| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Geology - Earthquakes Forum » 12:18...
Page 3 of 6 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| Dawlish... |
 Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 7:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 9, 5:21 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
"a storm" what's that supposed to mean? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 8:35 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 9 May, 18:47, Harold Brooks <hebrook... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: In article <cff8a1a5-f7fd-4656-8bee-f80f10f37ca8
at (no spam) x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com says...
On May 9, 3:47 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Complex problems with complex low and the Low Complex:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/europe/surface_pressure.html
That has just GOT to be a major volcanic eruption late saturday most
of Sunday and early Monday. Just like it shows on the model run I
posted about on this thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.sci.weather/browse_frm/thread/f7644...
This is from the NEIC: 5.5 Magnitude earthquake at 23:21 on 8th May
2008.
!8 hours since the last one, therefore a storm brewing maybe. It is
certainly heading that way.
From NEIC, based on the ~1500 M5+ earthquakes per year, there are about
480 M5.5+ earthquakes per year, or about 1 every 18 hours. (There have
been 43 5.5 or larger quakes in the last 30 days.)
Harold
--
Harold Brooks
hebrook... at (no spam) hotmail.com
It would now seem as if a complex low pressure at 55N 30W is being
used to predict a major volcanic eruption anywhere in the world.
But, why the Northern Atlantic? There are plenty of vigorous areas of
low pressure in the Southern Ocean between Antarctic and S. America,
S. Africa, New Zealand etc. Are these never able to contribute to
earthquakes/volcanoes?
Or is this an "upmarket, decadent, Western standard of living" theory? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:41 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 9, 6:47 pm, Harold Brooks <hebrook... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: In article <cff8a1a5-f7fd-4656-8bee-f80f10f37ca8
at (no spam) x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com says...
This is from the NEIC: 5.5 Magnitude earthquake at 23:21 on 8th May
2008.
!8 hours since the last one, therefore a storm brewing maybe. It is
certainly heading that way.
From NEIC, based on the ~1500 M5+ earthquakes per year, there are about
480 M5.5+ earthquakes per year, or about 1 every 18 hours. (There have
been 43 5.5 or larger quakes in the last 30 days.)
What did you make of the facts I pointed out to you earlier? A series
of years with less than 8 quakes of 7 M and over per annum.
As for the lower magnitude quakes there does seem to be a relationship
between mascons, high pressure areas and said quakes. If you look at
the world list of quakes greater than 2 M., the relationship is even
more striking.
Please don't make the mistake that some of the dunces on
uk.sci.weather tend to make, that I am insisting one is the cause of
the other.
My take on the matter is more in the nature of harmonics that might be
engendered in the three body problem, where the orbit perturbations
cause a lapse in the system. A sphere of several billion tons, moving
at thousands of miles an hour must have a special problem dealing with
inertia.
Consider what might happen with a gyro-compass were it 2 thousand
miles wide and on an armature 1/4 million miles long.
The mere orbit of the moon is impossibly complex.
On top of that, It has huge mass-concentrations the like of which make
earth's mascons -which as yet are still to be explored; pale into
insignificance.
Which in turn means that the ideas I have put forward should not be
ruled out without some consideration.
May I take it that you would agree that all the earth's weather in
intimately interlinked?
Logically then, a shower in North Wales affects the wind in Barra.
Which is only a small step away from my claim that a severe storm in
the Philippines can affect the weather here in Britain.
It is axiomatic that floods in Britain following long spells of wet
weather here coincide with reports of forest fires in the arid climes
of North America. You have noticed that?
Did you know that the mascon we call the Mid Atlantic Ridge runs
friction a close second in the cause of the failure of man made
satellites?
When I first started looking at these things, one of the first put
downs I received was that there are some 3 million earthquakes each
year. I don't know what parameters the person was using, some quote
from a TV show I imagine. But that merely means they are as common as
waves on the sea shore.
30 million seconds in a year; one wave hitting every shore in ten of
those -every ten of those; on average...
And the waves are intimately linked to the weather are they not?
