We asked you questions about your theory. We asked you to explain certain aspects. You avoided those questions and quite often suggested we read your book, which we obviously would have to buy. That leads us to think you're just here to make money by selling your book, and not here to promote a possible new theory.

For myself, I may not have gone to school for any of this, or have worked in the field. It is a hobby I have learned by self study. But the most important tool in my bag is the tool of skepticism. I do not necessarily need to understand a concept in detail to recognize a fallacious logic used to explain it. That is given away by the words used.

For a specific example, I asked you how the ground knows when to 'ratchet' from these 'thermoelastic waves' and not from other ground movements such as earth tides. Your answer was because you measured them. That is a fallacious logic known as a tautology, or circular reasoning. Basically you told me it is so because you said so. That is the kind of answer given by a pseudoscientist and gives me much doubt as to the validity of your argument.

When you posted complaining about our response to your ideas, that is also a sign of pseudoscientific thinking. Many use the argument that because one is ridiculed or laughed at, they must be right.

Yes, we are trying to pick your theory apart. But that is how science works. An idea stands when it does not fail. But all it takes is one failure and the idea must be reworked or discarded. For example, Einstein's Theory of Relativity. This idea has been test in thousands of different ways, and it has never failed even once. By 'tested', I mean people have tried to pick it apart and show how it's wrong.

Another example is the Standard Model of particle physics. When first proposed decades ago, it has been tested in thousands of ways. It has passed all but one, which is the current test for the Higg's Boson. And it looks like we're going to ultimately confirm that as well. But again, all it takes is one failure and the entire theory fails.

I strongly suggest reading the following page on my website. It is a section from a book I read years ago which gives many examples of erroneous ways of thinking. I learned much from it and I think others can, too. That's why I sought out permission from the author to quote such a large portion of his book.

http://www.skywise711.com/Skeptic/WPBWT/index.html

Brian