On Oct 1, 5:15*am, kolldata wrote:
On Sep 30, 8:41*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

On Sep 29, 3:12*am, kolldata wrote:

WL, *bring me into the picture here. Is this Beta map a
replacement for the global globular map ?

I wish I could but I only understand my own brand of garble.

Care to try again. I seem to remember you were almost articulate
recently. Or maybe it was the meeting of two broken minds?

I'm using the global map to globally understand the global earthquake
picture, that is comma GLOBALLY.

This is a Global site.
For Global people!

There is nothing for YOU here.

NOT AWARE THE FLAT MAP EXISTED and now here's an updated FLAT MAP with
a horde of flat mappers drewling over its new flat features and for
the life of me, I can't figure what I'm missing out on *here.

what does a flat map do for you the global map doesn.t supply ?

I believe that all maps by definition are flat. I may be wrong.
A globe is by definition globular. I am certain about that.

It is very difficult to represent one on the other and asking for the
USGS to allow the use of bands to indicate distances 80 and 60 degrees
from epicentres is not a small thing.

The map at the present on the top of the NEIC lists is not the map I
am talking about and -as is so often the case with you, I have no idea
what you are talking about and asking usually gets a more screwed up
reply.

You could open this link I presume?
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/mapping/

http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt...islOO8GH4-IL5A

I unlike you, once I have ascertained the enquirer is genuine, will
endeavour to oblige with a more basic explanation that that to which I
have become adept.

If you care to run your peepers over the map given, you shoud see a
Java script controller -or a controller of the code they are using. It
behaves like Java so...

Anyway, they are asking for per to change things to suit us which is a
first, AFAIK.