OK, that is a non sequitur. Merely saying such and such is caused by
so and so does not prove anything.
Saying silly things about a fellow poster for instance, instead of
reasoning with him, is not the way to prove him wrong, even if he says
he agrees with you that he is a kook for example, it merely shows a
paucity of respect for both people and for science.
Ah well, I have said my piece. One thing I have learned whilst airing
my views is that it is a thankless task trying to disabuse an expert
of his fallacies.
Believe what you like. Stay in the dark. Be the master of the cul-de-
sac.
Much good may it do you.
It would be a shame to wake some people.
Or:
It's 21 hours now since the last one:
Quote: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php
Stop thinking in terms of averages and do the actual observations. And
while you are at it, ponder on the weight of the moon.
3.5 x 1 Kilo per litre. What is that for a spheroid some 3.5 million
metres across?
A lot.
And it doesn't roll around the earth on averages.
Please do not berate me with statistics in future. They all add up to
proof positive for my argument not yours.
I hope you realise that I am paying you a compliment in writing to you
of these things. I wouldn't even consider it were your name Dawlish or
that other plonker. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 9, 8:41 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
And Rammasun is at hurricane force. It is slated to become a cat. 2.
Coincidence?
Perhaps.
If you care to look, you will find plenty of them. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 10:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 12:35 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 9, 10:34 pm, Harold Brooks <hebrook... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: In article <abadbb16-3d4a-4d3a-982c-2e9ffe16d985
at (no spam) k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com says...
This is from the NEIC: 5.5 Magnitude earthquake at 23:21 on 8th May
2008.
18 hours since the last one, therefore a storm brewing maybe. It is
certainly heading that way.
From NEIC, based on the ~1500 M5+ earthquakes per year, there are about
480 M5.5+ earthquakes per year, or about 1 every 18 hours. (There have
been 43 5.5 or larger quakes in the last 30 days.)
What did you make of the facts I pointed out to you earlier? A series
of years with less than 8 quakes of 7 M and over per annum.
I made of it that you didn't know how to do the search on the NEIC
website. The NOAA catalog of significant earthquakes, which is what you
searched, has less than half of the earthquakes that the NEIC database
has. For 1990-2, from your search, NOAA had 9, 6, and 13, respectively.
Searching the NEIC database gives 18, 18, and 24. If you had looked at
"USGS/NEIC (PDE) 1973 - Present", instead of "Significant Worldwide
Earthquakes (2150 B.C. - 1994 A.D.)", you'd have gotten a very different
answer.
This was a NOAA site?
NEIC: Earthquake Search Results
U. S. G E O L O G I C A L S U R V E Y
E A R T H Q U A K E D A T A B A S E
FILE CREATED: Fri May 9 10:00:11 2008
Global Search Earthquakes= 12
Catalog Used: NOAA
Date Range: Year: 1971 - 1971 Month: 01/Day: 01 Month: 12/
Day: 31
Magnitude Range: 7.0 - 10.0
Data Selection: Significant Earthquakes World Wide (NOAA)
CAT YEAR MO DA ORIG TIME LAT LONG DEP MAGNITUDE IEFM
DTSVNWG DIST
NFPO km
TFS
NOAA 1971 01 10 0717 -3.20 139.70 34 8.10 MsNOAA
9D.. .......
NOAA 1971 02 04 1533 0.50 98.70 40 7.10 MsNOAA
9D.. .......
NOAA 1971 05 22 1643 38.80 40.50 3 7.00
MsNOAA .C.. .......
NOAA 1971 06 17 21 -25.40 -69.40 76 7.00 MsNOAA
5C.. .......
NOAA 1971 07 09 0303 -32.50 -71.30 58 7.50 MsNOAA
9C.. .T.....
NOAA 1971 07 14 0611 -5.50 153.90 47 7.90 MsNOAA
7C.. .T.....
NOAA 1971 07 26 0123 -4.90 153.20 43 7.90 MsNOAA
6D.. .T.....
