On May 7, 8:46 am, Dawkish wrote:

Back on topic.

Quite right, let us put the past behind us and you can go and boil
your head while I think about editing my posts to make you look even
more bumptious than you are.

low gramur snipped.

Blast!
I was going to reply regardless but I have forgotten what you drooled
and can't be asked to look.

The 7.5 Earthquake that you proposed could happen in the next 2-3
days..... hasn't. Your prediction from 24th April was wrong. To even
achieve a continuing 50% accuracy will now require you to get the next
two predictions correct. I await them with interest.

But in Weather Law a Cat 4 hurricane can be regarded as a stand-in for
an earthquake of from 7.5 M to 7.8 or 9ish.
(Bearing in mind that not only is perturbation considered but the time
at high oscillation is taken into account. If the same was true for
hurricanes, the time interval would put it well into the teens.)

Other outcomes also to be considered are volcanic eruptions with a
large output of matter. Large cells of F 3 and 4 tornadoes covering
many counties even a number of states. Above cloud lightning and
lesser storms in higher latitudes.

Search and see (if you can find someone to show you how) the one thing
all the above have in common is that they occur at a region where the
surface pressure is near 1010 millibars. Usually between two or more
fairly flaccid weather systems.

Generally an hurricane force in the temperate climes is the equivalent
of a Cat 3 or 4 cyclone.

I will not be dictated to by you in the use of English.

Now look at this, you recalcitrant scion of a ne'er do well:

5.3 M. 2008/05/06. 23:28 -7.9 123.2 Banda Sea
5.3 M. 2008/05/06. 12:42 -20.4 168.8 Loyalty Islands
5.1 M. 2008/05/06. 10:06 -20.3 168.8 Loyalty Islands
5.3 M. 2008/05/05. 21:58 28.4 54.1 Southern Iran

If you take the matched pair out of this equation you get a lapse of
over 24 hours for the next pair:

06. 23:28 -7.9 123.2 Banda Sea
05. 21:58 28.4 54.1 Southern Iran

And a storm in the west (Asian) Pacific:
http://www.hurricanezone.net/tcgraphics/wp0308.gif

No hurricane yet (it is classed as a gale on the Beaufort Scale) it
will grow more powerful or the earthquake I said would arrive some
days ago is at last going to avail itself for our edification.

One more axiom for Clueless:

When the classical methods of weather-forecasting show error or
uncertainty and there is something of the same ilk with my efforts
too, then the likelihood (the North Atlantic having a positive NAO
(according to my way of classifying said anomaly (not that I think it
is anomalous, in the true meaning of the word))) is that an earthquake
of Mag 7 or larger is due.

This one is SOOOO due....

You have much to learn and I have much to teach, so go and wipe your
bottom, clean it and report back so I can give your arse another
kicking. Sodue.

On May 7, 3:01*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On May 7, 8:46 am, Dawkish wrote:



Back on topic.

Quite right, let us put the past behind us and you can go and boil
your head while I think about editing my posts to make you look even
more bumptious than you are.

low gramur snipped.

Blast!
I was going to reply regardless but I have forgotten what you drooled
and can't be asked to look.

The 7.5 Earthquake that you proposed could happen in the next 2-3
days..... hasn't. Your prediction from 24th April was wrong. To even
achieve a continuing 50% accuracy will now require you to get the next
two predictions correct. I await them with interest.

But in Weather Law a Cat 4 hurricane can be regarded as a stand-in for
an earthquake of from 7.5 M to 7.8 or 9ish.
(Bearing in mind that not only is perturbation considered but the time
at high oscillation is taken into account. If the same was true for
hurricanes, the time interval would put it well into the teens.)

Other outcomes also to be considered are volcanic eruptions with a
large output of matter. Large cells of F 3 and 4 tornadoes covering
many counties even a number of states. Above cloud lightning and
lesser storms in higher latitudes.

Search and see (if you can find someone to show you how) the one thing
all the above have in common is that they occur at a region where the
surface pressure is near 1010 millibars. Usually between two or more
fairly flaccid weather systems.

