On Jul 18, 10:56 am, Dawlish wrote:

Where's the evidence that you actually
predicted the time, dates and strength BEFORE it actually happened,
Online.

I presume you can use a search engine.

I would be more than willing to help if you can't. (If I was. But I
ain't.)

On Jul 18, 11:10*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jul 18, 10:56 am, Dawlish wrote:

Where's the evidence that you actually
predicted the time, dates and strength BEFORE it actually happened,

Online.

I presume you can use a search engine.

I would be more than willing to help if you can't. (If I was. But I
ain't.)

1/5 correct, in the prediction of earthquakes, that you've been good
enough to share with us. 20%. Every single large earthquake of 6.5mag
missed, since then, including Sichuan. No major eruption correctly
predicted, including Chaiten, the biggest of the year. It's hard to
argue with those outcomes. I very much doubt that your methods have
any use whatsoever, but I'm open to persuasion, if you could
demonstrate continued outcome success tht is significantly better than
chance.

On Jul 17, 2:36 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
18th to 25th July: 07:59. This spell is an 8 o'clock

And the last spell was based on the phase of the moon being somewhere
near 4 o'clock.

I get the idea that these spells are similar except that with the
first, the weathr is warm and a Low presents itself at the North Pole.
Tropical storms occur on the Norrth American coasts of the Pacific and
Atlantic.

With the coming spell I imagine the predominant spell ovr the North
Pole will be an High. Tropical storms will occur in the Asian oceans.
And we will have uch the same weather only it will be a lot colder.

5.0 2008/07/18 12:47 37.8N. 87.0E. S Xinjiang, China
5.7 2008/07/17 22:52 44.4N. 129.4W. Off the coast of Oregon, USA.
5.5 2008/07/17 22:36 44.4N. 129.3W. Off the coast of Oregon, USA.
5.0 2008/07/17 16:40 31.7N. 104.2E. E Sichuan, China
5.1 2008/07/16 22:58 33.2N. 92.0E. S Qinghai, China.

So, with that pair of Oregon quakes, the writing is on the wall for
one of these:
http://satellite.ehabich.info/hurricane-watch.htm

Bertha looks favourite. She had a good run though. And kept me
waiting. The bugger.

Nothing too outre going on he
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/wwa/

On Jul 18, 5:33*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jul 17, 2:36 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

18th to 25th July: 07:59. This spell is an 8 o'clock

And the last spell was based on the phase of the moon being somewhere
near 4 o'clock.

I get the idea that these spells are similar except that with the
first, the weathr is warm and a Low presents itself at the North Pole.
Tropical storms occur on the Norrth American coasts of the Pacific and
Atlantic.

With the coming spell I imagine the predominant spell ovr the North
Pole will be an High. Tropical storms will occur in the Asian oceans.
And we will have uch the same weather only it will be a lot colder.

5.0 *2008/07/18 12:47 *37.8N. 87.0E. * *S Xinjiang, China
5.7 *2008/07/17 22:52 *44.4N. 129.4W. Off the coast of Oregon, USA.
5.5 *2008/07/17 22:36 *44.4N. 129.3W. Off the coast of Oregon, USA.
5.0 *2008/07/17 16:40 *31.7N. 104.2E. *E Sichuan, China
5.1 *2008/07/16 22:58 *33.2N. *92.0E. * S Qinghai, China.

So, with that pair of Oregon quakes, the writing is on the wall for
one of these:http://satellite.ehabich.info/hurricane-watch.htm

Bertha looks favourite. She had a good run though. And kept me
waiting. The bugger.

Nothing too outre going on hehttp://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/wwa/

I don't see any mention of the 7.0 Honshu earthquake. How could you
miss that if your theories work?

Basically, W; this just doesn't work, does it? Much of it is based on
hindsight and it is written, deliberately, I feel in gobbledygook.
Your theory is not able to predict anything important for people. I
think it is a hobby for yourself, with no practical application
whatsoever. Sorry to disappoint you, but that's the conclusion I've
reached from monitoring what you do. It's just bad science.

