| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Geology - Earthquakes Forum » In your window innuendo
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Weatherlawyer |
 Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:31 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In this study, 2D topographic profiles across the central and eastern
Transverse Ranges were compared to observed gravity and predicted
gravity calculated from the Talwani method. Locations of observed
gravity are shown in black:
http://www.scec.org/education/college/internships/2000/natek/sld008.htm
Compare:
http://www.data.scec.org/faults/sofault.html
PREDICTION ISSUED 09/18/07
Rating A, A, A
LAKE ELSINORE AREA
33.73N / -117.47
RADIUS 120KM
3.5 OR GREATER
09/19/07 - 09/29/07
3.9 2007/09/25 15:38:24 33.739N 117.469W 4.8 13 km ( 8 mi) WNW of
Lake Elsinore, CA
USGS
Rating:
Location - A - Within set parameters
Distance between 33.73N 117.47W and 33.739N 117.469W is 1.0061 km
Magnitude - A - As predicted.
Window - A - Within specified time period.
http://www.petrachallusquakepredictions.com/petraspredictions1.html
I don't hold with the window of probability that Petra subscribes to,
I think it is a clause thought up by college professors to train
potential seismologists not to attempt looking outside the box.
Personally I believe that if the US media wasn't a circus run by
clowns, a lot of people would pay her some attention. To get one
prediction right would stir up enough interest to make her type of
research a lot more potent. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mike Williams |
| Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191339080.832374.319070@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Quote: In this study, 2D topographic profiles across the central and eastern
Transverse Ranges were compared to observed gravity and predicted
gravity calculated from the Talwani method. Locations of observed
gravity are shown in black:
http://www.scec.org/education/college/internships/2000/natek/sld008.htm
Compare:
http://www.data.scec.org/faults/sofault.html
PREDICTION ISSUED 09/18/07
Rating A, A, A
LAKE ELSINORE AREA
33.73N / -117.47
RADIUS 120KM
3.5 OR GREATER
09/19/07 - 09/29/07
3.9 2007/09/25 15:38:24 33.739N 117.469W 4.8 13 km ( 8 mi) WNW of
Lake Elsinore, CA
USGS
Rating:
Location - A - Within set parameters
Distance between 33.73N 117.47W and 33.739N 117.469W is 1.0061 km
Magnitude - A - As predicted.
Window - A - Within specified time period.
http://www.petrachallusquakepredictions.com/petraspredictions1.html
I don't hold with the window of probability that Petra subscribes to,
I think it is a clause thought up by college professors to train
potential seismologists not to attempt looking outside the box.
Personally I believe that if the US media wasn't a circus run by
clowns, a lot of people would pay her some attention. To get one
prediction right would stir up enough interest to make her type of
research a lot more potent.
Challus makes LOTS of predictions. Generally for very seismically active
areas. The number of predictions that pan out is just about what one would
expect from chance. She publicizes her successes but not her failures. Your
claim that "to get one prediction right would stir up enough interest to
make her type of research a lot more potent" is suggestive of a rather
unsophisticated approach.
Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer |
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 5:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 2, 11:22 pm, "Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote:
Quote: "Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191339080.832374.319070@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
In this study, 2D topographic profiles across the central and eastern
Transverse Ranges were compared to observed gravity and predicted
gravity calculated from the Talwani method. Locations of observed
gravity are shown in black:
http://www.scec.org/education/college/internships/2000/natek/sld008.htm
Compare:
http://www.data.scec.org/faults/sofault.html
PREDICTION ISSUED 09/18/07
Rating A, A, A
LAKE ELSINORE AREA
33.73N / -117.47
RADIUS 120KM
3.5 OR GREATER
09/19/07 - 09/29/07
3.9 2007/09/25 15:38:24 33.739N 117.469W 4.8 13 km ( 8 mi) WNW of
Lake Elsinore, CA
USGS
Rating:
Location - A - Within set parameters
Distance between 33.73N 117.47W and 33.739N 117.469W is 1.0061 km
Magnitude - A - As predicted.
