4 ms·

What are you even talking about?

• ein0p 2y ago
  Seek different news sources. That earthquake in Iran wasn’t an earthquake. It didn’t have aftershocks and USGS couldn’t determine the depth.
  • fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
    Enjoy your speculative theories. Lots of minor earthquakes don't have aftershocks, not to mention that Iran is one of the most seismically active countries in the world. But please feel free to provide a trustworthy news source backing your claim.
    • ein0p 2y ago
      What is a “trustworthy news source” these days. I saw the seismograph charts on Twitter. If you expect any “trustworthy” news in an environment where US MIC could get another trillion dollars in (borrowed) taxpayer money, I have a bridge I’d like to sell.
      • deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      • fldskfjdslkfj 2y ago
        A news source that has confirmed with at least one seismology expert who has conducted a thorough (preferably peer reviewed) analysis showing that the charts are abnormal for an earthquake and are more inline with those of an explosion. It seems to me like it's should be extremely easy to distinguish the two, there's more than enough earthquake data - and that fact that there is no such report says it all. For starters i'd even take an amateur analysis, but just some dude on twitter saying "there was seismic activity - must be a nuclear test" - nah.