they were far away from where the EQLs appeared in the inland region”.

The authors conclude that the flash was caused by electrical current from the rock and a horizontal magnetic field disturbance. It does not appear to be related to the electricity distribution network.

Here is a video showing various instances of lights seen in the sky during the quake:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8Ma0nkCqis

This is certainly not definitive to say that flashes seen during quakes are EQLs, but it opens the potential that some are. It could be that the blue-white flashes of wires and transformers may produce a similar visual effect as the much rarer EQLs. There is a problem with confirming this conclusion as one would have to be able to document all flashes and match these with utility failures in order to discard those causes. It would be ideal if cameras could capture a flash in a precise location up close to confirm a natural cause. That has not yet happened.

In conclusion, the continuing research into the LAIC and electro-seismic models, notably in China and Japan, is exciting. They consider that observations of atmospheric anomalies are genuine and explainable, not discounted as mistakes or exaggerations. There is an inherent unreliability in eyewitness reports. But, I do think that the difference in tectonic regimes between the US and Asia can result in dismissal of the historical evidence about atmospheric earthquake anomalies. We simply don’t have the same range of seismic incidents, in large cities, that occur in those places. In the not so distant future, we may see greater acceptance of strange reports associated with earthquakes taken seriously as the weight of the evidence and a reasonable mechanism to explain them has won over the scientific community. It looks like serious investigation into the potential explanations for EQLs will continue.

References

Chen, H.; Han, P.; Hattori, K. Recent Advances and Challenges in the Seismo-Electromagnetic Study: A Brief Review. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 5893. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14225893

De Santis A, Abbattista C, Alfonsi L, Amoruso L, Campuzano SA, Carbone M, Cesaroni C, Cianchini G, De Franceschi G, De Santis A, Di Giovambattista R, Marchetti D, Martino L, Perrone L, Piscini A, Rainone ML, Soldani M, Spogli L, Santoro F. Geosystemics View of Earthquakes. Entropy (Basel). 2019 Apr 18;21(4):412. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7514901/

Enomoto, Y. Earthquake Lights Observed in Japan—Possible Underlying Mechanisms. Atmosphere 2024, 15, 916. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15080916

Hayakawa, M.; Hobara, Y. Integrated Analysis of Multi- Parameter Precursors to the Fukushima Offshore Earthquake (Mj = 7.3) on 13 February 2021 and Lithosphere–Atmosphere– Ionosphere Coupling Channels. Atmosphere 2024, 15, 1015. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15081015

Xie, B.; Wu, L.; Mao, W.; Wang, Z.; Sun, L.; Xu, Y. Horizontal Magnetic Anomaly Accompanying the Co-Seismic Earthquake Light of the M7.3 Fukushima Earthquake of 16 March 2022: Phenomenon and Mechanism. Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 5052. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15205052

#Anomalies #earthquakeLights #earthquakePrecursors #EQL #ionosphere #LAIC #luminousPhenomena #mysteriousLights #rainbowCloud #skyFlashes #SpookyGeology

https://sharonahill.com/?p=8803

Fishy images of a glowing red sea

There is a phenomenon that stumped people when it first appeared, including the pilots who documented it – bright red lighted spots in the sea. Puzzling at first, the explanation was eventually discovered, and solidly confirmed. But this week, I noticed a less diligent weather commentator in Greece is getting attention for reposting images from several years ago, with a slightly different context, but without the explanation. This has led to another surge in interest, including from tabloid “newz” sites and their overly excited commenters.

July 2022 sighting that went viral

Back in July 2022, I included a news blip about the strange sighting of a red glow in the sea in my Substack Weekly Weird Newsletter (now inactive). Commercial pilot Dustin Maggard had spotted the red glow in the Pacific Ocean while flying at 39,000 feet. Soon after, when the images spread online, weather experts identified the cause – fishing boats with LED lights.

