[ Roll & Rock ] [ Main Menu ]
21508
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
EARTHQUAKE WARNING Posted by EQF on July 11, 2020 One or more strong electromagnetic signals (EM Signals) were detected on both July 9 and July 10, 2020. Based on past data etc., that is an indicator that there is perhaps a 50% chance that there will be a significant and likely powerful earthquake by July 15, 2020. It might take several days to finish computer analyses of the data. As a consequence, no probable location data are presently available for the expected earthquake. When available they will be displayed on my Data.html Web page. Data.html It is likely that at the location of the expected earthquake there were other earthquake precursors observable during the past few days and perhaps even before that. Any information from other researchers regarding an expected powerful earthquake would be appreciated. The present version of Data.html Web page recommended that people watch for a significant earthquake along the 179 W longitude line. There was one. It is likely the one that was expected. But at the moment, I cannot positively connect the precursor data with that earthquake. Some additional data evaluations would need to be done. 2020/06/18 12:49:53 33.29S 177.84W 10 7.4 "229km SSE of L'Esperance Rock, New Zealand" These are expressions of personal opinion. Regards to all, EQF |
Responses:
[21559] [21560] [21547] [21558] [21539] [21541] [21540] [21525] [21526] [21528] [21533] [21510] [21512] [21518] [21514] [21516] [21515] [21517] [21522] [21524] [21527]
21559
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Earthquake Warning Closed July 24, 2020
|
Posted by EQF on July 24, 2020 This Earthquake Warning is over and closed. The probability is high that the approaching recent powerful Alaska earthquake was responsible for the high intensity EM Signals that were detected on July 9, 2020. They were the basis for this Earthquake Warning. Additional details are scheduled to be posted about this when there is sufficient time. Earthquakes often occur multiples of about 7 days after certain warning signals are detected. July 22 was 13 days after July 9, 2020. The Alaska earthquake could be regarded as a "Freebee." A lot appears to have been learned from it. I now have a new theory for calculating Time Windows after all of these years. But there was no reported damage associated with the earthquake and there were no reported injuries or fatalities. Regards to all, EQF |
Responses:
[21560]
21560
From: Roger Hunter, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning Closed July 24, 2020
|
EQF; Is the alignment new or full moon? Roger |
Responses:
None
21547
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Update July 21, 2020
|
EARTHQUAKE FORECASTING UPDATE Posted by EQF July 21, 2020 Comments would be appreciated regarding possible approaching U.S. West Coast seismic activity. My forecasting Web site has been updated with the latest forecast data. Below is that latest copy of Chart C that has had some vertical lines drawn on it at certain longitudes.
The chart shows that recent strong line peaks around 125 E are reducing in size. Data on another chart shown below indicate to me that those 125 E line peaks might have been related to that recent strong Papua New Guinea earthquake. I still cannot say that for certain. 2020/07/17 02:50:23 7.84S 147.77E 80 7.0 "114 km NNW of Popondetta, Papua New Guinea" NEIS Data There is a new, sharp line peak on the latest Chart C shown above at around 116 W longitude. That might be an indicator of approaching U.S. West Coast seismic activity. I recommend that people keep watch for such a possibility and will be checking other people’s forecasts to see if there are any that match that longitude. Chart C shows that there were persistent line peaks around 179 W. My computer programs regard longitudes that are 90, 180, and 270 degrees to the east and west of one another as being about the same when it does its calculations. So I had the program draw a vertical line at 89 W. The 179 W and 89 W area line peaks might have been pointing to the approach of either the powerful New Zealand area earthquake or the one in Mexico that claimed several lives, or both. 2020/06/23 15:29:04 15.92N 95.95W 20 7.4 "12km E of Santa Maria Xadani, Mexico" 2020/06/18 12:49:53 33.29S 177.84W 10 7.4 "229km SSE of L'Esperance Rock, New Zealand" The line peaks disappeared from those longitudes shortly after the earthquakes occurred. The chart below, also from my Web site shows the days when individual electromagnetic signals (EM Signals) were detected during 2020.