NOAA 1971 07 27 0203 -2.70 -77.40 135 7.50 MsNOAA
7C.. .......
NOAA 1971 09 05 1835 46.80 141.20 9 7.70 MsNOAA
9D.. .T.....
NOAA 1971 10 27 1758 -15.60 167.20 49 7.10 MsNOAA
7C.. .......
NOAA 1971 11 24 1935 52.90 159.20 106 7.50
MsNOAA .... .......
NOAA 1971 12 15 0829 55.90 163.40 30 7.80 MsNOAA
XF.. .......
Why would the NEIC be using a NOAA database if it were in error?
I was wondering, too, why the National oceans and Atmosphere people
were storing seismic tables. It turns out they are chargeds with the
responsibility of storing most of the USA's geophysics data:
"Welcome to the World Data Center for Solid Earth Geophysics, Boulder.
The WDC for SEG is maintained by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) in
Boulder, Colorado.
The WDC SEG maintains extensive data and documentation compilations in
a number of geophysical and environmental disciplines, including
historic tsunamis, significant earthquakes, Earth magnetism,
paleomagnetism, topography, gravity, and ecosystems.
Data come from surface, aircraft and satellite platforms. See our list
of datasets held by the WDC for SEG."
Quote: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/wdc/
It's not my problem whatever you think. Here is the search from a
different catalogue:
Global CMT Catalog
Search criteria:
Start date: 1976/1/1 End date: 1977/1/1
-90 <=lat<= 90 -180 <=lon<= 180
0 <=depth<= 1000 -9999 <=time shift<= 9999
0 <=mb<= 10 0<=Ms<= 10 7<=Mw<= 10
0 <=tension plunge<= 90 0 <=null plunge<= 90
Results
010176A KERMADEC ISLANDS REGION
Date: 1976/ 1/ 1 Centroid Time: 1:29:53.4 GMT
Lat= -29.25 Lon=-176.96
Depth= 47.8 Half duration= 9.4
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 13.8
Moment Tensor: Expo=26 7.680 0.090 -7.770 1.390 4.520 -3.260
Mw = 7.3 mb = 6.2 Ms = 0.0 Scalar Moment = 9.56e+26
Fault plane: strike=202 dip=30 slip=93
Fault plane: strike=18 dip=60 slip=88
011476A KERMADEC ISLANDS
Date: 1976/ 1/14 Centroid Time: 15:56: 7.5 GMT
Lat= -29.69 Lon=-177.04
Depth= 46.7 Half duration=20.0
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 32.6
Moment Tensor: Expo=27 4.780 -0.490 -4.300 0.830 3.620 -1.320
Mw = 7.8 mb = 6.3 Ms = 0.0 Scalar Moment = 6.02e+27
Fault plane: strike=200 dip=26 slip=95
Fault plane: strike=15 dip=64 slip=88
011476B KERMADEC ISLANDS REGION
Date: 1976/ 1/14 Centroid Time: 16:47:44.8 GMT
Lat= -28.72 Lon=-176.75
Depth= 17.7 Half duration=20.5
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 11.3
Moment Tensor: Expo=27 2.560 0.180 -2.740 3.580 6.770 -1.230
Mw = 7.9 mb = 6.5 Ms = 8.0 Scalar Moment = 8.18e+27
Fault plane: strike=189 dip=11 slip=71
Fault plane: strike=28 dip=80 slip=93
012176A KURIL ISLANDS
Date: 1976/ 1/21 Centroid Time: 10: 5:33.6 GMT
Lat= 44.58 Lon= 149.49
Depth= 26.5 Half duration= 9.3
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 9.5
Moment Tensor: Expo=26 3.210 -1.490 -1.720 2.870 5.330 -1.840
Mw = 7.2 mb = 6.3 Ms = 7.0 Scalar Moment = 6.91e+26
Fault plane: strike=237 dip=16 slip=116
Fault plane: strike=30 dip=76 slip=83
020476A GUATEMALA
Date: 1976/ 2/ 4 Centroid Time: 9: 1: 7.2 GMT
Lat= 15.14 Lon= -89.78
Depth= 16.3 Half duration=13.8
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 23.8