Change my mind by accurately predicting something which can't be
predicted by other means. I'm pretty sure that you can't do that and
if you can't - your hobby is simply useless to anyone else.

On Jul 18, 5:33 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Nothing too outre going on hehttp://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/wwa/

But there is he
7.0 M. 2008/07/19 02:39. 37.6N. 142.1E. Off the east coast of Honshu,
Japan.

We have another example of the criticality of fluids once more. Two
consecutive 5.5s (or thereabouts) in much the same place, followed by
the stepping down in the power of a cyclone and then something on the
other side of that Fluid Mac Number: 666, a 7.

Either that or the dafties are right about plate tectonics. Bloody
morons. They will cling to any alternative to the truth until it is
too painful to just watch them. Anything other than see the
startlingly obvious.

On Jul 19, 9:18*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jul 18, 5:33 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:



Nothing too outre going on hehttp://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/wwa/

But there is he
7.0 M. 2008/07/19 02:39. 37.6N. 142.1E. Off the east coast of Honshu,
Japan.

We have another example of the criticality of fluids once more. Two
consecutive 5.5s (or thereabouts) in much the same place, followed by
the stepping down in the power of a cyclone and then something on the
other side of that Fluid Mac Number: 666, a 7.

Either that or the dafties are right about plate tectonics. Bloody
morons. They will cling to any alternative to the truth until it is
too painful to just watch them. Anything other than see the
startlingly obvious.

Or, intelligent enough to know that this alternative is gobbledygook
and only peddled by a pitifully tiny group of people......which may,
in the form that you present it, number precisely one in total. Of
course, the one who believes it to be true, would consider everybody
else morons and dafties whilst believing himself to be the one
genius. All those scientists, completely wrong and you right. It must
make you feel good every day.

If the reasoning is "startlingly obvious" and everyone else on the
planet is missing it, why did you do only do as well as well as the
morons and dafties, in completely failing to predict Sichuan, Chaiten
and now Hunshu? If all this is "startlingly obvious", why can't you
actually use your theories to predict?

Go on W, predict us an earthquake - or your hobby remains exactly
that; a hobby.

On Jul 19, 9:18 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Nothing too outre going on hehttp://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/wwa/

But there is he
7.0 M. 2008/07/19 02:39. 37.6N. 142.1E. Off the east coast of Honshu,

We have another example of the criticality of fluids once more. Two
consecutive 5.5s (or thereabouts) in much the same place, followed by
the stepping down in the power of a cyclone and then something on the
other side of that Fluid Mac Number: 666, a 7.

And mo

5.6 M. July 19th. 09:35. 11.0 S. 164.5 E. Santa Cruz Islands region.
6.7 M. July 19th. 09:27. 11.0 S. 164.5 E. Santa Cruz Islands region.
5.3 M. July 19th. 02:48. 37.6 N. 142.3 E. Off the East coast of
Honshu, Japan
7.0 M. July 19th. 02:39 37.6 N. 142.1 E. Off the East coast of
Honshu, Japan

Either 2 more cyclones take an hit or there is one copping for both of
the above. Which is rather disconcerting if true.

On Jul 19, 12:01 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jul 19, 9:18 am, Weatherlawyer wrote:



Nothing too outre going on hehttp://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/wwa/

But there is he
7.0 M. 2008/07/19 02:39. 37.6N. 142.1E. Off the east coast of Honshu,

We have another example of the criticality of fluids once more. Two
consecutive 5.5s (or thereabouts) in much the same place, followed by
the stepping down in the power of a cyclone and then something on the
other side of that Fluid Mac Number: 666, a 7.