EM 4 would be the lowest EM Signal intensity. EM 9 is the highest. EM 3 signals are usually different as they have an AC, or vibrating character down around 3 to 20 cycles per second. EM 2 signals have an apparent frequency of around 7000 cycles per second. The ones in the 4 to 9 range have no known frequency. All of the signals are presently believed to be associated with temporary fluctuations in the Earth's geomagnetic energy field. There were high intensity EM Signals detected on July 17, 18, and 19, 2020 and a few others further back in time that have line peaks at around 116 W. That is likely significant. It probably indicates that the same fault zone was responsible for all of those signals. And there have been enough of them recently that they are now appearing on Chart C around 116 W. Chart C shows “Averaged EM Signals” rather than individual signals. Some fault zone, possibly along the U.S. West Coast might have become active. OTHER SEISMIC ACTIVITY Another forecaster has informed me that he is watching for seismic activity around the Nicobar Islands, India area. These are personal opinions. Regards to all, EQF |
Responses:
[21558]
21558
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Update – Alaska Earthquake July 23, 2020
|
EARTHQUAKE FORECASTING UPDATE Posted by EQF July 23, 2020 The electromagnetic signal (EM Signal) forecasting method being discussed here appears to have done a FANTASTIC job of pointing to the approach of the recent powerful Alaska earthquake. 2020/07/22 06:12:44 55.03N 158.52W 28 7.8 "105 km SSE of Perryville, Alaska" Two types of EM Signal data are available on my Web site. The first type involves Averaged EM Signals. They are usually the best to use when trying to spot the approach of significant earthquakes. But they have a variety of limitations. The second type of data are for Individual EM Signals and earthquakes. Those are the data that appear to have spotted the approach of the Alaska earthquake. HOW THOSE INDIVIDUAL SIGNALS ARE EVALUATED When two high intensity EM Signals are detected within say 2 hours of one another then that is a sign that a significant earthquake could be approaching. When that happens I will often circulate an earthquake warning and updates as I did with this thread. My theory up until recently was that 50% of the time the expected earthquake would occur within a week of the time when the signals were detected. However, with this latest warning I decided to see if an updated version of that theory might be more accurate. That updated theory proposes that 50 % of the time, the expected earthquake will occur before the time when the sun, moon, and Earth are in a straight line after the signals are detected. That happened on July 20, 2020. And I extended my Time Window for the earthquake until July 22, 2020. That extended Time Window was exactly correct for that Alaska earthquake. The original Earthquake Warning was based on the fact that 2 high intensity signals were detected within a few hours of one another on July 9, 2020. When the earthquake finally occurs after that happens it will usually have a line peak shape that is similar to the line peak shape of the later of the 2 (or more) EM Signals. As data that have been on my Web sites for years demonstrate, that has happened quite a few times in the past. The chart below shows the line peak shapes of those 2 EM Signals and their UTC detection times plus the line peak shape and for the Alaska earthquake. The shapes for the later EM Signal and the Alaska earthquake are almost identical indicating that the earthquake was likely the expected one.
The Alaska earthquake line peak shape also matches the actual longitude of the earthquake. That means that my computer program determined that the Alaska earthquake was likely triggered by sun and moon gravity forces that were similar to ones that were in the past responsible for other earthquakes that occurred around 159 W being triggered. An older significant Alaska earthquake has been included at the top of the chart that shows that it also had line peak shapes that matched the longitude of the earthquake. All of this means that earthquake forecasters using just my EM Signal data might have accurately predicted the earthquake as far back as July 9 of 2020. When I circulate a formal earthquake warning, it is saying: It appears that a significant earthquake is likely approaching. I don’t have enough time available to check for everyone’s approaching earthquakes. People living where earthquakes are a threat need to determine if my forecast data could be pointing to the area where they live and work. Then they need to check for other earthquake precursors that might be appearing in that area around the same time as the signals that I work with. That could confirm the location of the expected earthquake. There probably were some that could have been detected in the area of that Alaska earthquake back around July 9 of 2020. All of these Earthquake Forecasting steps are explained in detail on my various Web site Web pages. Considering the amount of damage an earthquake can cause, I believe that it would be well worthwhile for governments around the world to learn how to make use of my data. People living in Alaska would undoubtedly have liked to have known weeks ago that this latest earthquake might be approaching! These are personal opinions. Regards to all, EQF |
