|
Re: a miss is a miss |
Not to argue with a scientist, for whom a near miss is indeed a miss, but the comparison to JOB doesn't translate. Not to sound mean, but JOB has built so much wiggle room into his predictions, they're hardly predictions at all. The "There will be a 7 somewhere in the Ring of Fire" during a 10 day interval, is more likely to happen than not. Same thing with his, "There will be a 3-4 somewhere in the Bay Area," the Bay Area constantly expanding, and the likelihood of that also being quite high. Question: Did he predict the Cambria earthquake? Cathryn Follow Ups: ● we're working a bit on that - John Vidale 18:28:00 - 9/4/2004 (22723) (2) ● The moon/tidal theory - Cathryn 20:30:17 - 9/4/2004 (22726) (0) ● But my question ... - Cathryn 20:24:15 - 9/4/2004 (22725) (2) ● Re: But my question ... - Roger Hunter 21:48:11 - 9/4/2004 (22729) (1) ● Re: But my question ... - Cathryn 16:29:13 - 9/5/2004 (22740) (1) ● P.S. to Roger - Cathryn 17:14:54 - 9/5/2004 (22745) (1) ● Re: P.S. to Roger - Roger Hunter 21:11:45 - 9/5/2004 (22751) (1) ● Re: P.S. to Roger - Cathryn 14:51:52 - 9/6/2004 (22765) (0) ● I've no idea - John Vidale 21:03:49 - 9/4/2004 (22727) (3) ● JOB - Cathryn 16:33:02 - 9/5/2004 (22741) (1) ● Re: JOB - Cathryn 16:35:46 - 9/5/2004 (22742) (0) ● Re: I've no idea - Cathryn 16:23:25 - 9/5/2004 (22738) (0) ● Re: I've no idea - Cathryn 16:22:58 - 9/5/2004 (22736) (1) ● More on the books - Cathryn 16:25:28 - 9/5/2004 (22739) (0) |
|