[Roger Hunter]

(03-15-2015, 04:21 AM)Skywise Wrote: Look at it the other way. The real data is equally INsignificant as 6000 random dates.

I would then say that the proposition under test fails.

Brian

What I think this shows is that the average is not a good null hypothesis. These are mag 6+ quakes. They don't happen all that frequently so the sun-moon angle is erratic.

6000 random dates in 100 years is also erratic and gives a similar answer; the distribution does not fit the expected line.

Roger