Responses:
None
21539
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Update July 19, 2020
|
Update Posted By EQF on July 19, 2020 As stated in other posts, it can be as much as a week between my visits to this forum. So response posts and updates might take a while. REGARDING THE EARTHQUAKE THAT IS STILL EXPECTED There was a powerful earthquake this week in the Papua New Guinea area . 2020/07/17 02:50:23 7.84S 147.77E 80 7.0 "114 km NNW of Popondetta, Papua New Guinea" NEIS Data However, that earthquake does not match any of my recent EM Signal data and does not appear to be the one that has been expected. Additionally, new high intensity EM Signals have been detected since it occurred. So, this expected earthquake looks like it could still be on the way. The present 50% Time Window will close around July 22. If the earthquake has not occurred by then it could be a while before it does occur. It will probably generate additional high intensity EM Signals before it does finally occur. As my data show, delays of three months or more are not unusual. My Web pages should be updated by Tuesday, July 21, 2020. Additional explanation information and charts are scheduled to be posted here. One of my Web site charts that will be discussed will focus on how to interpret the charts that display individual EM Signals and earthquakes rather than averaged EM Signals and earthquakes. ANOTHER IMPORTANT EFFORT The first effort regarding an important project that has been slowing my earthquake work was done a week ago. Advice was sent to certain parties. They apparently decided not to take the advice. And as expected, their response was in at least one internationally circulated news report. They did do as I requested with regard to keeping my name out of the news. This is a highly important matter. It is my intention to give it another try this coming week, further slowing my earthquake work. It is my expectation that the people involved will again decide against doing what I am recommending. And as has happened in the past, there could be consequences resulting from that. At least they will likely remember that they were warned. RESPONSES TO MY POSTS If you are interested in the sciences of Earthquake Forecasting, Earthquake Triggering, and earthquake research in general then I recommend that you just ignore Roger’s posts made in response to my posts. As far as I am aware, he has never read any of my lengthy Web pages that explain how the forecasting method I use works and what the data represent. I recommend that you ignore any numbers that he posts in response to my posts. I am talking about apples and he appears to me to be determined to remain focused on oranges. It is not worth my time to try to argue with him. These are personal opinions. Regards to all, EQF |
21541
From: Roger Hunter, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Update July 19, 2020
|
EQF; I would suggest that you and anyone else who choose to ignore my posts do so at their own peril. I am posting hard facts relevant to earthquake predictions; yours included. Those facts disagree with your claims. The position of the sun and moon have nothing to do with large earthquakes and this is not an opinion, it is a demonstrable fact. Roger |
Responses:
None
21540
From: Skywise, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Update July 19, 2020
|
Ed said, "REGARDING THE EARTHQUAKE THAT IS STILL EXPECTED" and, "...expected earthquake looks like it could still be on the way. The present 50% Time Window will close around July 22. Uhmmmm.... looking at your original post, you said "a significant and likely powerful earthquake by July 15, 2020." Are you adjusting the time window after the quake didn't hit within the originally stated time window? This is a well known logical fallacy called 'moving the goal posts'. Ed also said, "...ignore Roger’s posts made in response to my posts." and, "I recommend that you ignore any numbers that he posts in response to my posts." and add from your post http://earthboppin.net/talkshop/rollem/messages/21524.html where you basically tell people what to and where to post.... This is the same crap you pulled on Earthwaves and why I ultimately booted you from there. YOU do not run this forum. YOU do not get to dictate who posts what where. YOU do not get to dictate who reads what posts. If YOU don't like the response to your "personal opinions", then don't post them!!! Stop being so full of yourself, Ed, and you might get a little more respect for your unsubstantiated grandiose claims. Although that's doubtful, since they ARE unsubstantiated grandiose claims. You never have backed up anything with hard proof of who you are and of what you claim to be. And now you've come back to do that same thing? Bollocks, Ed. Pure bollocks. Brian |
Responses:
None
21525
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Update July 14, 2020
|