Generally an hurricane force in the temperate climes is the equivalent
of a Cat 3 or 4 cyclone.

I will not be dictated to by you in the use of English.

Now look at this, you recalcitrant scion of a ne'er do well:

5.3 M. *2008/05/06. 23:28 * * * -7.9 * *123.2 * Banda Sea
5.3 M. *2008/05/06. 12:42 * * * -20.4 * 168.8 * Loyalty Islands
5.1 M. *2008/05/06. 10:06 * * * -20.3 * 168.8 * Loyalty Islands
5.3 M. *2008/05/05. 21:58 * * * 28.4 * *54.1 * *Southern Iran

If you take the matched pair out of this equation you get a lapse of
over 24 hours for the next pair:

06. 23:28 * * * -7.9 * *123.2 * Banda Sea
05. 21:58 * * * 28.4 * *54.1 * *Southern Iran

And a storm in the west (Asian) Pacific:http://www.hurricanezone.net/tcgraphics/wp0308.gif

No hurricane yet (it is classed as a gale on the Beaufort Scale) it
will grow more powerful or the earthquake I said would arrive some
days ago is at last going to avail itself for our edification.

One more axiom for Clueless:

When the classical methods of weather-forecasting show error or
uncertainty and there is something of the same ilk with my efforts
too, then the likelihood (the North Atlantic having a positive NAO
(according to my way of classifying said anomaly (not that I think it
is anomalous, in the true meaning of the word))) is that an earthquake
of Mag 7 or larger is due.

This one is SOOOO due....

You have much to learn and I have much to teach, so go and wipe your
bottom, clean it and report back so I can give your arse another
kicking. Sodue.

Show me the evidence of forecast success.......or go away. Mind you,
your abuse is funny! *))

Without that evidence. You are a charlatan; no more.

An earthquake of Mag 7, or larger, as has already been explained to
you, by two of us, will occur, on average, every few weeks. You just
completely failed to predict the last one. You'll predict this one,
but so will I.

There will be a Mag 7 earthquake, or larger, somewhere in the world in
the next month. 4/6 your odds. Any takers?

On May 7, 3:10 pm, Dawlish wrote:
On May 7, 3:01 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:



On May 7, 8:46 am, Dawkish wrote:

Back on topic.

Quite right, let us put the past behind us and you can go and boil
your head while I think about editing my posts to make you look even
more bumptious than you are.

low gramur snipped.

Blast!
I was going to reply regardless but I have forgotten what you drooled
and can't be asked to look.

The 7.5 Earthquake that you proposed could happen in the next 2-3
days..... hasn't. Your prediction from 24th April was wrong. To even
achieve a continuing 50% accuracy will now require you to get the next
two predictions correct. I await them with interest.

But in Weather Law a Cat 4 hurricane can be regarded as a stand-in for
an earthquake of from 7.5 M to 7.8 or 9ish.
(Bearing in mind that not only is perturbation considered but the time
at high oscillation is taken into account. If the same was true for
hurricanes, the time interval would put it well into the teens.)

Other outcomes also to be considered are volcanic eruptions with a
large output of matter. Large cells of F 3 and 4 tornadoes covering
many counties even a number of states. Above cloud lightning and
lesser storms in higher latitudes.

Search and see (if you can find someone to show you how) the one thing
all the above have in common is that they occur at a region where the
surface pressure is near 1010 millibars. Usually between two or more
fairly flaccid weather systems.

Generally an hurricane force in the temperate climes is the equivalent
of a Cat 3 or 4 cyclone.

I will not be dictated to by you in the use of English.

Now look at this, you recalcitrant scion of a ne'er do well:

5.3 M. 2008/05/06. 23:28 -7.9 123.2 Banda Sea
5.3 M. 2008/05/06. 12:42 -20.4 168.8 Loyalty Islands
5.1 M. 2008/05/06. 10:06 -20.3 168.8 Loyalty Islands
5.3 M. 2008/05/05. 21:58 28.4 54.1 Southern Iran

If you take the matched pair out of this equation you get a lapse of
over 24 hours for the next pair:

06. 23:28 -7.9 123.2 Banda Sea
05. 21:58 28.4 54.1 Southern Iran

And a storm in the west (Asian) Pacific:http://www.hurricanezone.net/tcgraphics/wp0308.gif

No hurricane yet (it is classed as a gale on the Beaufort Scale) it
will grow more powerful or the earthquake I said would arrive some
days ago is at last going to avail itself for our edification.

