|
Re: Show me Canie! |
The dozens of people that recieved timely warnings to large worldwide events wish you and many others would do it too. You make it sound so easy. I challenge you then to post ten likely earthquakes to occur in ten days, and we'll see if your theory of how easy forecasting by foreshocks seems will pan out. I spend dozens of co$tly hours figuring out everything from history to dozens of other factors as well. If I haven't been contributing anything new then why aren't there many people warning many people. You make it sound so easy it's almosta low blow. SO SHOW ME. I doubt you can get 2 in ten of the bat. Should you care to reiterate your claim that accurate prediction by foreshocks is not adding anything, then I must be on the wrong website. And from the sitemaster! Seriously! Follow Ups: ● Re: Canie Showed ME/ us! - martin@n.i.c.e. 15:02:31 - 1/2/2001 (4280) (0) ● Re: Canie's travel advisory - Canie 23:11:22 - 12/31/2000 (4245) (3) ● Re: Canie's travel advisory - Canie 14:43:48 - 1/2/2001 (4278) (1) ● Re: Canie's 3rd. hit! - martin@n.i.c.e. 14:52:41 - 1/2/2001 (4279) (0) ● Re: Canie Gets a MAJOR hit! - martin@n.i.c.e. 00:23:52 - 1/1/2001 (4247) (1) ● Re: Another BIG HIT! - martin 10:53:08 - 1/1/2001 (4259) (1) ● Re: Another BIG HIT! - Cathryn 14:16:37 - 1/1/2001 (4265) (0) ● Re: Canie's travel advisory - Bob Shannon 23:32:11 - 12/31/2000 (4246) (1) ● Re: Canie's travel advisory - Canie 11:22:09 - 1/1/2001 (4260) (1) ● Re: Canie's travel advisory - martin 11:58:08 - 1/1/2001 (4261) (1) ● Re: Canie's travel advisory - Cathryn 14:25:54 - 1/1/2001 (4268) (0) |
|