[Roger Hunter]

(01-19-2017, 03:27 PM)Duffy Wrote: Roger;

>>Forgive me but you are missing the point.

It wouldn't be the first time. Bear with me.

>>  You are trying to analyse how I get the data, and not what the data means in relation to recent quake activity.  Nor am I predicting, I gave account of a possible scenario using the data in the table ... that's why this is experimental, not predictable.

I'm trying to understand how you do it to understand the consequences of what you're doing.

>> Also, if I am correctly predicting the majority of longitudes in my attempts, you state this is something worth investigating.

Correct.

>> If I happen to get latitude with one of these attempts, it's a chance occurrence ... and I am misleading myself !

No, I suspect getting a quake at the right longitude is a matter of chance.

>> As a serious matter of interest, do you have record of how many chance occurrences there have been on Earthwaves ?

No. I don't investigate everything.

>> There is one line of data in the table dated 7th Jan 10:24 ut, it shows that the centre of the moon was on 134' 20' E by 9' 55' N at this time.  I googled this location, there is nothing there except a small sea mound in the South Philippine sea. I posted this detail at 14:01 ut on the 16th Jan ... do you agree that this information is correct ?

I'll take your word for it.

>> Another line of data is dated 15th Jan 00:26 ut, it shows the centre of the moon was on 28' 53' E by 11' 39' N at this time, and was posted at the same time as the data above ... do you agree that this information is also correct ?

Again, I'll take your word for it.

>> At 10:15:56 ut today (19th) a 5.0 quake occurred on the West Indian Antarctic Ridge at bearing 127' 29' E by 49' 02' S. At this exact time, the centre of the sun was on 28' 43' E longitude.  That's 11 miles West of the longitude posted in the 15th Jan data !.  Also at the exact time this quake occurred, it was officially night at 10:16 ut, on the little sea mound in the South Philippine sea at bearing 134' 20' E by 9' 55' N. 

Ok

>> There are 129,600 square degrees on Earth's surface, and the crosses on my map occupy 16 of them ... look at this data and tell me " you don't find this the slightest bit intriguing".  You are the scientist, I am asking you or others that find this interesting, weather this data is significant ? ... not the source it originated from 
 
Only if you can do it more than chance would allow. That's what I'm trying to determine which is why I need to know exactly how you do it. I need to reproduce your method correctly to accurately test it. I can do it a thousand times in seconds.

>> Just as I had mentioned earlier in this thread; millions of people will be aware that an earthquake occurred in Italy yesterday.  The news is reporting on efforts to find survivors in a buried hotel in Central Italy, after the quakes triggered an avalanche.  Only a few thousand will know an insignificant earthquake took place in the antarctic.   I can find the dots, but I don't know how to join them ... that's for a scientist to do. 

I'm trying.

>> No offence Roger, but I don't want to spend the next few days defending myself against your assumptions. So either I continue this experiment as planned, and see if it leads anywhere, or I terminate it here ... your call !

Relax Duffy, I'm not your enemy. Work with me on this so I can do it correctly. I need to reproduce your method to test it and if my test says you're on to something then Manchester may have grant money. Or not, I don't know.

Roger