12:18
 

Weatherlawyer wrote:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/.../10/180_50.php

6 to 6.5 M. probably. And it will occur at something like 90 degrees
from where it hits the steep slope I believe. I don't know if rat
Island is more likely in that case but it's going to be in that area.

When will this happen? Roughly?

Jim
--
"Well, well. We've come a long way from the Prime Minister's
exploding cake." - Adam West, Batman.

http://www.UrsaMinorBeta.co.uk http://twitter.com/GreyAreaUK

12:18
 

On May 15, 7:04 am, (jim) wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/.../10/180_50.php

6 to 6.5 M. probably. And it will occur at something like 90 degrees
from where it hits the steep slope I believe. I don't know if Rat
Island is more likely in that case but it's going to be in that area.

When will this happen? Roughly?

No idea.

Dawlish is the star for that sort of thing. Ask him. Meantime don't
give up. That High is still the
http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/ensem...me=00&Type=pnm

There is a sort of universality of design in the material universe.
Like with an atom you get the little bits floating around the big bit
and the whole is infinitesimal compared to the nothingnesses
connecting them. And that pales into its own oblivion when compared to
the absolute nothingnesses between atoms.

Well imagine the "bits that float around the big bits" are the two
highs straddling the USA at the moment. And the "bigger bits" are the
planet, as in this example North America.

Then that nothingness between them... defines them.

So I imagine that when the High coming over the hills starts to fill
in the blanks, you will have your major event. I repeat; I don't know.

But as with miracles in general, it all works on timing doesn't it?
Let's see, we are 3 days in to an 8 day spell. There is often a lull
in these things in the middle of a spell. But in Britain I think that
this is something more to do with interference patterns as a Low or
whatever hits a distance of some 15 degrees from us.
(Don't ask.) (Well, you can ask Dawlish.)

Perhaps, wherever you are you might notice such a thing. The big
question in that case is: How much interference does an interference
pattern impart?

The Andreanofs look like they are winding up nicely. There again one
could say the same for the Fox Islands a few days back:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...uakes_all.html

12:18
 

On 2008-05-15, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On May 15, 7:04 am, (jim) wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/.../10/180_50.php

6 to 6.5 M. probably. And it will occur at something like 90 degrees
from where it hits the steep slope I believe. I don't know if Rat
Island is more likely in that case but it's going to be in that area.

When will this happen? Roughly?

No idea.

So, essentially, you're predicting an earthquake 'at some point' in a region
that gets several 'quakes a day?

Jim
--
http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk http://twitter.com/GreyAreaUK

"Sometimes when I talk to a Windows person about using a Mac,
I feel like I'm explaining Van Halen to a horse." Merlin Mann

12:18
 

On 15 May, 07:04, (jim) wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/.../10/180_50.php

6 to 6.5 M. probably. And it will occur at something like 90 degrees
from where it hits the steep slope I believe. I don't know if rat
Island is more likely in that case but it's going to be in that area.

When will this happen? Roughly?


Soon.

There are 3 to 4 earthquakes in that area on a daily basis, so it wont
be long.

Our Mr McNeil does not go in for predictions unless (a) they are a
statistical certainty, or (b) the predictions are so vague that they
could be describing an event over half the earth's surface within the
next 3 weeks.

12:18
 

On May 15, 10:41 am, Jim wrote:

So, essentially, you're predicting an earthquake 'at some point' in a region
that gets several 'quakes a day?

Yes.
You are quick of the mark, you are, so you are, to be sure.

12:18
 

On May 15, 11:11 am, wrote:

Our Mr McNeil does not go in for predictions unless (a) they are a
statistical certainty,

Well, in my own defence, I have to admit that they are certainly
certainties. What would you prefer?

or (b) the predictions are so vague that they
could be describing an event over half the earth's surface within the
next 3 weeks.

I am much more vague than that. But had the whole earth been preparing
for the inevitable that you yourself are admitting is preordained,
then thousands of people from Burma to China would be going about
their relatively uneventful lives because of people like me.

Or at the very least the emergency services would have been gearing up
3 weeks in advance instead of 3 days after the event. What would that
be worth to mankind?

And why are you upset about me? You are not paying my wages.

12:18
 

In article
,
Weatherlawyer wrote:

On May 15, 10:41 am, Jim wrote:

So, essentially, you're predicting an earthquake 'at some point' in a region
that gets several 'quakes a day?

Yes.
You are quick of the mark, you are, so you are, to be sure.

Hey, I predict a car is going to drive up my street. Soon.

Any moment now.

Oh, it's in the lull between the morning rush and lunch.

Oh! A car! A car! I predicted it!

--
Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

12:18
 

On May 15, 4:43 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:
In article
,

Weatherlawyer wrote:
On May 15, 10:41 am, Jim wrote:

So, essentially, you're predicting an earthquake 'at some point' in a region
that gets several 'quakes a day?

Yes.
You are quick of the mark, you are, so you are, to be sure.

Hey, I predict a car is going to drive up my street. Soon.

Any moment now.

Oh, it's in the lull between the morning rush and lunch.

Oh! A car! A car! I predicted it!

Now predict the big ones.

12:18
 

On May 15, 6:54*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On May 15, 4:43 pm, Timberwoof
wrote:





In article
,

*Weatherlawyer wrote:
On May 15, 10:41 am, Jim wrote:

So, essentially, you're predicting an earthquake 'at some point' in a region
that gets several 'quakes a day?

Yes.
You are quick of the mark, you are, so you are, to be sure.

Hey, I predict a car is going to drive up my street. Soon.

Any moment now.

Oh, it's in the lull between the morning rush and lunch.

Oh! A car! A car! I predicted it!

Now predict the big ones.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The chorus of questions gets louder. You missed the big ones, W and
the 6.5 earthquake prediction "at some point", when; "I don't know"
can only be described as laughable. I'll give you a week, eh? That's
generous, wouldn't you agree?

Time, surely, to give it up, if what you are doing is this lame and no
use to anyone except to give odd pleasure to you?

12:18
 

On 15 May, 19:18, Dawlish wrote:




The chorus of questions gets louder. You missed the big ones, W and
the 6.5 earthquake prediction "at some point", when; "I don't know"
can only be described as laughable. I'll give you a week, eh? That's
generous, wouldn't you agree?

Time, surely, to give it up, if what you are doing is this lame and no
use to anyone except to give odd pleasure to you?

There does seem to have been rather a lot of earthquakes in the
California region recently. Most of them are relatively minor, but
anyone want to hazard a guess if the San Fransisco 'big one' is
brewing?

I wonder what synoptic situation is needed in advance of this event?

Now, a correct 7-day prediction of the San Andreas faultline making a
large move would be worth the Nobel Prize, I reckon.