One more axiom for Clueless:

When the classical methods of weather-forecasting show error or
uncertainty and there is something of the same ilk with my efforts
too, then the likelihood (the North Atlantic having a positive NAO
(according to my way of classifying said anomaly (not that I think it
is anomalous, in the true meaning of the word))) is that an earthquake
of Mag 7 or larger is due.

This one is SOOOO due....

You have much to learn and I have much to teach, so go and wipe your
bottom, clean it and report back so I can give your arse another
kicking. Sodue.

Show me the evidence of forecast success.......or go away. Mind you,
your abuse is funny! *))

Without that evidence. You are a charlatan; no more.

An earthquake of Mag 7, or larger, as has already been explained to
you, by two of us, will occur, on average, every few weeks. You just
completely failed to predict the last one. You'll predict this one,
but so will I.

There will be a Mag 7 earthquake, or larger, somewhere in the world in
the next month. 4/6 your odds. Any takers?

This spell will continue until that large earthquake occurs, unless
there is more than one due -in which case (against the odds) they will
occur within a few days of each other.

Care to give me odds on that? Or if you want to chance ytour pocket
money for the month put a fiver on it, sonny.

On May 7, 6:45 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

This spell will continue until that large earthquake occurs, unless
there is more than one due -in which case (against the odds) they will
occur within a few days of each other.

Care to give me odds on that? Or if you want to chance ytour pocket
money for the month put a fiver on it, sonny.

Actually the likelihood of it being an earthquake began to diminish
yesterday. At the moment there isn't a good enough gradient between
the various highs and lows to indicate a large magnitude earthquake.

The lows are all pretty near the 1000 mb mark and the lowest that odd
one that has occupied the uk.sci.weather group so much, the
singularity in the North Atlantic is the lowest I can see in the
northern hemisphere
http://www.westwind.ch/?link=ukmb,ht...racknell+13 2

What appears most likely is another vicious burst of activity in that
Chilean volcano. Maybe some tornadic stuff in New Zealand and the USA.
Extensive cells in the USA if so. There are flash flood warnings on
he
http://www.weather.gov/largemap.php (Kansas and Missouri.)

There is another massive High in the Arctic, 1050 mb. I forget what
happened last time. Hawaii erupting I think. It was only a few days
ago but I forget, gophigure!

OK:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.g...4a30c804f96ca3

There followed a super typhoon that killed thousands and then the
Chilean eruption.

Ooer!

On May 7, 6:45*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On May 7, 3:10 pm, Dawlish wrote:





On May 7, 3:01 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

On May 7, 8:46 am, Dawkish wrote:

Back on topic.

Quite right, let us put the past behind us and you can go and boil
your head while I think about editing my posts to make you look even
more bumptious than you are.

low gramur snipped.

Blast!
I was going to reply regardless but I have forgotten what you drooled
and can't be asked to look.

The 7.5 Earthquake that you proposed could happen in the next 2-3
days..... hasn't. Your prediction from 24th April was wrong. To even
achieve a continuing 50% accuracy will now require you to get the next
two predictions correct. I await them with interest.

But in Weather Law a Cat 4 hurricane can be regarded as a stand-in for
an earthquake of from 7.5 M to 7.8 or 9ish.
(Bearing in mind that not only is perturbation considered but the time
at high oscillation is taken into account. If the same was true for
hurricanes, the time interval would put it well into the teens.)

Other outcomes also to be considered are volcanic eruptions with a
large output of matter. Large cells of F 3 and 4 tornadoes covering
many counties even a number of states. Above cloud lightning and
lesser storms in higher latitudes.

Search and see (if you can find someone to show you how) the one thing
all the above have in common is that they occur at a region where the
surface pressure is near 1010 millibars. Usually between two or more
fairly flaccid weather systems.