Imaginative commenters at the time suggested these lights were all sorts of things – volcanism, fires or burning oil spills, nuclear submarines, aliens, HAARP, a portal to another dimension, etc. Note that Stranger Things was trending at the time. Some people love to make those kinds of kooky quips in comments.

Fishing boats and their red lights

American weather modeler Neil Jacobs confirmed these red spots were boats using LED lights. The exact ships could be located in the spot at that time using a website that tracks vessels. The French website, The Observers, also had a weather expert check and confirmed the same.

The bright lights are used to attract fish to the surface, namely schools of “saury” (mackerel pike), common in Asian cuisine. Lights (usually green) are also used for catching squid. Fleets of lighted boats can be seen from space.

Other incidents of red glows or bright spots on the ocean have also been reported.

This July incident was also reported by other web sources as being in the Atlantic after the photos appeared on Reddit. Again, they didn’t do great fact checking. I could not readily find the exact location where the pilots reported the lights but the better sources that quote the pilot say it was the Pacific.

A 2014 incident investigated

Another pilot (Christiaan van Heijst – a Dutch 747 captain with over 10,000 flying hours and twenty years of flying experience) noticed a cluster of red lights in the sea in 2014. It was so startling, he reported the incident and gave the photos to scientific analysts who found the lights, as described, visible on satellite imagery from the time and location. The incident appeared on an episode of Discovery Channel’s show ‘NASA’s Unexplained Files’ where they considered volcanism, high altitude lightning (sprites), and Russian military testing. They managed to converge on the source being ships, but didn’t make the connection to fish lights.

Van Heijst originally proposed it might be fishing boats but the location was odd. Because the sighting occurred just after two large earthquakes (in San Francisco and Chile), he wondered if these were earthquake lights. However, in 2022, he updated his web site report by explaining that it was most likely a Chinese saury fishing fleet.

Blood red sky

Here is another similar experience from 2020, caught in a photo by a pilot over the Pacific (Dmitriy / @deltaoscarstudio). You can see how the sea surface lights are reflected by the clouds.

In May of 2022, the night sky above Zhoushan, China turned deep red due to the lights from the boats refracted in the drizzly, cloudy skies. That incident frightened local people who saw the eerie sky. They assumed it was not good news, maybe a fire, or worse. Several people recorded images of the event.

Greek mystery mongering

This week, I noticed a glowing red sea story circulating that pointed to a Facebook post from Greek “weather forecaster and analyst”, Theofanis Chatzigrivas. I went to his FB page and found that he was showing the same photos from the 2022 story but saying they were taken in the Atlantic Ocean. No other details were provided.

Notice that he says “They could never explain the red coloring in the clouds over the Atlantic Ocean”. The obvious questions arise about where he gets his information, and why he wouldn’t have known about this previous debunking of the lights from 2022? Did he not do any research? That’s not uncommon for those personalities looking to gain followers and fans. Posting interesting content is more important sometimes than doing any work to provide context or sound information. I don’t know much about Mr. Chatzigrivas because his content is all in Greek. It does seem like he provides regular weather forecasting. However, even after several people in the comments mentioned the 2022 source of the photos, and the true nature of the lights, he ignored that and even reposted the photos again with the same mystery mongering. So, he’s not a serious person.

Eager to capitalize on clicks, some news aggregator sites, like “newsincyprus.com” and “in-cyprus.philenews.com” simply reposted Chatzigrivas’ Facebook post. There was no link back to the source and no mention of the real, and well-known, cause. The stories were made to look like factual news of a true mystery:

I don’t have to elaborate on how news sites today are sad excuses for information, and mostly cause misinformation to spread.

I thought it would be worthwhile to add another take on the red glows so that maybe the next sensationalistic take on the fishing boat lights won’t go so far. And maybe Mr. Chatzigrivas will pay attention and do at least a little δέουσα επιμέλεια (due diligence).

#fishingBoats #mysteriousLights #mystery #redClouds #redGlow #redLights #redSky

https://sharonahill.com/?p=8745

#mysteriousLights

Client Info