Mar 21 18:40
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclips...se2001gmt.html

A most unstable spell. Nothing knew there.

Sum previous stuff:

1997
27 June **12:42
4 July **18:40
11 August **12:43
16 September **18:50
9 October **12:22

1998
1 July **18:43

1999
16 February **06:39
17 March **18:48
30 May **06:40
16 December **00:50

2000
8 July **12 :53
22 August **18 :51

2001
16 Jan **12:35
13 Jul **18:45
8 Nov **12:21
15 Nov **06:40

2002
20 Apr **12:48
27 Dec **00:31

2003
23 May **00:31
29 Jun **18:39
29 Jul **06:53

20 Aug **00:48
3 Sept **12:34
18 Oct **12:31
25 Oct **12:50

2004
5 Dec **00:53

2005
2 Apr **00:50
3 Sept **18:45
25 Sept **06:41

2006
7 Sept **18:42

2007
3 Jan 13:57
11 Jan **12:45
24 Apr **06:36
14 Jul **12:4
22 Jul **06:29
30 Jul **00:48
11 Sept **12:44
1 Dec **12:44

2008
21 Mar **18:40

On Mar 21, 12:50 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Mar 21 18:40
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclips...se2001gmt.html

A most unstable spell. Nothing knew there.

Sum previous stuff:

1997
11 August **12:43
16 September **18:50
9 October **12:22

1998

1999
16 February **06:39
17 March **18:48

2000
22 August **18 :51

2001

2002
20 Apr **12:48

2003

20 Aug **00:48
3 Sept **12:34
18 Oct **12:31
25 Oct **12:50

2004

2005
2 Apr **00:50
3 Sept **18:45
25 Sept **06:41

2006
7 Sept **18:42

2007
24 Apr **06:36
11 Sept **12:44

2008
21 Mar **18:40

Having removed the dates whose solar declinations are not as close as
they might be, I can look up what earthquakes were taking place during
or shortly after the spells left.

Ditto for tropical storms. Which still leaves a data collection agency
for other storms short of a suitable argument for exactitude. But
fortunately we have as a control: Great Britain. And there are
suitable records of weather types over there. Here is one example:
http://www.climate-uk.com/monthly/0801.htm
http://www.climate-uk.com/monthly/0802.htm

To get the desired year and month you just change the numbers at the
end of the URL.

Here is a list of what is available along with what should be
available shortly.
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.sc...a32f2e99df224#

I wonder if the MetO still has its data. Something went wrong with
their data about 1994/96~ish so I can't recommend it.

All in all it is rather hop-scotch. But hardly chaos theory.

On Mar 21, 11:32 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

All in all it is rather hop-scotch. But hardly chaos theory.

If you really want to put your head in the big saucepan, have a look
at these:

2008/03/21

5.0 M. 12:56 32.9 N 141.6 E. Depth 10.0 Izu Islands, Japan
5.0 M. 06:16 35.6 N 81.6 E. Depth 10.0 Xinjiang-Xizang
5.0 M. 04:03 35.4 N 81.5 E. Depth 11.1 Xinjiang-Xizang
5.2 M. 00:26 35.3 N 81.3 E. Depth 10.0 Xinjiang-Xizang
5.2 M. 00:09 -15.1 S 174.7 W. Depth 35.0 Tonga

2008/03/20

5.5 M. 23:12 35.5 N 81.4 E. Depth 17.7 Xinjiang-Xizang
5.3 M. 22:51 35.3 N 81.5 E. Depth 10.0 Xinjiang-Xizang
7.2 M. 22:33 35.5 N 81.4 E. Depth 22.9 Xinjiang-Xizang
6.0 M. 14:11 6.2 N 126.9 E. Depth 33.6 Mindanao, Philippines
5.4 M. 12:16 1.6 N 127.3 E. Depth 108.8 Halmahera, Indonesia
5.2 M. 11:56 6.9 S 155.3 E. Depth 27.4 Bougainville PNG
6.2 M. 08:23 28.9 S 177.495 W. Depth 49.5 Kermadec Islands

I don't consider the depth or the time of any great importance but
perhaps they are.

Thnkfully we don't have to consider too many examples. In fact if you
don't want to lose it all you aught to drop most of these and just
pick one or two and draw yur own margins.

After yu notice something interesting follow it up on the others and
from there widen out the idea to other concepts.

And don't give up when some of them fall down. There will be their own
particular modifications to the model you see a shape in.

OK here is the problem:

All of the above are related to a weather front crossing their own
particular fault zone.

It isn't so much a fault zone. I doubt there is any such thing as a
geologist/seismologist would describe it to himself in his or her self
deception.

It is more likely a mascon discontinuity. Which differs from the
Mohorovicic discontinuity in that a Moho is an example of wave
harmonics. A mascon discontinuity for want of a better phrase, is an
event horizon of some sort. (Nothing to do with that daft ideo of
black holes or any such silliness.)

Suspend your beliefs and for that matter your disbeliefs and find the
matching storm fronts.

All in all a cold spell so far. Wide spread snow showers all over
Britain but nothing terribly severe. A lot of sun in it too.

I guess it was due to the High pressure system in the Atlantic and the
Low in the North Sea. Both bringing down polar air and mixing it up
pretty thoroughly.

On Mar 25, 1:49 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
All in all a cold spell so far. Wide spread snow showers all over
Britain but nothing terribly severe. A lot of sun in it too.

I guess it was due to the High pressure system in the Atlantic and the
Low in the North Sea. Both bringing down polar air and mixing it up
pretty thoroughly.

Britain is battening down its hatches again. Meanwhile there looks to
be something interesting developing with the lack of large mags since
early Monday:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...us2008qaad.php

On Mar 26, 10:42 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...us2008qaad.php

A deep Baltic Low he
http://meteonet.nl/aktueel/brackall.htm

And an High stepping off the USA at Florida:
http://weather.unisys.com/images/sat_sfc_map_loop.html

It should be a biggie or maybe a cyclone with a series of Mag 6s
dotted over the planet.

On Mar 26, 10:52 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...us2008qaad.php

A deep Baltic Low he
http://meteonet.nl/aktueel/brackall.htm

And an High stepping off the USA at Florida:
http://weather.unisys.com/images/sat_sfc_map_loop.html

It should be a biggie or maybe a cyclone with a series of Mag 6s
dotted over the planet.

Probably the latter as Pancho is at 70 knots now and due 80 tomorrow:
http://205.85.40.22/jtwc/warnings/sh2608.gif

(That's an increase from 50 to 80 mph overnight. (Sustained wind
speeds near the core.))

My belli had been ringing for a casu majori at Xinjiang again but:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...us2008qbat.php