Posted by EQF July 14, 2020 The copy of Chart C at the bottom of this posting displays the latest forecast data from my Data.html Web page. There is a line peak around the 125 E longitude area that continues to persist. Most of the signal lines on Chart C represent averages of all of the electromagnetic signals (EM Signals) that were detected during the 90 days prior to the date of the signal line. There could be as many as several hundred of them. So, if a line peak remains at the same longitude for more than a few weeks it means that quite a few EM Signals detected over a fairly long period of time were pointing to the same location. The 15 and 45 day Time Window lines at the top of Chart C are intended to make it possible to more easily see what has been happening during just the past few weeks. Many individual signals point to other approaching earthquakes. But they tend to get averaged away because of the long Time Windows involved with each data line. That is intentional. Chart C is supposed to point to only the most important approaching earthquakes. THE 50% TIME WINDOW Perhaps 50% of the time when the types of signals that were generated during the past week are detected it is an indicator that the expected earthquake will occur within a week. If it does not occur then it will likely generate more signals before it does occur. It could be months away. I have never before known what controls that 50% probability. However, based on the latest observations I am now going to guess that it might have something to do with the locations of the sun and the moon in the sky. My computer programs indicate that there will be a direct sun - moon - Earth alignment around July 20, 2020. The moon will be between the sun and the Earth and it should be difficult to see the moon in the sky. Both the sun and moon will also be above about 20 N in addition to their being above the same longitudes for several days, especially July 20, 2020. These are generally the times when the Tide Generating Force and the Earth Tide are strongest. That force might be having some type of controlling effect on those Time Window probabilities. I just checked some other past data to see if that effect could be observed with them. And it was. So that might be the answer, finally discovered after all these years. Additional data will be checked. What all of that might mean is that this 50% Time Window will remain open for this present expected earthquake until perhaps July 22, 2020. These are personal opinions. Regards to all, EQF
|
21526
From: Roger Hunter, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Update July 14, 2020
|
EQF; I will state categorically that the positions of the sun and moon have nothing to do with large earthquakes. You may have found scattered cases where a quake of some size happens at some time before or after some particular configuration but it's only chance. Roger |
21528
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Update July 14, 2020
|
Posted by EQF on July 14, 2020 I believe that your opinion regarding that is incorrect. Years ago I posted some data regarding that subject to another forum. Someone did some calculations using the data and determined that there was something like a 95% probability that the most powerful earthquakes have in fact been affected by the sun and moon locations in the sky. Two people in the geology community then published a paper in some geology journal discussing all of that. I have the reference somewhere. It would take a while to find. Once again, please post these types of comments to some other thread. My earthquake warnings are intended to be sources of earthquake warning data, not philosophical discussions. Regards, EQF |
Responses:
[21533]
21533
From: Roger Hunter, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Update July 14, 2020
|
EQF; I am not posting opinions. I am posting factual information. Here's some more. I looked at all NEIC quakes from 1973 to 2019. For those of mag 6, 7, or 8 I computed the sun-moon angle at the quake time and kept a count of how many happened at each angle. If the sun-moon angle was significant the largest counts should be 0 or 180 corresponding to new or full moon with 90 or 270 possible. Results were for mag 6+ the most quakes were at 172 degrees. For mag 7+ the most quakes were at 224 and 240 degrees. For mag 8+ the most quakes were at 149, 165, 172, 218 and 267 degrees, not significant because the largest number was 2. Case closed. Roger |
Responses:
None
21510
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
Posted by EQF on July 11, 2020 The Data.html has just been updated. On Chart C there is a strong line peak around 125 E that is likely quite significant. However, the earthquake to which it is probably pointing will not necessarily occur at that longitude. It can also be seen on Chart C that there were strong line peaks around 179 W before that powerful New Zealand area earthquake occurred. There were also line peaks around 90 W before the following deadly Mexico area earthquake occurred (5 reported fatalities). 2020/06/23 15:29:04 15.92N 95.95W 20 7.4 "12km E of Santa Maria Xadani, Mexico" The Significant Earthquakes charts (sorted by date and by longitude) displayed on the Data.html Web page and others on my Web site have also been updated. Additional data will probably be added early next week. Another important project that has been delaying the earthquake work got completed earlier today. Regards to all, EQF |
Responses:
[21512] [21518] [21514] [21516] [21515] [21517] [21522] [21524] [21527]
21512
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
