this article treats a research topic as a closed book. plate tectonics are not currently well understood - there's vague ideas that are probably mostly right, but acting like we're certain about something we're only beginning to understand is a type of arrogance that only the internet is capable of. there's plenty of published, peer-reviewed material out there that considers tidal drag to be a primary force in plate movement, and the movement in the field is towards a greater acceptance of this, not a lesser acceptance of it.

regarding the issue of gravity in planetary alignments, the "too far away" rebuttal simply misunderstands the argument - and is mostly flat out wrong. it's not about the "creation of new gravity", or something, but about offsetting an equilibrium. if it weren't for jupiter, the earth would fall into the sun. the larger bodies in our system have effects on our orbit that we can calculate quite easily if we know a little about celestial mechanics. the idea about the alignments having an effect on tectonic movement is that it "blocks" the gravity that we already know has an effect for a few moments in a sudden manner, creating a shock.

you also have to keep in mind that small planets can block out large ones if they are much closer. and i'm not going to present an opinion on whether there's actually an alignment on the date in question, because i don't feel like doing the math, because there's nothing that could be done about it.

the ancients kept very detailed seasonal and astronomical records. they were very interested in the topic. after a few centuries of record keeping, it's reasonable to think a few correlations could be pulled out of the data using crude identification tactics. and, they were pretty good at arithmetic, too. what we see coming down to us as astrological mumbo jumbo is partly a preservation of this, in the face of barbarian destruction horizons. it needs modern methods to confirm. but it's not inherently absurd.

so, take heed: viral rebuttals are often as bad or worse than the nonsense they claim to debunk.

www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/for-science-debunking-2015-earthquake-asteroid-doomsdays/51599/

brad - Jessica's fist post states that 'plate tectonics are not currently well understood'. Really, I always thought the geology was pretty advanced, as mankind has been studying the earth for a long time, and they have a solid understanding of what makes earthquakes and volcanoes.

jessica murray - the theory of plate tectonics did not develop until the 1960s, and there's still a lot of kinks to work out. it's pretty clear that there are giant slabs of rock moving around on the earth, but exactly what makes them work is not at all clear. if we understood this well, we'd be able to predict earthquakes and volcanoes. when alfred wegener initially made the proposal that continents move around (around 1910), he was written off as a fringe lunatic and more or less ignored until after he died. and he actually initially proposed tidal drag as the dominant factor.

jeremy - Jessica, one planet passing in front of another does not block the gravity. The force of gravity passes through mass without being hindered. There would be no shock effect during a planetary alignment. There would be a very tiny, very gradual rise in the magnitude of gravitational force acting in that particular direction. Tidal forces and the moon may well have some sort of effect on plate tectonics. But gravity drops off rapidly as distance increases. So the gravity we feel from the moon is so much greater than the gravity we feel from the other planets that it would totally dominate the effect, and the gravity from the other planets would be insignificant when compared to the moons.

jessica murray - it's not true that gravity passes through without hindrance. i put "block" in quotes for a reason. it's more of an interference issue, that can create amplification (+ or -). nor is it true that we don't feel the effects of gravity from another planet. i actually looked this up, and the argument you're presenting comes from a rebuttal to the idea that pluto could affect human weightlessness - an obvious farce. but, you weigh much less than the earth's crust does, and pluto is very far way, so it's consequently a very bad argument.

as mentioned: jupiter has a measurable effect on our orbit. this understanding is a consequence of relativity, which calculates the center of mass differently than newton did. nor does gravity from the moon "overpower" gravity from jupiter based on distance. rather, both forces continue to act.

as mentioned, the idea is that a disturbance in the gravitational field would put the balance of existing forces out of whack. jupiter and the earth are already pulling on each other in a measurable way. any disturbance of this would necessarily create a shock, by definition - the question is whether that shock (and it's countershock) is big enough to have an effect. and, as i mentioned, this is currently an open research topic.