Window - A - Within specified time period.
http://www.petrachallusquakepredictions.com/petraspredictions1.html
I don't hold with the window of probability that Petra subscribes to,
I think it is a clause thought up by college professors to train
potential seismologists not to attempt looking outside the box.
Personally I believe that if the US media wasn't a circus run by
clowns, a lot of people would pay her some attention. To get one
prediction right would stir up enough interest to make her type of
research a lot more potent.
Challus makes LOTS of predictions. Generally for very seismically active areas.
There is a reason for that. Are you on some sort of medication that
hampers your ability to reason? Or have you moved to an high altitude
domicile recently? Very recently.
Quote: The number of predictions that pan out is just about what one would
expect from chance. She publicizes her successes but not her failures.
She doesn't publish her failures?
Are you sure?
Quote: Your claim that "to get one prediction right would stir up enough interest to
make her type of research a lot more potent" is suggestive of a rather
unsophisticated approach.
Your claim that I claim what you claim I claim is wrong. Your quote is
wrong and the thinking you seem intent on getting across is wrong.
In all fairness you, the sentence you misquote is not good grammar and
it would have been better to have stated the whole paragraph as below:
Quote: Personally I believe that if the US media wasn't a circus run by
clowns, a lot of people would pay her some attention, for to get one
prediction right would then stir up enough interest to make her type of
research a lot more potent.
Unfortunately as with other misconstrued posts here, yours are par for
the course.
Nice try though. But why bother?
Interesting that in your urge to get at her you should come at us
both. And the reason isn't jealousy as you post nothing useful to man
or beast. And even if you did it wouldn't be anything that our paltry
efforts could undermine, would it?
And you have no interest in preserving the status quo in contemporary
seismology as Petra subscribes (if not implicitly complies) to it.
Do you suspect her of witchcraft or something?
The only other thing I can come up with is that you need something to
do. Of all the righteous and just causes to get involved with, I
suppose hounding people on Usenet is less evil than say invading Iraq,
destroying the infrastructure and undermining the ability of native
forces to control subversive elements.
Do you have other things to do? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mike Williams |
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:07 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191407152.611115.156490@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
Quote: On Oct 2, 11:22 pm, "Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote:
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191339080.832374.319070@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
snip
Quote: Do you have other things to do?
Judging by the overwhelming volume of posts you make to this NG, it seems
that question would be better asked of you.
Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer |
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:58 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 3, 1:07 pm, "Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote:
Quote: "Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191407152.611115.156490@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...> On Oct 2, 11:22 pm, "Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote:
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191339080.832374.319070@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Do you have other things to do?
Judging by the overwhelming volume of posts you make to this NG, it seems
that question would be better asked of you.
I work part of my time and spend the rest of it annoying trolls. Not
much of a life is it? Better than one alternative, though.
Now you know all there is to know about me, how about an answer?
Here's a line of research that suggests itself:
Are you on some sort of medication that
hampers your ability to reason? Or have you moved to an high altitude
domicile recently? Very recently.
Quote: The number of predictions that pan out is just about what one would
expect from chance. She publicizes her successes but not her failures.
She doesn't publish her failures?
Are you sure?
Then there is this one:
Unfortunately as with other misconstrued posts here, yours are par for
the course.
Nice try though. But why bother?
That is, why bother to misconstrue my posts? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mike Williams |
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:59 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191423515.239955.297110@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Quote: On Oct 3, 1:07 pm, "Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote:
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191407152.611115.156490@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...> On Oct 2,
11:22 pm, "Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote:
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191339080.832374.319070@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Do you have other things to do?
Judging by the overwhelming volume of posts you make to this NG, it seems
that question would be better asked of you.
I work part of my time and spend the rest of it annoying trolls. Not
much of a life is it? Better than one alternative, though.
Now you know all there is to know about me, how about an answer?
Here's a line of research that suggests itself:
Are you on some sort of medication that
hampers your ability to reason? Or have you moved to an high altitude
domicile recently? Very recently.