Posted by EQF on July 11 2020 I haven't had a chance to check for recent strong volcano activity. That involves a lot more than downloading the NEIS earthquake records. However, this expected seismic activity does not look like a volcano to me. It looks a lot more like an approaching significant earthquake. I am still surprised that that recent 5+ magnitude California earthquake appeared to have generated such a strong EM Signal before it occurred. Other earthquake forecasters around the world will probably be warned about this expected seismic activity by E-mail tomorrow. Regards to all, EQF |
Responses:
[21518] [21514] [21516] [21515] [21517] [21522] [21524] [21527]
21518
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
Posted by EQF on July 12, 2020 Because of scheduling limitations, the planned circulation of this Earthquake Warning to other earthquake forecasters around the world will likely not get done until Monday, July 13, 2020. Hopefully, some of them have already been checking my Web site or they are seeing the forecast information here. Regards to all, EQF |
Responses:
None
21514
From: Roger Hunter, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
EQF; That New Zealand quake was a hit but saying a quake will happen sometime soon on a certain longitude doesn't qualify as a prediction. You must specify when, where and how big to qualify for a prediction and the quake has to fit all three parameters to be called a hit. Roger |
21516
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
Posted by EQF on July 12, 2020 Hi Roger, With humor intended, in your next reincarnation, you should probably not try to return as a disaster mitigation professional as I am. I actually own and run a formal organization for doing disaster management work. Best to stick with computer programming. But start with Python rather than True Basic. In my opinion, with the present “State of the art,” the best and perhaps the only way to learn that an earthquake is approaching for some location is to evaluate a variety of earthquake precursors. Each of them could help provide information regarding one or more parts of the total picture. Add them together and you can often form a fairly respectable forecast. My Earthquake Forecasting Breakthroughs Web page goes into great detail regarding that subject matter. With my own precursors, if a line peak remains at some longitude for more than a few weeks it is usually a good indicator that a significant earthquake or volcano eruption is on the way. Try to remember all of the following information or refer back to this posting when you have any questions. LOCATION My Web pages explain in great detail how to use my data to determine a possible location for an expected earthquake. In this present case people should first check for precursors in fault zone areas along the 125 E longitude line. If none have been observed there during the past few weeks then they should move on to test # 2 and on and on. If precursor signals are being detected where I live and work, perhaps on the other side of the planet from where an expected earthquake is going to occur, then the chances are fairly good that other detectable precursors such as Jet Stream Anomalies or Total Electron Content signals are being generated near the actual location of the expected earthquake. TIME WINDOW Once again, if these EM Signals are being detected then it usually means that the earthquake fault zone is becoming unstable. And an earthquake will probably occur there within 3 months or perhaps 6 months at most. There have been a few cases such as several earthquakes in the Chile and Indonesia area where the fault zone appeared to be generating EM Signals for as much as a year before the earthquake finally occurred. So, if the line peaks on my Chart C are stable at some longitude for more than a few weeks it often means that people might have as much as 3 months to look for other precursors. That is plenty of time. Unfortunately, in this present case it appears based on past data that people might now have as little time as one week to determine where the expected earthquake is likely to occur. MAGNITUDE That number is almost irrelevant in the real world where people are much more concerned about the possible damage that an earthquake can do versus its magnitude. A 5 magnitude earthquake occurring near a populated area and near the surface can often do a lot more damage than an 8 magnitude earthquake at the same location, but hundreds of kilometers below the surface. With regard to my forecasts, if the approaching earthquake is going to be strong enough that it is able to generate the types of EM Signals that I work with then it is likely that it will have a magnitude high enough that it could do some damage. So, it might be a 5 magnitude shallow earthquake or an 8 magnitude deep location earthquake. Either could generate these EM Signals. Either could do a lot of damage to a populated area located directly above. HIT AND MISS RECORDS My “hit and miss” data going from the present back to the start of 2001 are clearly displayed on my Web site. Anyone can check them. People SHOULD check those data to see if significant past earthquakes that occurred where they live and work were clearly detectable with my forecasting method. Approaching ones in certain areas such as Central and South America do not appear to be very good at generating these signals. Approaching Chile area earthquakes would be an exception. They usually generate LOTS of signals. I believe that other forecasting personnel have also found that to be the case. I don’t presently have