Generally an hurricane force in the temperate climes is the equivalent
of a Cat 3 or 4 cyclone.

I will not be dictated to by you in the use of English.

Now look at this, you recalcitrant scion of a ne'er do well:

5.3 M. *2008/05/06. 23:28 * * * -7.9 * *123.2 * Banda Sea
5.3 M. *2008/05/06. 12:42 * * * -20.4 * 168.8 * Loyalty Islands
5.1 M. *2008/05/06. 10:06 * * * -20.3 * 168.8 * Loyalty Islands
5.3 M. *2008/05/05. 21:58 * * * 28.4 * *54.1 * *Southern Iran

If you take the matched pair out of this equation you get a lapse of
over 24 hours for the next pair:

06. 23:28 * * * -7.9 * *123.2 * Banda Sea
05. 21:58 * * * 28.4 * *54.1 * *Southern Iran

And a storm in the west (Asian) Pacific:http://www.hurricanezone.net/tcgraphics/wp0308.gif

No hurricane yet (it is classed as a gale on the Beaufort Scale) it
will grow more powerful or the earthquake I said would arrive some
days ago is at last going to avail itself for our edification.

One more axiom for Clueless:

When the classical methods of weather-forecasting show error or
uncertainty and there is something of the same ilk with my efforts
too, then the likelihood (the North Atlantic having a positive NAO
(according to my way of classifying said anomaly (not that I think it
is anomalous, in the true meaning of the word))) is that an earthquake
of Mag 7 or larger is due.

This one is SOOOO due....

You have much to learn and I have much to teach, so go and wipe your
bottom, clean it and report back so I can give your arse another
kicking. Sodue.

Show me the evidence of forecast success.......or go away. Mind you,
your abuse is funny! *))

Without that evidence. You are a charlatan; no more.

An earthquake of Mag 7, or larger, as has already been explained to
you, by two of us, will occur, on average, every few weeks. You just
completely failed to predict the last one. You'll predict this one,
but so will I.

There will be a Mag 7 earthquake, or larger, somewhere in the world in
the next month. 4/6 your odds. Any takers?

This spell will continue until that large earthquake occurs, unless
there is more than one due -in which case (against the odds) they will
occur within a few days of each other.

Care to give me odds on that? Or if you want to chance ytour pocket
money for the month put a fiver on it, sonny.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No: the probability is that a large magnitude (7.0, 7.5, you seem very
confused as to what constitutes "large") earthquake will occur over
the next month (odds on) and the enormous likelihood is that the
earthquake will have nothing whatsoever to do with the position of any
of your meteorological features.

Did you look at those gfs pressure maps of Asia, that I referred you
to, including the "commie conspiracy" countries that apparently
prevent them being released and stopped you finding any for so long?
Most of us have been looking at them for years. Hope they help you.

PS As Harold says, nothing has "gone up in the last few
years"........you just weren't aware of the stats. We can't help that,
but some of us really are here to help when you need it.

PPS Any chance of those success statistics? Not much to ask.

7th May 2008.

5.0 M. 18:20. 36.1 N. 141.8 E. 35.0. Near the east coast of Honshu,
Japan
5.2 M. 17:31. 36.2 N. 141.6 E. 35.0 Near the east coast of Honshu,
Japan
6.8 M. 16:45. 36.1 N. 141.5 E. 35.0 Near the east coast of Honshu,
Japan
5.0 M. 16:24. 36.1 N. 141.8 E. 37.3 Near the east coast of Honshu,
Japan
5.9 M. 16:16. 36.3 N. 141.7 E. 35.0 Near the east coast of Honshu,
Japan
5.4 M. 16:12. 36.3 N 141.7 E. 35.0 Near the east coast of Honshu,
Japan
6.2 M. 16:02. 36.2 N. 141.5 E. 35.0 Near the east coast of Honshu,
Japan

This phenomenon follows a severe storm. The two events will be some
multiple of 15 degrees apart. Usually 120 but sometimes 90 and
sometimes 60 degrees.