The number of predictions that pan out is just about what one would
expect from chance. She publicizes her successes but not her failures.
She doesn't publish her failures?
Are you sure?
Then there is this one:
Unfortunately as with other misconstrued posts here, yours are par for
the course.
Nice try though. But why bother?
That is, why bother to misconstrue my posts?
Yeah - I'm actually quite sure she doesn't publicize her failures. There IS
a subtle but important difference between "publish" and "publicize." I
usually choose my words with some care. As always, if you have actual facts
to counter any of my arguments, I'd love to hear them.
And your reference to "unfortunately as with other misconstrued posts here,
yours are par for the course" is mystifying. What does that mean?
And how have I misconstrued your posts? If all you ever do is speak in
riddles, then nobody will ever take you seriously. It's an affectation of
yours that is momentarily interesting . . .
Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer |
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:41 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 3, 9:59 pm, "Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote:
Quote:
" If all you ever do is speak in
riddles, then nobody will ever take you seriously. It's an affectation of
yours that is momentarily interesting . . .
I got into the habit of using the sort of prose I do just to irritate
the feck out of trolls. Now it seems I can't get out of the habit.
I have no need of an avid following as I am continent.
(Puerile for my own purpose, so to speak.) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Mike Williams |
| Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191454883.654803.169770@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Quote: On Oct 3, 9:59 pm, "Mike Williams" <miklw...@pacbell.net> wrote:
" If all you ever do is speak in
riddles, then nobody will ever take you seriously. It's an affectation of
yours that is momentarily interesting . . .
I got into the habit of using the sort of prose I do just to irritate
the feck out of trolls. Now it seems I can't get out of the habit.
I have no need of an avid following as I am continent.
(Puerile for my own purpose, so to speak.)
Your continence, or lack of same, had not heretofore been brought into
question.
Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer |
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:53 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 2, 4:31 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: In this study, 2D topographic profiles across the central and eastern
Transverse Ranges were compared to observed gravity and predicted
gravity calculated from the Talwani method. Locations of observed
gravity are shown in black:http://www.scec.org/education/college/internships/2000/natek/sld008.htm
Compare:http://www.data.scec.org/faults/sofault.html
PREDICTION ISSUED 09/18/07
Rating A, A, A
LAKE ELSINORE AREA
33.73N / -117.47
RADIUS 120KM
3.5 OR GREATER
09/19/07 - 09/29/07
3.9 2007/09/25 15:38:24 33.739N 117.469W 4.8 13 km ( 8 mi) WNW of
Lake Elsinore, CA
USGS
Rating:
Location - A - Within set parameters
Distance between 33.73N 117.47W and 33.739N 117.469W is 1.0061 km
Magnitude - A - As predicted.
Window - A - Within specified time period.
http://www.petrachallusquakepredictions.com/petraspredictions1.html
I don't hold with the window of probability that Petra subscribes to,
I think it is a clause thought up by college professors to train
potential seismologists not to attempt looking outside the box.
Personally I believe that if the US media wasn't a circus run by
clowns, a lot of people would pay her some attention. To get one
prediction right would stir up enough interest to make her type of
research a lot more potent.
If you know when there are >not< going to be earthquakes but had only
50% accuracy with the ones you knew were going to occur, then your
score rate would be about 75%. If I was getting results something like
that it might mean that my predictions were being shoved to one side
the way that my UK weather predictions are interfered with.
Now I have take another look at my previous results and try to see
where I went wrong and what other events were occurring at the time.
The presence of other earthquakes will also move the goal posts.
I might be able to up the score if I find some corroborating
anomalies. The trouble is, I forecast more than 3 days in advance so I
am going to miss as I won't know what tropical storms are going to be
active.
I have never agreed with the small windows some set for themselves. If
you had any idea of the time frame then all seismically active regions
should be on alert. Giving ridiculously narrow margins closes
opportunities for others to beware. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 23, 2008 4:33 am
|
|