the ability to display volcano eruption data on my Web pages. So on my data records there might be line peaks remaining at some longitude for a while. Then they disappear without a significant earthquake being recorded. The line peaks might have been associated with an approaching volcano eruption. There are also other complications possible. WHY GOVERNMENTS CAN’T PREDICT EARTHQUAKES Governments learned long ago that their weather forecasters generally did not have the ability to deal with the disaster aspects of floods, tornadoes, and hurricanes. The weather forecasters are usually technical people. To get a city prepared and evacuated when it is in the path of a hurricane, experienced, capable, disaster management personnel are needed. Unfortunately, it appears to me that our governments have never learned this same lesson regarding forecasting earthquakes and getting people prepared for them. Most or all governments appear to me to be letting scientists run their earthquake forecasting programs rather than bringing in experienced professional disaster managers to run the programs. Disaster managers would say, “We will go with the best data available rather than wait for 100% confirmation regarding Location, Time, and Magnitude. With luck, governments might someday realize that this is a major problem with earthquake forecasting. They will then hopefully make some changes. And progress will finally be made. These are personal opinions. Regards to all, EQF |
Responses:
None
21515
From: Roger Hunter, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
EQF; For example, the odds on a quake of mag 5+ happening in the 10 degree wide area from 90N to 90S,170E to 180E within a 10 day window are 0.699 The odds on a 6+ quake in the same area are 0.117 So you really need to be more specific and more restricted to be taken seriously. Roger |
21517
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
Posted by EQF July 12, 2020 Hi Roger, Once again, you appear to me to be thinking like a technical person rather than a professional disaster manager. Professional disaster managers would have the attitude that "Any fairly accurate data regarding any aspect of the forecast picture is valuable." One precursor does not need to provide the entire picture by itself. Regarding my forecasts being taken seriously, You might not like them. But others have such a high regard for my forecast data that I have to be quite careful regarding what information I circulate to them, including scientist, so that they don't unnecessarily go into a panic. These are personal opinions. Regards, EQF |
21522
From: Roger Hunter, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
EQF; In reading these posts I get the feeling that you don't understand what I'm saying. I'll try again. Any prediction or forecast has a probability of being correct by pure chance. So when you make some vague statements about an expected quake you may or may not be correct but you won't always be right or wrong. The test for valid prediction methods is the right/wrong ratio. You have to be right more often than chance would allow and the higher the ratio the better. Ideally the correct method would always be right. Now I don't care how predictions are made, whether ear tones, body aches or any other method. I just care how often they are correct. Roger |
21524
From: EQF, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
Posted by EQF July 14, 2020 Hi Roger, The following is my very strong recommendation and request. This recommendation specifically applies to my own Earthquake Warnings or Advisories. But I would expect that other people posting notes about earthquake warnings here would like to request the same thing. If I post an Earthquake Warning as found in this thread and you want to comment on the actual details of the information in the warning or ask for more information then that is fine with me. But these actual warning are not intended to be discussions regarding the philosophy of earthquake forecasting or what constitutes a valid warning. If you would like to discuss those subjects then please do that in other threads. My information is of course intended for the people visiting this forum. But it is to a large extent also intended for government officials and other earthquake forecasters and researchers around the world. When they see people getting into discussions regarding something other than the basic warning information they might get confused. And that could diminish the value of the warning information. This warning information might be the only information that many around the world have access to. I believe that it is important that they not get confused. Some of them likely speak English only as a second or third language. Regards, EQF |
Responses:
[21527]
21527
From: Roger Hunter, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Earthquake Warning July 11, 2020
|
EQF; I didn't see this post before my last response but it wouldn't have mattered. We are not discussing philosophy here but factual information about quake prediction. You have not shown that your methods are valid or that your predictions are accurate. If anyone is confusing others it's you. I can back up anything I post with facts. I am not trying to offend or insult you or anyone, I'm only presenting factual information. Roger |
Responses:
None
[ Roll & Rock ] [ Main Menu ]