|
Response |
John, I have mentioned much of this in the past. And it looks like it is time to post a reminder. First, I personally do not like certain remarks which I believe that you have made which appear to me to refer to my competence as a scientist. This earthquake forecasting and triggering research is something which I am taking quite seriously. I feel that there could be many lives at stake. And I feel that it would be both inaccurate and improper for you to suggest that I am carelessly ignoring this or that type of technical information. As far as I am aware, you do not know what I am thinking or what I types of data I am examining or ignoring. So I do not know how you could or why you would tell other people that you do know what I am thinking etc. Second, as I believe I have stated repeatedly, you appear to me to have little understanding of and little serious interest in understanding the technology upon which my forecasting work etc. is based. At one time you asked a question about relationships between Earth velocity, acceleration, and changes in acceleration. But I am not aware of any other significant effort that you have made to learn how this technology works. And much of the work has not yet even been discussed in detail at my Web sites. I simply have not had time to prepare the necessary Web reports. Less formal e-mail type reports have been and are constantly being circulated. I believe that my data are clearly showing that there are definite links between the positions of the sun and the moon and both earthquake occurrence times and the times when certain types of earthquake precursors are being generated. At the moment about the best that I and probably most or all other researchers interested in this subject matter can do is show where those links exist and generate theories to explain them. From extensive discussions that I have been having with people regarding all of this I would have to say that no one including me has so far been able to outline an exact celestial mechanics – geophyisics theory model which explains how all of these things are working. But, progress is definitely being made. Follow Ups: ● thought I was being factual - John Vidale 16:19:29 - 8/18/2003 (19274) (2) ● Why should ocean tides be important? - chris in suburbia 05:06:42 - 8/19/2003 (19283) (1) ● simple -> easily evaluated, not effective - John Vidale 07:00:18 - 8/19/2003 (19284) (1) ● Synthetic data provide good results - EQF 12:24:33 - 8/19/2003 (19287) (1) ● measurements - John Vidale 15:29:01 - 8/19/2003 (19289) (0) ● Re: thought I was being factual - Don in Hollister 22:49:05 - 8/18/2003 (19279) (0) ● Prove It - Don in Hollister 15:02:07 - 8/18/2003 (19272) (0) |
|