Weather Banter

Weather Banter (https://www.weather-banter.co.uk/)

- alt.talk.weather (General Weather Talk) (https://www.weather-banter.co.uk/alt-talk-weather-general-weather-talk/)

- - 12:18 (https://www.weather-banter.co.uk/alt-talk-weather-general-weather-talk/124286-12-18-a.html)

On 14 May, 21:28, Weatherlawyer wrote:
Prezzie for you:

There is an high leaving the United States at the moment over the
Carolinas/Florida:

http://weather.unisys.com/images/sat_sfc_map_loop.html

This will produce a 6.5 I think at the Andrianof Islands chain
somewhere on this arc:

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.

Big problem with trying to fix a location is that no one knows the
harmonics involved. How could they? I am the only one looking into it.

Look at this loop as of 2008-5-15-00:00
https://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/efs/cgi-b...ntic%20Bas in)

As of 00:00, there was a clearly defined High of some 15 to 20 degrees
diameter.
12:00 and it is building, being fed by a stream from Canada.
24:00 and it's breaking away again.
36:00 Wow, look at that.
48:00 Pwned.
60:00 and it's back again.

On May 16, 12:30 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Big problem with trying to fix a location is that no one knows the
harmonics involved. How could they? I am the only one looking into it.

Look at this loop as of 2008-5-15-00:00 https://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/efs/cgi-b...t=0&incr=12&st...)

As of 00:00, there was a clearly defined High of some 15 to 20 degrees
diameter.
12:00 and it is building, being fed by a stream from Canada.
24:00 and it's breaking away again.
36:00 Wow, look at that.
48:00 Pwned.
60:00 and it's back again.

+24hrs and it looks like this:
http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/ensem...me=00&Type=pnm

Talk about hanging on by a thread. It couldn't be more circumspect if
it were reading my posts. But I'll get the bugger yet! You just wait.

On May 16, 7:31*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On May 16, 12:30 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Big problem with trying to fix a location is that no one knows the
harmonics involved. How could they? I am the only one looking into it.

Look at this loop as of 2008-5-15-00:00 https://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/efs/cgi-b...t=0&incr=12&st...)

As of 00:00, there was a clearly defined High of some 15 to 20 degrees
diameter.
12:00 and it is building, being fed by a stream from Canada.
24:00 and it's breaking away again.
36:00 Wow, look at that.
48:00 Pwned.
60:00 and it's back again.

+24hrs and it looks like this:

http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/ensem...our=0&Day=0&Ru....

Talk about hanging on by a thread. It couldn't be more circumspect if
it were reading my posts. But I'll get the bugger yet! You just wait.

No, W; that's the wrong word..........."you'll GUESS the bugger yet".
And you will. And you'll claim you predicted it, despite your previous
prediction success statistics showing, quite clearly, that your
theories are not rooted in reality.

On 16 May, 09:58, wrote:

My only wish is to try and discover whether the paragraphs of
confusing stuff about sixes, twelves and a 90 degree harmonic are
actually that; just an attempt to make the theory look clever and
above our intelligence level.

On the other hand, if he does know what he is talking about, it would
be nice to have it explained in a less confusing way, so that even
dunces such as me can try and make some sense of it.

Had you been a deal more civil on the matter, you might have had more
success sooner.

6 hours is 90 degrees and you might expect any harmonic to reflect
that. I can only speak from experience forced on me in an effort to
find matching phases. (The runs of this year are almost unique in the
way that they have repeated.)

15 degrees either side of 120 degrees will get you to the edge of a
shadow zone from an epicentre.

Before I had access to a computer or understood how to work a
spreadsheet, all I had was handwritten tables and a bad memory. I did
have a crib though in that I lived in a place where you could almost
count on some sort of thundery weather at specific times.

Get yourself a large set of navigators dividers or make a set out of
wire or card and buy a cheap globe from Lidl or somewhere. Then mark
off the distances on a great circle between storms and earthquake
epicentres. You will see that they occur in the shadow zones of one
another.

If that doesn't whet your appetite you are a lost cause. Here for a
taster is a link to run off a few example with:
http://www.gb3pi.org.uk/great.html

As for harmonics; there still remains a reasonable explanation to
better it.

My idea not only explains errata in computer runs, it fits every other
profile that geo-physics demands. Not least among them is that super-
phenomena occur when classical methods fail.

Furthermore it completes the lost theories of celestial mechanics much
more easily than mystical special relativities. It's straightforward
and simple to understand.

Damn it, if I can understand it anyone can. It's boy's own rocket
science for goodness sake!

On 16 May, 15:59, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Get yourself a large set of navigators dividers or make a set out of
wire or card and buy a cheap globe from Lidl or somewhere. Then mark
off the distances on a great circle between storms and earthquake
epicentres. You will see that they occur in the shadow zones of one
another.

If that doesn't whet your appetite you are a lost cause. Here for a
taster is a link to run off a few example with:

I did set out a number of worked examples and I posted them to Usenet
a few years back but the trolls were so frantic to bury me without
taking the slightest time to check their facts, that I couldn't be
bothered with them.

