[Roger Hunter]

(01-30-2017, 12:44 AM)Roger Hunter Wrote:

(01-29-2017, 09:13 PM)Duffy Wrote:

(01-29-2017, 08:08 PM)Duffy Wrote:

(01-29-2017, 07:56 PM)Duffy Wrote: Hi Roger;

I will repeat again what I am doing, but this will be the third time this week.  I am having trouble contemplating why you seem to be having problems understanding my description. So for the fourth time, this is what I do ...

a)  I get a signal

b) I look at my clock to see what time the signal arrived

c) I check on my planetary program to see where the sun and moon are, at the time it says on my clock

d) I wait until this has happened several times, and note the time and sun and moon position on each occasion

e) I sign on here, and type the days, times and sun / moon positions in a table format and press send

f) I place crosses on my map to represent positions of the sun and moon, at the times the clock showed

g) I wait for a 5+ quake to happen, and check if sunrise/sunset lands on one of my crosses at the time the quake happened

h) This is my third test with "different" positions on my map, previous tests have shown higher than average links between
    my crosses and 5+ quakes at sunrise/sunset, So I poss the question " are these signals related to earthquakes" because the results defy the odd's

Now, as I have explained, this is nothing to do with prediction otherwise I would have posted in "Prediction" instead of "Miscellaneous".  It is here purely for verification, and nothing more. I have detailed this as basic as I am able and as per your request ... so apologies if this is not clear enough, as I don' know any other way to put it !

As I have also mentioned, this data seems to be periodic and connected to the moon's cycle, so I'm not sure how this can be tested, unless the test is repeated under the same conditions. But I can guess what your going to do when you get your program running. If you select one of the bearings and compare 10 years worth of 5+ quakes against it, you are going to get hundreds ... you will be wasting your time on a predictably false conclusion.   But, as I hope is the case, you might start listening to me ... its now 18 hours after new moon (19:50 ut) and there are still no contacts with my bearings !

Duffy

Apologies ... it is now over 42 hours since new moon occurred, I checked that on the same clock in case it's accuracy was questioned  .

Duffy

Just spotted an error in my 27th Jan post regarding new data ... it should read 27th Jan 19:39 ut CS 111' 32' W - 18' 15' S ... CM 114' 25' W - 16' 27' S. This data was excluded anyway, but it doesn't bestow confidence in ones peer's ... I checked the rest, and they are all where they are supposed to be ... Can't have you feeling dumb on your own !

Duffy

Duffy;

Ok, I think I've got it now.

Interestingly, it's similar to the work of another individual I've worked with, a man called E.D. G. or E. Q. F..
His idea was to find the sun/moon locations and compute a gravity point, combining the two locations into a 3rd one representing the strongest gravitational effect.

In fact, his program will work for your idea (with some modification).

His idea didn't work. 

More later.

Roger

Duffy;

Well that didn't take long. The file runs and gives answers but they don't always agree with yours, sometimes by large amounts.

I used the 10 signals you posted for Jan 2017,  asking it to print the subsolar and sublunar locations, which it did but as stated above, they are not the same as yours.

The question is then which do we believe?

Where do you get your answers?

Roger