Of course since a storm has just run through Japan, the distance to
the Burmese peninsula from Honshu being 45 degrees makes no
difference: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Maps/
10/140_35.php

The UK is enjoying a very nice spell of anticyclonic at the moment.
There are no severe storms elsewhere in the northern hemisphere to
account for it and apart from some very minor cramps yesterday I don't
have any twinges.

Interesting.

The Smithsonian updater for the volcanoes archive seems to be busted.
I got the latest release by fiddling with the last three digits on
this link:
http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/us...rweek=20080505

Apparently it doesn't matter what day you put on as long as it falls
in the week you want.

That N Atlantic low is now over 1000 mb and sending a ridge out
towards Greenland. Could it actually do what I said it was going to do
all those yonks ago?

If so, watch out Xinjiang.

On 7 May, 21:01, Dawlish wrote:
On May 7, 6:45 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:



On May 7, 3:10 pm, Dawlish wrote:

On May 7, 3:01 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

On May 7, 8:46 am, Dawkish wrote:

Back on topic.

Quite right, let us put the past behind us and you can go and boil
your head while I think about editing my posts to make you look even
more bumptious than you are.

low gramur snipped.

Blast!
I was going to reply regardless but I have forgotten what you drooled
and can't be asked to look.

The 7.5 Earthquake that you proposed could happen in the next 2-3
days..... hasn't. Your prediction from 24th April was wrong. To even
achieve a continuing 50% accuracy will now require you to get the next
two predictions correct. I await them with interest.

But in Weather Law a Cat 4 hurricane can be regarded as a stand-in for
an earthquake of from 7.5 M to 7.8 or 9ish.
(Bearing in mind that not only is perturbation considered but the time
at high oscillation is taken into account. If the same was true for
hurricanes, the time interval would put it well into the teens.)

Other outcomes also to be considered are volcanic eruptions with a
large output of matter. Large cells of F 3 and 4 tornadoes covering
many counties even a number of states. Above cloud lightning and
lesser storms in higher latitudes.

Search and see (if you can find someone to show you how) the one thing
all the above have in common is that they occur at a region where the
surface pressure is near 1010 millibars. Usually between two or more
fairly flaccid weather systems.

Generally an hurricane force in the temperate climes is the equivalent
of a Cat 3 or 4 cyclone.

I will not be dictated to by you in the use of English.

Now look at this, you recalcitrant scion of a ne'er do well:

5.3 M. 2008/05/06. 23:28 -7.9 123.2 Banda Sea
5.3 M. 2008/05/06. 12:42 -20.4 168.8 Loyalty Islands
5.1 M. 2008/05/06. 10:06 -20.3 168.8 Loyalty Islands
5.3 M. 2008/05/05. 21:58 28.4 54.1 Southern Iran

If you take the matched pair out of this equation you get a lapse of
over 24 hours for the next pair:

06. 23:28 -7.9 123.2 Banda Sea
05. 21:58 28.4 54.1 Southern Iran

And a storm in the west (Asian) Pacific:http://www.hurricanezone.net/tcgraphics/wp0308.gif

No hurricane yet (it is classed as a gale on the Beaufort Scale) it
will grow more powerful or the earthquake I said would arrive some
days ago is at last going to avail itself for our edification.

One more axiom for Clueless:

When the classical methods of weather-forecasting show error or
uncertainty and there is something of the same ilk with my efforts
too, then the likelihood (the North Atlantic having a positive NAO
(according to my way of classifying said anomaly (not that I think it
is anomalous, in the true meaning of the word))) is that an earthquake
of Mag 7 or larger is due.

This one is SOOOO due....

You have much to learn and I have much to teach, so go and wipe your
bottom, clean it and report back so I can give your arse another
kicking. Sodue.

Show me the evidence of forecast success.......or go away. Mind you,
your abuse is funny! *))

Without that evidence. You are a charlatan; no more.

An earthquake of Mag 7, or larger, as has already been explained to
you, by two of us, will occur, on average, every few weeks. You just
completely failed to predict the last one. You'll predict this one,
but so will I.

There will be a Mag 7 earthquake, or larger, somewhere in the world in
the next month. 4/6 your odds. Any takers?

