Logout 
Portal 
Forum
Search
Members
Help 
06-13-2016, 02:25 PM
I thought I would start this evaluation by re-publishing my recent predictions, and include any relevant results relating to coordinates given, magnitude range was chosen as 5 - 6.5, and a longitude margin of error at +/- 2' The object of this prediction was to test my hypothesis of an opposite longitude event, the country's named were chosen for reference only, but there was a high probability some may be correct.
State of Para, Brazil 51' W .................................................... Banda Sea, Indonesia 130' E
M6.0 18:14 ut 20th May 129' 52' E
Northern Territory, Australia
Italy 14' E ............................................................................ Alaska 166' W
Amended to 52' S - 14' E
North-east of Bouvet Island
Greece 23' E ......................................................................... Alaska 157' W
M5.4 18:36 ut 25th May 26' 14' E M5.8 20:51 ut 31st May 158' 32' W
Crete, Greece Chignik Lake, Alaska
Morocco 5' W ......................................................................... New Zealand 175' E
M5.2 07:36 ut 31st May 7' 54' W
Southern Atlantic Ridge
Papua New Guinea 148' E ....................................................... North Atlantic Ridge 32' W
M5.2 13:40 ut 3rd June 148' 24' E
South of Tasmania
Columbia 75' W ...................................................................... South Sumatra 103' E
M5.2 10:00 ut 27th May 74' 59' W M6.5 22:56 ut 1st June 100' 42' E
Central Peru Mentawai, South Sumatra
Iran 49' E ................................................................................ Canada 131' W
Mid-Atlantic Ridge 28' W .......................................................... Papua New Guinea 152' E
M7.2 09:46 ut 28th May 26' 59' W M5.1 15:04 ut 27th May 152' 25' E
South Sandwich Islands Papua New Guinea
I have mentioned on several occasions, that for a given seismic event on one longitude of the earth's surface, a counter action is likely to occur on the opposite longitude. previous predictions that i addressed this probability include; African Continent 21st March and South West Indian Ocean 4th April. The first locations on this listing are also a point in fact, State of Para, Brazil gave just such an indication, all the data fitted the picture perfectly, I included Banda Sea as a possible opposite longitude event. It had a high probability rating according to Roger's scale, but the data didn't match, nobody was more surprised than I when the final outcome was Northern Territories Australia. The past couple of weeks, I have attempted to refine portions of my predictions to determine more precise longitude bearings, according to my interpretation of my own data, specific anomalies change bearings after major seismic events occur, another point in fact that I mentioned in a Q&A post the possibility of an event in Bhutan or Tibet. This was later changed to 84' E Nepal in my present prediction, then on the 2nd June I amended this to 81' E Western Nepal. The related anomaly disappeared in a suppression period on 10th June, approx 3 hours after a mag 5.2 occurred in Southern California, I am not suggesting an opposite longitude action applies here as the bearings don't match, but the anomaly has re-appeared in a suppressed state, which makes it difficult to confirm its last positional bearing ( suppression was covered in previous posts ). I fear that my prediction time will elapse before any event takes place in this region, I don't intend to renew this, but it will be interesting to see if CA has an evil twin !.
You my notice some results in the list do not comply to my stated parameters, I have stated many times in my past posts, I am not at the stage with this project to be able to determine with any degree of accuracy, magnitudes related to the anomalies I record on my systems. Sometimes, a change in morphology may indicate a mag 6 or above, but as yet, is not totally reliable. It is also possible to analyse morphological change to determine event time, for the past few months, I have mostly concentrated on refining longitude data, ETA's have always been a casual attempt, but during this prediction I came within 8 and 20 minutes of two 6+ quakes in the Fiji region, the locations I chose were wrong, but it shows potential is there with further analysis. I believe events just outside my margin of error were a result of a silly mistake, I calculate longitude by drawing vertical lines over a virtual map on a 10" laptop screen, using a felt tip pen, maths is not really my strong point but I discovered later, a felt line on a 10" screen equates to a lateral figure of approx 2.5 degrees
. I am not claiming any success with this prediction, as it does not meet all the necessary requirements, thus, excuses are not necessary either, I just thought it was a genuinely amusing mistake.
For the past 17 months, I have tried to gain favour to my project with members , but I believe my pseudo hypothesis relating to solar / lunar correlations with seismic anomalies, has damaged any interest I am trying to project. This is without doubt a very controversial subject, but considering all the coordinates listed here were calculated using multiple on line sources and combining it with my own data, "all" of which relating to solar and lunar positions ... in my opinion, the list is in-part giving some validation to said hypothesis. I will of course repeat this listing method as many times as is necessary, but for the present, I would be great-full if anybody wished to express their opinion about this prediction, critically or favourably, I welcome both.
