Logout 
Portal 
Forum
Search
Members
Help 
01-02-2016, 11:09 AM
Dear Duffy,
I like your post! That is a post from the old Duffy we love! Yes, I am blunt/honest. Probably I should have toned it down a little bit. Poor old Earthwaves page has been suffering from way too few scientists and amateur scientists posting the last few years. Now, Brian has not been posting and he would be, and has been in the past, the best person to work with you on your approach.
I think your work is interesting, but I know too little about it, and really cannot evaluate it. My problem lately has been that a couple of weeks ago you did a stream of predictions in a short period, and since no one was doing evaluations for you, and you did not do it yourself, I saw it as not so good. It would be best if, if you make a prediction on this page, you then post an evaluation on what actually happened. I don't have time, and really don't have skill. But, if you claim success for some M5 or 6 when they occur all the time in the area you predict for, I am liable to comment, and Roger is liable to evaluate.
Where I thought you were going way too far in direction of pseudo-science was the fine details of moon rise etc. It came across as something you thought was real. I suggest you stick with your electronics (?) measurements, maybe predictions related to these, and some reasonable hypotheses (or even speculation) as to what is causing the signals you record. When people with a lot of expertise (Roger, Brian, or I) suggest you are way out in left field on speculations you may have (like the moon stuff), that you pay attention to us.
I'm working towards being happy in the New Year. I had real problems in my personal life in 2015. I am already much happier. It will be a good year. "It will be OK".
Chris
I like your post! That is a post from the old Duffy we love! Yes, I am blunt/honest. Probably I should have toned it down a little bit. Poor old Earthwaves page has been suffering from way too few scientists and amateur scientists posting the last few years. Now, Brian has not been posting and he would be, and has been in the past, the best person to work with you on your approach.
I think your work is interesting, but I know too little about it, and really cannot evaluate it. My problem lately has been that a couple of weeks ago you did a stream of predictions in a short period, and since no one was doing evaluations for you, and you did not do it yourself, I saw it as not so good. It would be best if, if you make a prediction on this page, you then post an evaluation on what actually happened. I don't have time, and really don't have skill. But, if you claim success for some M5 or 6 when they occur all the time in the area you predict for, I am liable to comment, and Roger is liable to evaluate.
Where I thought you were going way too far in direction of pseudo-science was the fine details of moon rise etc. It came across as something you thought was real. I suggest you stick with your electronics (?) measurements, maybe predictions related to these, and some reasonable hypotheses (or even speculation) as to what is causing the signals you record. When people with a lot of expertise (Roger, Brian, or I) suggest you are way out in left field on speculations you may have (like the moon stuff), that you pay attention to us.
I'm working towards being happy in the New Year. I had real problems in my personal life in 2015. I am already much happier. It will be a good year. "It will be OK".
Chris