Report on my Earthquake Dart Board
Skywise
is now available on my website.
http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/article/index.html
Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
George
"Skywise" <in...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote in message
news:11ui85c...@corp.supernews.com...
> An article on the first 90 days of my quake predictions
> is now available on my website.
>
> http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/article/index.html
>
> Brian
Good work, Brian. You should publish this somewhere. I have only one
criticism, and it is a small one. When I open that page up in IE 6, I have
to scroll horizontally to see all of the text. This is a little annoying.
Is there any way you can fix this? Just a suggestion.
George
Petra
Congratulations Brian,
Excellent report. I think it would be great if you could publish it
somewhere and I believe all you need is a scientist who is willing to
publish it with you, a co-author. I wonder if there is anyone in this
house who might avail themselves?
You made an excellent case in regard to people who just want to make
hits versus making predictions which are valuable. There are probably
at least 15 to 20 persons on the internet who make weekly predictions
for 5.0 quakes in Japan. They are never specific as to say whether it
would be northern, central or southern Japan though and as they have
5.0 quakes every 3.5 days getting a hit is as easy as pie. But newbies
to the net don't know that and good reports such as yours point out the
uselessness of it all.
I would say it is indeed an important work and you did a splendid job
in your presentation, placement of visuals and wrapped it up
beautifully.
Congratulations on a job well done.
You're Awesome!
Petra
Skywise
news:pXfGf.760641$_o.138722@attbi_s71:
Well, George, if you'd stop trying to browse the net on your
old Commodore 64!!! :)
This page, like all of my website, is designed for 1024 wide.
If your window is narrow than that, it will end up needing
to be scrolled. All of the text is within a table that is
fixed at 1000 pixels wide.
But, I took a look at it in IE6 and it seems ok. The only
thing it seems to be ignoring is the <center> code. Everything
is on the left margin when it's supposed to be in the center
of the screen, if it's wide enough.
IE6 is known not to be 100% W3C compliant. That is, like many
M$ products, they don't conform to the standards set and agreed
upon by the rest of the internet community.
George
> "George" <geo...@wtfiswrongwithyou.com> wrote in
> news:pXfGf.760641$_o.138722@attbi_s71:
>
>>
>> "Skywise" <in...@oblivion.nothing.com> wrote in message
>> news:11ui85c...@corp.supernews.com...
>>> An article on the first 90 days of my quake predictions
>>> is now available on my website.
>>>
>>> http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/article/index.html
>>>
>>> Brian
>>
>> Good work, Brian. You should publish this somewhere. I have only one
>> criticism, and it is a small one. When I open that page up in IE 6, I
>> have to scroll horizontally to see all of the text. This is a little
>> annoying. Is there any way you can fix this? Just a suggestion.
>>
>> George
>
> Well, George, if you'd stop trying to browse the net on your
> old Commodore 64!!! :)
Umm, you know better than that. Hmph!
> This page, like all of my website, is designed for 1024 wide.
> If your window is narrow than that, it will end up needing
> to be scrolled. All of the text is within a table that is
> fixed at 1000 pixels wide.
My screen resolution is set at 1024 by 768.
> But, I took a look at it in IE6 and it seems ok. The only
> thing it seems to be ignoring is the <center> code. Everything
> is on the left margin when it's supposed to be in the center
> of the screen, if it's wide enough.
>
> IE6 is known not to be 100% W3C compliant. That is, like many
> M$ products, they don't conform to the standards set and agreed
> upon by the rest of the internet community.
>
> Brian
> --
> http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
> Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
> Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
> Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
Yeah, I know. They have to do it their way. I went back and changed the
font size to a smaller one, and it made no difference. The horizontal
scroll bar still pops up and the text goes off the right side of the
screen. Since you are using a set table width, I'd expected this. When I
change the screen resolution to 1152 by 864 the page looks fine.
George
rick++
for a prediction evaluation lab is progressing.
I'd like such to include a computer tool for evaluating the
probabiility of
beating chance for an individual prediction
and a statistical significance calculator for multiple predictions and
omissions.