Moment Tensor: Expo=27 -0.350 -0.780 1.120 0.380 -0.470 1.670
Mw = 7.5 mb = 6.2 Ms = 7.5 Scalar Moment = 2.04e+27
Fault plane: strike=254 dip=73 slip=-10
Fault plane: strike=347 dip=80 slip=-162
032476A KERMADEC ISLANDS
Date: 1976/ 3/24 Centroid Time: 4:46:16.4 GMT
Lat= -29.99 Lon=-177.51
Depth= 54.1 Half duration= 8.1
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 12.0
Moment Tensor: Expo=26 3.670 0.120 -3.780 0.070 1.780 -1.410
Mw = 7.0 mb = 6.4 Ms = 6.8 Scalar Moment = 4.34e+26
Fault plane: strike=206 dip=34 slip=103
Fault plane: strike=11 dip=57 slip=81
050576A KERMADEC ISLANDS
Date: 1976/ 5/ 5 Centroid Time: 4:52: 2.6 GMT
Lat= -29.84 Lon=-177.43
Depth= 41.8 Half duration= 7.9
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 11.6
Moment Tensor: Expo=26 3.630 0.040 -3.660 0.150 1.800 -1.750
Mw = 7.0 mb = 6.2 Ms = 6.8 Scalar Moment = 4.39e+26
Fault plane: strike=211 dip=34 slip=105
Fault plane: strike=13 dip=57 slip=80
060376A NEW IRELAND REGION
Date: 1976/ 6/ 3 Centroid Time: 16:44:53.1 GMT
Lat= -4.75 Lon= 153.47
Depth= 85.9 Half duration= 8.7
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 14.3
Moment Tensor: Expo=26 5.110 -1.330 -3.780 -1.270 2.650 2.710
Mw = 7.1 mb = 6.2 Ms = 0.0 Scalar Moment = 6.08e+26
Fault plane: strike=143 dip=31 slip=83
Fault plane: strike=331 dip=59 slip=94
062076A NORTHERN SUMATERA
Date: 1976/ 6/20 Centroid Time: 20:53:23.5 GMT
Lat= 3.18 Lon= 96.24
Depth= 19.1 Half duration= 7.5
Centroid time minus hypocenter time: 10.1
Moment Tensor: Expo=26 2.430 -0.020 -2.410 1.120 -1.680 1.840
Mw = 7.0 mb = 6.3 Ms = 7.0 Scalar Moment = 3.55e+26
Fault plane: strike=338 dip=28 slip=99
Fault plane: strike=147 dip=62 slip=85
Quote: http://www.globalcmt.org/cgi-bin/globalcmt-cgi-bin/CMT3/form?itype=ymd&yr=1976&mo=1&day=1&otype=ymd&oyr=1977&omo=1&oday=1&jyr=1976&jday=1&ojyr=1976&ojday=1&nday=1&lmw=7&umw=10&lms=0&ums=10&lmb=0&umb=10&llat=-90&ulat=90&llon=-180&ulon=180&lhd=0&uhd=1000<s=-9999&uts=9999&lpe1=0&upe1=90&lpe2=0&upe2=90&list=0
Perhaps you would care to put me right and give me a link to a search
of a catalogue more to your tastes? Maybe include the parameters?
I can't seem to find the details in your previous posts. A bit dense I
know, so what am I going to do? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 12:40 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
* catalog=ANSS
* start_time=1990/01/01,00:00:00
* end_time=1991/01/01,00:00:00
* minimum_latitude=-90
* maximum_latitude=90
* minimum_longitude=-180
* maximum_longitude=180
* minimum_magnitude=7.0
* maximum_magnitude=10
* event_type=E
Date Time Lat Lon Depth Mag Nst Gap Clo RMS
SRC
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990/03/03 12:16:27.96 -22.12 175.16 33.20 7.40 322 1.32
NEI
1990/03/05 16:38:12.57 -18.32 168.06 20.70 7.00 335 1.24
NEI
1990/05/30 10:40:06.14 45.84 26.67 89.30 7.10 648 1.03
NEI
http://www.ncedc.org/cgi-bin/catalog-search2.pl |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Harold Brooks... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 12:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <cff8a1a5-f7fd-4656-8bee-f80f10f37ca8
at (no spam) x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Weatherlawyer at (no spam) hotmail.com says...