And mo

5.6 M. July 19th. 09:35. 11.0 S. 164.5 E. Santa Cruz Islands region.
6.7 M. July 19th. 09:27. 11.0 S. 164.5 E. Santa Cruz Islands region.
5.3 M. July 19th. 02:48. 37.6 N. 142.3 E. Off the East coast of
Honshu, Japan
7.0 M. July 19th. 02:39 37.6 N. 142.1 E. Off the East coast of
Honshu, Japan

Either 2 more cyclones take an hit or there is one copping for both of
the above. Which is rather disconcerting if true.

From The Wikipedia:

The Huygens-Fresnel principle is a method of analysis applied to
problems of wave propagation. It recognizes that each point of an
advancing wave front is in fact the centre of a fresh disturbance and
the source of a new train of waves; and that the advancing wave as a
whole may be regarded as the sum of all the secondary waves arising
from points in the medium already traversed.

For example, if two rooms are connected by an open doorway and a sound
is produced in a remote corner of one of them, a person in the other
room will hear the sound as if it originated at the doorway. As far as
the second room is concerned, the vibrating air in the doorway is the
source of the sound.

Huygens principle:
Wave functions of every object propagate over any and all unobstructed
paths from the source to the point. It is the result of the
interference of all its paths; the amplitudes and the phases of the
wave functions of the object at any given point, all wave trains
behave so.

A point source generates waves that travel spherically in all
directions. The sum of the waves from all the point-sources at any
point can be calculated.

There are points where minimal interference and where destructive
interference occurs, for example, when their path lengths differ by
ë / 2 (a 180 degrees phase difference). For three waves to cancel each
other, the phases must differ by 120 degrees, thus path differences
must be ë / 3, and so forth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens%27_principle

From another thread:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...S10/42.52.-130....

That system / continuum..
seems to be locked into the behaviour of what used to be hurricane
Bertha.

Tornadic stuff tends to die down when there are a lot of active
tropical storms.
And of course there is a minimum of activity if such TSs are in the
North Atlantic.
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/080718_rpts.html

There is as yet, no explanation or reason that two aparently unrelated
fluid phenomena are related the way Oregon's seismology and the North
Atlantic's meteorology are.

However once you consider the planet itself as a fluid (or field
perhaps?) you can introduce the concept of phasors. And as the
rotation of the field coincides with the frequency of seismic waves
(as it would would it not?) and the interference of the rest of the
solar system becomes involved, there is fair scope for the allusion.

On Jul 19, 12:01 pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Nothing too outre going on hehttp://www.spc.noaa.gov/products/wwa/

But there is he
7.0 M. 2008/07/19 02:39. 37.6N. 142.1E. Off the east coast of Honshu,

We have another example of the criticality of fluids once more. Two
consecutive 5.5s (or thereabouts) in much the same place, followed by
the stepping down in the power of a cyclone and then something on the
other side of that Fluid Mac Number: 666, a 7.

And mo

5.6 M. July 19th. 09:35. 11.0 S. 164.5 E. Santa Cruz Islands region.
6.7 M. July 19th. 09:27. 11.0 S. 164.5 E. Santa Cruz Islands region.
5.3 M. July 19th. 02:48. 37.6 N. 142.3 E. Off the East coast of
Honshu, Japan
7.0 M. July 19th. 02:39 37.6 N. 142.1 E. Off the East coast of
Honshu, Japan

Either 2 more cyclones take an hit or there is one copping for both of
the above. Which is rather disconcerting if true.

ACTIVE STORMS:

Cristobal (Atlantic)
Fausto (E. Pacific)
Bertha (Atlantic)
Elida (E. Pacific)

http://www.hurricanezone.net/
http://satellite.ehabich.info/hurricane-watch.htm

Meanwhile contemporary seismologists, earthwide, will realise
immediately the cycles of high intensity such as:

5.3
6.4
5.3
5.2
6.3
5.6
6.7
5.3
7
.... as just one of those things.

Like, we have these plates and ...the crockery gets a little excited
now and again in their love making and ...carried away, so to speak.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...quakes_big.php