Some years back Alan Jones wrote a tool to do the first.
Scientists in many fields calculate these routinely.
But it would be nice to have an automated web-tool to make this
easy for everyone.
Skywise
@attbi_s72:
<Snipola>
> Yeah, I know. They have to do it their way. I went back and changed the
> font size to a smaller one, and it made no difference. The horizontal
> scroll bar still pops up and the text goes off the right side of the
> screen. Since you are using a set table width, I'd expected this. When I
> change the screen resolution to 1152 by 864 the page looks fine.
>
> George
Sorry for the inconvenience with the fixed width. I run 1600x1200
and I thought reducing it to fit 1024 would be sufficient except
for those poor folks who are still stuck with VGA monitors. Heck,
I think 1600x1200 is too small, but that's probably just me.
J.F. Cornwall
> "George" <geo...@wtfiswrongwithyou.com> wrote in news:xHhGf.752871$x96.204731
> @attbi_s72:
>
> <Snipola>
>
>>Yeah, I know. They have to do it their way. I went back and changed the
>>font size to a smaller one, and it made no difference. The horizontal
>>scroll bar still pops up and the text goes off the right side of the
>>screen. Since you are using a set table width, I'd expected this. When I
>>change the screen resolution to 1152 by 864 the page looks fine.
>>
>>George
>
>
> Sorry for the inconvenience with the fixed width. I run 1600x1200
> and I thought reducing it to fit 1024 would be sufficient except
> for those poor folks who are still stuck with VGA monitors. Heck,
> I think 1600x1200 is too small, but that's probably just me.
>
> Brian
Nope, it's not just you. At work, I run a double-headed setup with 2
1600x1200 tubes (yes, CRT), and *that's too small* for me... I want a
1x2 meter display with .25mm dot pitch and full 32-bit color depth. I
am very doubtful if what I want exists yet, and I am damn sure my
employer would not buy it if it does, but that's what *I* want Santa to
bring me :-)
Jim
(USGS computer jockey speaking only for myself and NOT for the gov't)
Skywise
news:IuDxF...@igsrsparc2.er.usgs.gov:
> Skywise wrote:
<Snipola>
>> Sorry for the inconvenience with the fixed width. I run 1600x1200
>> and I thought reducing it to fit 1024 would be sufficient except
>> for those poor folks who are still stuck with VGA monitors. Heck,
>> I think 1600x1200 is too small, but that's probably just me.
>>
>> Brian
>
> Nope, it's not just you. At work, I run a double-headed setup with 2
> 1600x1200 tubes (yes, CRT), and *that's too small* for me... I want a
> 1x2 meter display with .25mm dot pitch and full 32-bit color depth. I
> am very doubtful if what I want exists yet, and I am damn sure my
> employer would not buy it if it does, but that's what *I* want Santa to
> bring me :-)
>
> Jim
> (USGS computer jockey speaking only for myself and NOT for the gov't)
Oh yes...my new system's video card can handle two monitors. I've
currently got one of my old 1024s hooked up for when I need it.
But ideally I'd like to get a matching monitor to what I have now.
I see them on eBay for cheap...so cheap it costs more to ship. So
I need to wait until I see one local that I can just pick up.
The other issue is interferrence. I don't think this model of
monitor is magnetically shielded. I certainly can't place any of
my monitors next to this one.
And shielding material is mucho expensive. Like $'s per square inch.
Brina
Petra
Rick,
Jordan only received his funding two weeks ago. I suspect it should
take no less than a month to be in a position to start asking for
proposals and some months before he is ready to receive and review
them.
I sent a follow-up e-mail to him two weeks ago to remind him I wanted
to participate and to let me know when he was ready to receive
proposals. Then I heard about his funding coming through and I knew
it would be awhile.
But as you aren't making a proposal I don't see why you can't inform
him that you have this method and ask him to let you know if he is
interested in using it. Considering the order of the universe he
should have your program as well as others before he begins the
process.
Just a thought,
Petra
George
No problemo. I'm easy to get along with, for the most part. :-)
George