From NEIC, based on the ~1500 M5+ earthquakes per year, there are about
480 M5.5+ earthquakes per year, or about 1 every 18 hours. (There have
been 43 5.5 or larger quakes in the last 30 days.)
Harold
--
Harold Brooks
hebrooks87 at (no spam) hotmail.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 1:23 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 9, 9:26 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On May 9, 8:52 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 8:41 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
It's 21 hours now since the last one:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php
And Rammasun is at hurricane force. It is slated to become a cat. 2.
Coincidence?
Perhaps.
If you care to look, you will find plenty of them.
When a couple of coincidents point to me being right, does it make you
think?
A 6.7 and smack on time too. You know what?
I am bloody good I am.
2008/05/09. 21:51. Guam region. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Harold Brooks... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 4:34 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <abadbb16-3d4a-4d3a-982c-2e9ffe16d985
at (no spam) k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, Weatherlawyer at (no spam) hotmail.com says...
Quote: On May 9, 6:47 pm, Harold Brooks <hebrook... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
In article <cff8a1a5-f7fd-4656-8bee-f80f10f37ca8
at (no spam) x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com says...
This is from the NEIC: 5.5 Magnitude earthquake at 23:21 on 8th May
2008.
!8 hours since the last one, therefore a storm brewing maybe. It is
certainly heading that way.
From NEIC, based on the ~1500 M5+ earthquakes per year, there are about
480 M5.5+ earthquakes per year, or about 1 every 18 hours. (There have
been 43 5.5 or larger quakes in the last 30 days.)
What did you make of the facts I pointed out to you earlier? A series
of years with less than 8 quakes of 7 M and over per annum.
I made of it that you didn't know how to do the search on the NEIC
website. The NOAA catalog of significant earthquakes, which is what you
searched, has less than half of the earthquakes that the NEIC database
has. For 1990-2, from your search, NOAA had 9, 6, and 13, respectively.
Searching the NEIC database gives 18, 18, and 24. If you had looked at
"USGS/NEIC (PDE) 1973 - Present", instead of "Significant Worldwide
Earthquakes (2150 B.C. - 1994 A.D.)", you'd have gotten a very different
answer.
Harold
--
Harold Brooks
hebrooks87 at (no spam) hotmail.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dawlish... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:52 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 9, 8:52 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Pure coincidence. the only way to verify your theories is to use them
to predict and then analyse your predictions.
You don't come back to the predictions you make; you leave them. Thus
you have no statistics to back up your theories. That's why no-one
takes what you say seriously. You may have "perplexed" one or two, but
that's really the best you've done. Produce the goods by using what
you believe in to predict. Show that your doubters and everyone in the
scientific community except yourself and a couple of other left-
fielders are wrong, by using your theory to accurately predict.
If you can't, there is no benefit whatsoever in what you
write.........except to yourself and as entertainment value to us in
the associated abuse..
There's a "major" volcanic eruption about to happen in the next 2 days
according to your theory. If you get that right (and, of course, you
have not defined "major") you will have increased your percentage
forecast accuracy from 0% to 33% since 24th April. If there is no
"major" eruption, you remain on 0%.
In the case of weather forecasting, or any other forecasting, accurate
success statistics are the only judge.
By identifying a link in hindsight, which you do often, by quoting
something and then saying "coincidence?", without any verification by
forecast accuracy means - well, I'll let you figure that one out for
yourself. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 10, 12:23 am, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.hurricanezone.net/tcgraphics/wp0308.gif
120 knots. A Cat 4 again.
