| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Geology - Earthquakes Forum » Scientific Prediction: Central America: 9/14 to 9/28
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| shoppersplace |
 Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Please go to my website, www.earlyearthquakes.com
to read my theory of predicting earthquakes.
I have a link to a discussion board as well, on there. Please reply
back to me only if you are serious about helping to prove the theory.
I am also looking for a good programmer. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mirage |
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:19 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 13, 7:27 pm, shoppersplace <marclevitt...@aol.com> wrote:
Quote: Please go to my website,www.earlyearthquakes.com
to read my theory of predicting earthquakes.
snip
Meager site It says you have developed a 'theory' that says that
quakes on one side of the world cause subsequent quakes on the
opposite side. But you don't provide any of the data that you used in
the development of your 'theory'. In science, an idea that's just
pulled out of the air without being built on supporting data is called
a 'guess', not a theory.
Apparently your methodology for proving your 'guess' isn't actually a
methodology either. Your site says that you predicted that an
Indonesian quake would cause an earthquake of unknown magnitude in the
Columbia-to-Peru area. When such a quake didn't happen, but a small
M4.1 hit the Sea of Cortez in Mexico, you took credit because it was
"close enough". What kind of methodology is it where you claim that
you are correct when clearly you are not. How can anyone accept any
of your 'facts' when you make such statements?
Fun touch, though, in your paired maps showing the opposite side of
the world for any location.
Summary: Incorrect use of scientific terminology. Bad methodology.
One clever map (but not clever enough).
Overall grade: F
--mirage |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| shoppersplace |
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 5:03 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 14, 1:19?am, mirage <mjohnso...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Quote: On Sep 13, 7:27 pm, shoppersplace <marclevitt...@aol.com> wrote:
Please go to my website,www.earlyearthquakes.com
to read my theory of predicting earthquakes.
snip
Meager site It says you have developed a 'theory' that says that
quakes on one side of the world cause subsequent quakes on the
opposite side. But you don't provide any of the data that you used in
the development of your 'theory'. In science, an idea that's just
pulled out of the air without being built on supporting data is called
a 'guess', not a theory.
Apparently your methodology for proving your 'guess' isn't actually a
methodology either. Your site says that you predicted that an
Indonesian quake would cause an earthquake of unknown magnitude in the
Columbia-to-Peru area. When such a quake didn't happen, but a small
M4.1 hit the Sea of Cortez in Mexico, you took credit because it was
"close enough". What kind of methodology is it where you claim that
you are correct when clearly you are not. How can anyone accept any
of your 'facts' when you make such statements?
Fun touch, though, in your paired maps showing the opposite side of
the world for any location.
Summary: Incorrect use of scientific terminology. Bad methodology.
One clever map (but not clever enough).
Overall grade: F
--mirage
I am not a scientist, I inspect cars for a living. Like I said, I am
looking for serious programmers, willing to make a computer program,
that will map out, and help predict quakes.
If you will notice my track record on the site. There was a quake in
Mexico, a day or two after I posted this message. I have kept many
other quakes I had predicted with this method to myself in the past,
and if it can help better than tarrot cards, there is nothing to
lose. Period. Not here to argue. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mirage |
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:40 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 16, 3:03 pm, shoppersplace <marclevitt...@aol.com> wrote:
Quote: I am not a scientist,
And yet your very first post was a 'scientific' prediction. The
multitalented Mr. Shoppersplace.
Quote: I inspect cars for a living. Like I said, I am
looking for serious programmers, willing to make a computer program,
that will map out, and help predict quakes.
If you will notice my track record on the site. There was a quake in
Mexico, a day or two after I posted this message. I have kept many
other quakes I had predicted with this method to myself
Do you understand that if you make a prediction and keep it to
yourself, then you cannot take credit for it if it comes to pass?
Many well intentioned people say that they have made an accurate
prediction but unless they announce it first, the rest of us have no
way of separating those who correctly predict events from those who
are just self-deluded or fabricators of facts. Please start posting
your predictions here, and we'll be able to determine your
credibility, saving you the time and effort to tell us that you were
once again right.
Quote: in the past,
and if it can help better than tarrot cards,
Whether it works better than tarot will be determined by your
results. Post your predictions, please.
Quote: there is nothing to
lose. Period. Not here to argue.
Excellent. Welcome. Post your predictions here. A prediction must
contain a lat/long location, a date and time, and a magnitude.
Include margins of error for each parameter so you can get credit if
you're close.
You'll get tons of support, encouragement, and honor when your
predictions prove right.
--mirage |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:08 am
|
|