This spell will continue until that large earthquake occurs, unless
there is more than one due -in which case (against the odds) they will
occur within a few days of each other.

Care to give me odds on that? Or if you want to chance ytour pocket
money for the month put a fiver on it, sonny.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No: the probability is that a large magnitude (7.0, 7.5, you seem very
confused as to what constitutes "large") earthquake will occur over
the next month (odds on) and the enormous likelihood is that the
earthquake will have nothing whatsoever to do with the position of any
of your meteorological features.

Did you look at those gfs pressure maps of Asia, that I referred you
to, including the "commie conspiracy" countries that apparently
prevent them being released and stopped you finding any for so long?
Most of us have been looking at them for years. Hope they help you.

PS As Harold says, nothing has "gone up in the last few
years"........you just weren't aware of the stats. We can't help that,
but some of us really are here to help when you need it.

PPS Any chance of those success statistics? Not much to ask.

Its not just the pressure maps in Asia he needs to look at.

I suggest he takes a look at the pressure maps for the entire planet,
especially between the tropics and then he will see just how much of
it has surface pressure close to 1010mb for many months.

Is it really suprising that volcanoes, earthquakes and other
disturbances are more common in those areas, when an average pressure
of 1010mb is probably the most common around the globe?

Of course, we must not forget the power of the moon's gravitational
pull which (although it may not have as much effect on land as it does
over the water) is one day going to coincide with a geological
weakness and......

.....well I dare not allow myself to imagine what may come next.

On May 8, 12:22 pm, wrote:

....well I dare not allow myself to imagine what may come next.

Your lack of imagination aught to have a bearing on your intestinal
fortitude. However your greatest disability is the sheer volume of
ignorance you have so patiently stored between your ears.

Consider:

Of course, we must not forget the power of the moon's gravitational
pull which (although it may not have as much effect on land as it does
over the water)

Define gravity.

OK, that's an hard one for you. Let's try something easier:
Which orbits which? Does the moon go around the earth or the earth
around the moon?

In which case the attraction of the [blank] is [blanker] than that of
[blank].

Replace blank with ...

No, too difficult for you...
Let me see...

You obviously do not subscribe to Aristotle's theory of gravitational
attraction.
Where did you come up with your version of the alternative? No.. hang
on. I have got it..

Have you ever heard of a bloke called Galileo?

Ah forget it. Believe what you like.

In article 9a9e6df3-0dbb-4adf-afbe-
,
says...
On May 8, 12:22 pm, wrote:

....well I dare not allow myself to imagine what may come next.

Your lack of imagination aught to have a bearing on your intestinal
fortitude.

I see. When someone says they "dare not imagine", you comprehend this as
meaning they admit to having no imagination? And then you insult them as
a result of your own comprehension issues.


However your greatest disability is the sheer volume of
ignorance you have so patiently stored between your ears.

Consider:

Of course, we must not forget the power of the moon's gravitational
pull which (although it may not have as much effect on land as it does
over the water)

Define gravity.

OK, that's an hard one for you. Let's try something easier:
Which orbits which? Does the moon go around the earth or the earth
around the moon?


The moon goes round the Earth.

In which case the attraction of the [blank] is [blanker] than that of
[blank].

Replace blank with ...

No, too difficult for you...
Let me see...

You obviously do not subscribe to Aristotle's theory of gravitational
attraction.
Where did you come up with your version of the alternative? No.. hang
on. I have got it..

Have you ever heard of a bloke called Galileo?

Ah forget it. Believe what you like.



What a large amount of condescending and unwarranted claptrap, just
because crazyh0rse made a small, and not necessary factual, error (or
was it because he made "suggestions" for you to peruse). It is quite
clear to me that your most favoured pursuit is the ego inflating rampage
that you embark upon every time anyone should make any sort of
percieved) error which allows you to expose your self inferred
intellectual superiority.

Your post did nothing for anyone else (it didn't even identify
crazyh0rses mistake let alone correct it), had no substance whatsoever,
and served only your own personal gratification. I'm sure you at least
felt really clever while you wrote it.



--
Alan LeHun