This gives us an opportunity to play with a little algebra vis a vis
weather patterns. A Lunar Phase near 12 or 6 o'clock should produce a
low overcast relatively cool spell. We have enjoyed an unusually fine
spell instead.
If you accord the times of the phases arbitrary values of 1 through 6
a la Weatherlawyer's Precepts, you derive a value of 5 o'clock for
this spell.
It has been displaced by 5 hours. Or if you advance the clock, 1 hour.
I am presuming the cause to be inertia, therefore I am going to go
with the larger number where I imagine the spell being retarded not
advanced. Ergo:
Spell X = 5
Time X = 6 = 00
Force X = Cat 4
Now we need a base line for the weather in that neck of the woods in
May. This is about the only time that statistics prove useful in
climatology:
DAMN!
Nothing is ever easy is it:
"The Philippines has two very different climate zones.
In the coastal and lowland areas there's a typically tropical marine
climate: hot and humid throughout most of the year. However, most of
the year constant sea breezes temper the climate somewhat except
during the dry summer months from March to the end of May.
The two main seasons are wet and dry; the dry season from mid-November
to mid-May<<<<
.... from November to the end of February enjoying cool, ocean breezes
with March to May with being the hottest, up to 38C" Did you write
this Dawlish?
"..and the wet season from June to October being hot and humid.
Every year during the rainy season nearly 20 typhoons, known as
"bagyos" blow across the islands usually lasting 3 or 4 days. Steamy,
sunny days during the wet season are common after the tropical
downpours of heavy rain during the nights and early mornings."
http://www.world66.com/asia/southeastasia/philippines/climate
Let us presume calm humid overcast is the norm for phases there as
here, where the time of the phase is 12 or 6 o'clock.
So a marked deterioration in the weather of from calm to 125 knots in
the West Pacific is worth a marked change from cool overcast to
anticyclonic in Britain.
And it can be given a value. A Cat 4 = an M 8 to M 9.
And an anticyclone where it should be a col is thus worth C4 or M 8.5.
Therefore a change in the spell from the predictable to the actual of
5 hours is the equivalent of 5 billion tons of TNT per region
affected.
Quote: http://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/magnitude.html
Hence the need to specify harmonics as per the question that started
this whole fracas off in the first place:
Quote: http://groups.google.com/group/uk.sci.weather/browse_frm/thread/e447ef84fbbc1ec9/0c48035decef3092?lnk=gst&q=harmonics+and+astrometry#0c48035decef3092
Which Low, as it happens, is still pending at 60 N 30 W:
>http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/bracka.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 11:19 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 10 May, 00:23, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On May 9, 9:26 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 8:52 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On May 9, 8:41 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
It's 21 hours now since the last one:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php
And Rammasun is at hurricane force. It is slated to become a cat. 2.
Coincidence?
Perhaps.
If you care to look, you will find plenty of them.
When a couple of coincidents point to me being right, does it make you
think?
A 6.7 and smack on time too. You know what?
I am bloody good I am.
No you are not, you just think you are.
There still has not been one over 7 for 3 weeks.
(Last month, the earthquake "quack" said 'This spell runs from April
28th to May 5th. I expect an earthquake in the region of 7.3 to occur
early in it.')
However, like all bogus fortune tellers/horoscope writers there is
always a proviso such as, it may not happen because of........ (insert
pages of internet quotes, links and total bullshit designed to divert
attention from the fact that no prediction has been issued at all).
May I suggest that if you want to command any kind of respect, you
cease the Mystic Meg style of forecasting and actually predict the
precise date that a mag. 7+ earthquake will occur, preferably more
than 24 hours in advance. If you could narrow this down to a
continent, then even better.
And, you are quite welcome to fire the most vicious insults known to
man, in my direction. I dont care.
And remember - mag 6.7 does not count as 'in the region of 7.3' and
May 9th does not count as 'Apr 28th to May 5th'
Accurate forecasting becomes much harder when you are subject to very
close scrutiny and independent verification - doesn't it? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Dawlish... |
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 12:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 10, 8:56 am, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On May 10, 12:23 am, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php
And Rammasun is at hurricane force. It is slated to become a cat. 2.