It was interesting but a lot of work. I don't have clue what to use
for a search term to locate them.

On May 16, 3:59*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On 16 May, 09:58, wrote:

My only wish is to try and discover whether the paragraphs of
confusing stuff about sixes, twelves and a 90 degree harmonic are
actually that; just an attempt to make the theory look clever and
above our intelligence level.
On the other hand, if he does know what he is talking about, it would
be nice to have it explained in a less confusing way, so that even
dunces such as me can try and make some sense of it.

Had you been a deal more civil on the matter, you might have had more
success sooner.

6 hours is 90 degrees and you might expect any harmonic to reflect
that. I can only speak from experience forced on me in an effort to
find matching phases. (The runs of this year are almost unique in the
way that they have repeated.)

15 degrees either side of 120 degrees will get you to the edge of a
shadow zone from an epicentre.

Before I had access to a computer or understood how to work a
spreadsheet, all I had was handwritten tables and a bad memory. I did
have a crib though in that I lived in a place where you could almost
count on some sort of thundery weather at specific times.

Get yourself a large set of navigators dividers or make a set out of
wire or card and buy a cheap globe from Lidl or somewhere. Then mark
off the distances on a great circle between storms and earthquake
epicentres. You will see that they occur in the shadow zones of one
another.

If that doesn't whet your appetite you are a lost cause. Here for a
taster is a link to run off a few example with:

http://www.gb3pi.org.uk/great.html

As for harmonics; there still remains a reasonable explanation to
better it.

My idea not only explains errata in computer runs, it fits every other
profile that geo-physics demands. Not least among them is that super-
phenomena occur when classical methods fail.

Furthermore it completes the lost theories of celestial mechanics much
more easily than mystical special relativities. It's straightforward
and simple to understand.

Damn it, if I can understand it anyone can. It's boy's own rocket
science for goodness sake!

Unfortunately, phrases like "you could almost count on some sort of
thundery weather at specific times." undermines the things you are
trying to show, as that is just pure memories from someone who has
admitted, a few lines earlier that you have a bad one. Memory just
cannot be relied on - especially in weather recording! " .........
storms and earthquake epicentres. You will see that they occur in the
shadow zones of one another.", ought to producce some forecast
accuracy and the method ought to be reproduceable - exactly how a
theory becomes mainstream science. You really ought to be able to
produce some decent forecast accuracy figures from such a, seemingly,
"definite" relationship, butfrom the start of my monitoring, you
plainly can't. You can't even, so far, get past the first hurdle of
forecasting a single event right.

Memory and no forecast accuracy. No wonder it doesn't add up. Still
waiting for that earthquake of 6-6.5 magnitude in the Andreanof
Islands (care with the spelling) chain, or the Rat Islands (there are
15+, it's not a singular, that's why I questioned your geography).
Tell you what, I'll give you the whole of the Aleutian chain, as well
as allowing you a week, as you've failed to give an actual time
period, being the generous sort that I am. If this is unfair, please
let me know. 6 days to go. It's almost bound to happen in that area,
just by chance. The last one in this region of 6.0 (mag6.6) was in
the Andreanof islands on the 2nd of May and this area had one of the
biggest ever recorded earthquakes of mag (estimated) 8.6, in 1957.
It's an extremely seismically active area, earthquakes of 6.0 are
fairly common there and it has been two weeks since the last one of
6.0+.

W; it's not a case of not understanding. I've scrolled back and read
your theories. It's just a case of....it just doesn't work. Any
prediction success you've had in the past (who knows?) presently can't
be reproduced and, as such, what's the use?

On May 17, 9:55*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On 14 May, 21:28, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Prezzie for you:

There is an high leaving the United States at the moment over the
Carolinas/Florida:

http://weather.unisys.com/images/sat_sfc_map_loop.html

This will produce a 6.5 I think at the Andrianof Islands chain
somewhere on this arc:

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.

Ah well, back to the drawing board with that one.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you giving up with this one? So soon?

On May 15, 10:24 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

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.

Logically you might suspect that the reaction to these things is a
mirror effect in the largest bits. And ths may be seismic in nature?
Why not.

There is certainly that coincident I pointed out elsewhere about the
lapse rate in the appearance of mag 5 and greater quakes being related
to strong winds.

There seems to be something going on along those lines at the moment
with Halong.

I don't claim to know how or why, yet. Perhaps Dawlish with his huge
brain, can oblige us with something useful at long last?

Or am I mistaking oral cavitation for cranial capacity?

On May 18, 9:58*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On May 15, 10:24 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

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.

Logically you might suspect that the reaction to these things is a
mirror effect in the largest bits. And ths may be seismic in nature?
Why not.

There is certainly that coincident I pointed out elsewhere about the
lapse rate in the appearance of mag 5 and greater quakes being related
to strong winds.

There seems to be something going on along those lines at the moment
with Halong.

I don't claim to know how or why, yet. Perhaps Dawlish with his huge
brain, can oblige us with something useful at long last?

Or am I mistaking oral cavitation for cranial capacity?

If you've given up, that's 0/4 since April 24th. 0%. Not looking good.
Prove to me this works and I'll take an interest, as many others
would.