Re: RE to Lowell on Proton Storms
Posted by dib on October 06, 2001 at 06:04:10:

I don't believe that my message should have been interpreted as personal criticism aimed at you, nor should it have aroused your carefully phrased pique. My intent was to question whether it is good science to predict an earthquake on the basis of a couple of correlations that are not unexpected nor significant.

Follow Ups:
     ● Re: Good science versus ??? - Jen  06:53:58 - 10/6/2001  (9792)  (2)
        ● The Only good science is PC science - Lowell  10:28:39 - 10/6/2001  (9794)  (1)
           ● Re: The Only good science is PC science - dib  16:39:16 - 10/6/2001  (9802)  (2)
              ● Re: The Only good science is PC science - Cathryn  17:55:08 - 10/6/2001  (9806)  (1)
                 ● Re: The Only good science is PC science - dib  19:02:27 - 10/6/2001  (9808)  (2)
                    ● Re: The Only good science is PC science - Cathryn  10:56:34 - 10/7/2001  (9815)  (0)
                    ● Hats off to Cathryn - Jen  19:38:10 - 10/6/2001  (9809)  (1)
                       ● Re: Hats off to Cathryn - Cathryn  11:01:32 - 10/7/2001  (9816)  (0)
              ● Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - 2cents  17:51:54 - 10/6/2001  (9805)  (2)
                 ● Re: Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - dib  23:32:47 - 10/6/2001  (9812)  (2)
                    ● Re: Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - 2cents  06:22:42 - 10/8/2001  (9829)  (2)
                       ● Re: Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - Cathryn  16:38:39 - 10/10/2001  (9899)  (1)
                          ● Re: Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - dib  17:53:42 - 10/10/2001  (9900)  (0)
                       ● Re: Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - dib  22:15:57 - 10/9/2001  (9875)  (0)
                    ● Re: Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - Cathryn  11:21:06 - 10/7/2001  (9818)  (1)
                       ● Re: Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - dib  22:32:26 - 10/9/2001  (9877)  (0)
                 ● Re: Postmortem & Words That Haunt ... - Cathryn  18:04:54 - 10/6/2001  (9807)  (0)
        ● Re: Good science versus ??? - dib  08:58:52 - 10/6/2001  (9793)  (1)
           ● Re: Good science versus ??? - Jen  11:10:32 - 10/6/2001  (9795)  (1)
              ● Re: Good science versus ??? - dib  17:28:38 - 10/6/2001  (9804)  (1)
                 ● Re: Good science versus ??? - Canie  09:03:33 - 10/7/2001  (9813)  (1)
                    ● Re: Good science versus ??? - dib  09:43:58 - 10/7/2001  (9814)  (1)
                       ● Re: Good science versus ??? - Cathryn  11:04:48 - 10/7/2001  (9817)  (1)
                          ● Re: Good science versus ??? - dib  22:19:00 - 10/9/2001  (9876)  (2)
                             ● Re: Good science versus ??? - dib  21:16:08 - 10/10/2001  (9914)  (0)
                             ● Re: Good science versus ??? - Cathryn  16:32:54 - 10/10/2001  (9898)  (1)
                                ● Re: Good science versus ??? - dib  18:50:50 - 10/10/2001  (9905)  (1)
                                   ● Re: Good science versus ??? - Cathryn  19:35:08 - 10/10/2001  (9906)  (1)
                                      ● Re: Good science versus ??? - dib  20:27:20 - 10/10/2001  (9909)  (1)
                                         ● Re: Good science versus ??? - Cathryn  20:52:15 - 10/10/2001  (9910)  (0)