Coincidence?
A 6.7 and smack on time too. 2008/05/09. 21:51. Guam region.
http://www.hurricanezone.net/tcgraphics/wp0308.gif
120 knots. A Cat 4 again.
This gives us an opportunity to play with a little algebra vis a vis
weather patterns. A Lunar Phase near 12 or 6 o'clock should produce a
low overcast relatively cool spell. We have enjoyed an unusually fine
spell instead.
If you accord the times of the phases arbitrary values of 1 through 6
a la Weatherlawyer's Precepts, you derive a value of 5 o'clock for
this spell.
It has been displaced by 5 hours. Or if you advance the clock, 1 hour.
I am presuming the cause to be inertia, therefore I am going to go
with the larger number where I imagine the spell being retarded not
advanced. Ergo:
Spell X = 5
Time X = 6 = 00
Force X = Cat 4
Now we need a base line for the weather in that neck of the woods in
May. This is about the only time that statistics prove useful in
climatology:
DAMN!
Nothing is ever easy is it:
"The Philippines has two very different climate zones.
In the coastal and lowland areas there's a typically tropical marine
climate: hot and humid throughout most of the year. However, most of
the year constant sea breezes temper the climate somewhat except
during the dry summer months from March to the end of May.
The two main seasons are wet and dry; the dry season from mid-November
to mid-May
... from November to the end of February enjoying cool, ocean breezes
with March to May with being the hottest, up to 38C" Did you write
this Dawlish?
"..and the wet season from June to October being hot and humid.
Every year during the rainy season nearly 20 typhoons, known as
"bagyos" blow across the islands usually lasting 3 or 4 days. Steamy,
sunny days during the wet season are common after the tropical
downpours of heavy rain during the nights and early mornings."http://www.world66.com/asia/southeastasia/philippines/climate
Let us presume calm humid overcast is the norm for phases there as
here, where the time of the phase is 12 or 6 o'clock.
So a marked deterioration in the weather of from calm to 125 knots in
the West Pacific is worth a marked change from cool overcast to
anticyclonic in Britain.
And it can be given a value. A Cat 4 = an M 8 to M 9.
And an anticyclone where it should be a col is thus worth C4 or M 8.5.
Therefore a change in the spell from the predictable to the actual of
5 hours is the equivalent of 5 billion tons of TNT per region
affected.
http://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/magnitude.html
Hence the need to specify harmonics as per the question that started
this whole fracas off in the first place:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.sci.weather/browse_frm/thread/e447e...
Which Low, as it happens, is still pending at 60 N 30 W:
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/bracka.html- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
A prediction of a 7.5 Earthquake is now justified by you, by the
ocurrence of a 6.7 earthquake, which is over 8x weaker?? That's
"bloody good". Nah. That's guessing the probabilities completely
wrong. You went for far too big an eathquake. As has been pointed out
to you, on average, there are between 15 and 20 Earthquakes of >7.0
per year. >7.5 would probably be around 5. You can't cope with odds of
over 70/1 against.
An earthquake of >6 occurs around 150 times a year, 1 every 2 to 3
days on average. Just think how "bloody good" you could have been if
you'd just guessed your number a little differently?
Waiting for the "major eruption" over the next 2 days to increase your
success stats to 33% (and also for you to define what you mean by a
"major" eruption, though I know it benefits you a great deal to have
such obfuscation in your success criteria, even though the obfuscation
is painfully obvious.
No reasonable success percentage in predictions; no use. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Weatherlawyer... |
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 1:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 10, 8:56 am, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Furthermore the two North Atlantic cells are of the same order of
magnitude. The High focussed at Oslo/Gothenburg and the Low at 55 N 35
W are both about 1 hour wide.
OK, they cover some 20 or 40 degrees but the actual diameter is
Gothenburg to Edinburgh, isn't that far off 15 degrees on a great
circle.
I like that coincidence. 15 degrees suits me. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 3 of 6 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Aug 30, 2008 12:15 am
|
|