Thank you
Duffy
State of Para, Brazil 51' W .................................................... Banda Sea, Indonesia 130' E
M6.0 18:14 ut 20th May 129' 52' E
Northern Territory, Australia
Italy 14' E ............................................................................ Alaska 166' W
Amended to 52' S - 14' E
North-east of Bouvet Island
Greece 23' E ......................................................................... Alaska 157' W
M5.4 18:36 ut 25th May 26' 14' E M5.8 20:51 ut 31st May 158' 32' W
Crete, Greece Chignik Lake, Alaska
Morocco 5' W ......................................................................... New Zealand 175' E
M5.2 07:36 ut 31st May 7' 54' W
Southern Atlantic Ridge
Papua New Guinea 148' E ....................................................... North Atlantic Ridge 32' W
M5.2 13:40 ut 3rd June 148' 24' E
South of Tasmania
Columbia 75' W ...................................................................... South Sumatra 103' E
M5.2 10:00 ut 27th May 74' 59' W M6.5 22:56 ut 1st June 100' 42' E
Central Peru Mentawai, South Sumatra
Iran 49' E ................................................................................ Canada 131' W
Mid-Atlantic Ridge 28' W .......................................................... Papua New Guinea 152' E
M7.2 09:46 ut 28th May 26' 59' W M5.1 15:04 ut 27th May 152' 25' E
South Sandwich Islands Papua New Guinea
I have mentioned on several occasions, that for a given seismic event on one longitude of the earth's surface, a counter action is likely to occur on the opposite longitude. previous predictions that i addressed this probability include; African Continent 21st March and South West Indian Ocean 4th April. The first locations on this listing are also a point in fact, State of Para, Brazil gave just such an indication, all the data fitted the picture perfectly, I included Banda Sea as a possible opposite longitude event. It had a high probability rating according to Roger's scale, but the data didn't match, nobody was more surprised than I when the final outcome was Northern Territories Australia. The past couple of weeks, I have attempted to refine portions of my predictions to determine more precise longitude bearings, according to my interpretation of my own data, specific anomalies change bearings after major seismic events occur, another point in fact that I mentioned in a Q&A post the possibility of an event in Bhutan or Tibet. This was later changed to 84' E Nepal in my present prediction, then on the 2nd June I amended this to 81' E Western Nepal. The related anomaly disappeared in a suppression period on 10th June, approx 3 hours after a mag 5.2 occurred in Southern California, I am not suggesting an opposite longitude action applies here as the bearings don't match, but the anomaly has re-appeared in a suppressed state, which makes it difficult to confirm its last positional bearing ( suppression was covered in previous posts ). I fear that my prediction time will elapse before any event takes place in this region, I don't intend to renew this, but it will be interesting to see if CA has an evil twin !.
You my notice some results in the list do not comply to my stated parameters, I have stated many times in my past posts, I am not at the stage with this project to be able to determine with any degree of accuracy, magnitudes related to the anomalies I record on my systems. Sometimes, a change in morphology may indicate a mag 6 or above, but as yet, is not totally reliable. It is also possible to analyse morphological change to determine event time, for the past few months, I have mostly concentrated on refining longitude data, ETA's have always been a casual attempt, but during this prediction I came within 8 and 20 minutes of two 6+ quakes in the Fiji region, the locations I chose were wrong, but it shows potential is there with further analysis. I believe events just outside my margin of error were a result of a silly mistake, I calculate longitude by drawing vertical lines over a virtual map on a 10" laptop screen, using a felt tip pen, maths is not really my strong point but I discovered later, a felt line on a 10" screen equates to a lateral figure of approx 2.5 degrees
. I am not claiming any success with this prediction, as it does not meet all the necessary requirements, thus, excuses are not necessary either, I just thought it was a genuinely amusing mistake.For the past 17 months, I have tried to gain favour to my project with members , but I believe my pseudo hypothesis relating to solar / lunar correlations with seismic anomalies, has damaged any interest I am trying to project. This is without doubt a very controversial subject, but considering all the coordinates listed here were calculated using multiple on line sources and combining it with my own data, "all" of which relating to solar and lunar positions ... in my opinion, the list is in-part giving some validation to said hypothesis. I will of course repeat this listing method as many times as is necessary, but for the present, I would be great-full if anybody wished to express their opinion about this prediction, critically or favourably, I welcome both.
Thank you
Duffy