Today's Lunarsee
Weatherlawyer
discussions on here but I always thought in winter the Highs were lows
teperaturewise.
So what is happening? Isn't it true that the last time we had
unusually warm (read that as: remarked upon fairly recently) we had
(read that as "there was") a significant earthquake.
Looks like we are headed the same way. Another thing to look out for
are assertions of mists and fogs. They presage severe cyclonic storms
over the tropics and just outside of them.
Gianna
> [...]
> So what is happening? Isn't it true that the last time we had
> unusually warm (read that as: remarked upon fairly recently) we had
> (read that as "there was") a significant earthquake.
>
Jerrry noted the link between the earthquakes and the flights of the shuttle.
Have you made the same connection?
--
Gianna
Ron Button
RonB
"Gianna" <gia...@gianna.org> wrote in message
news:5261q2F...@mid.individual.net...
Gianna
Only if the president is in Turkey, I think.
But if all the methane were ignited at once, it could trigger a new clear winter
of discontent. That would stop the globular forming.
--
Gianna
Weatherlawyer
On Jan 29, 1:14 pm, Gianna <gia...@gianna.org> wrote:
> Ron Button wrote:
> > I always thought earthquakes were caused by farting cows
>
> > RonB
> > "Gianna" <gia...@gianna.org> wrote in message
> >news:5261q2F...@mid.individual.net...
> >> Weatherlawyer wrote:
> >>> [...] So what is happening? Isn't it true that the last time we had
> >>> unusually warm (read that as: remarked upon fairly recently) we had (read
> >>> that as "there was") a significant earthquake.
>
> >>> [...]
>
> >> Jerrry noted the link between the earthquakes and the flights of the
> >> shuttle. Have you made the same connection?Only if the president is in Turkey, I think.
> But if all the methane were ignited at once, it could trigger a new clear winter
> of discontent. That would stop the globular forming.
Eat my shit:
http://satellite.ehabich.info/hurricane-watch.htm
Weatherlawyer
Got that down your necks? Here's the afters:
6.8 mag, 2007/01/30 04:54, 54.9S 145.7E, west of MacQuarie Island
Not as large a magnitude as it might have been but the spell isn't
over yet, too, neither.
Gianna
>
> Got that down your necks? Here's the afters:
> 6.8 mag, 2007/01/30 04:54, 54.9S 145.7E, west of MacQuarie Island
>
> Not as large a magnitude as it might have been but the spell isn't
> over yet, too, neither.
>
Michael, Michael, Michael ...
Unusually warm - where?
Significant earthquake - where?
The demonstrable link is - where?
The causal element is - where?
I asked you previously for some supporting information for your theory but you
did not send me any. Are you surprised if one thinks that is because there is
none? I look forward to reading the data.
--
Gianna
Weatherlawyer
Gianna wrote:
> Weatherlawyer wrote:
> >
> > Got that down your necks? Here's the afters:
> > 6.8 mag, 2007/01/30 04:54, 54.9S 145.7E, west of MacQuarie Island
> >
> > Not as large a magnitude as it might have been but the spell isn't
> > over yet, too, neither.
>
Parts of the UK. I have had a remarkably cold month of it but
immediately prior to the earthquakes, it had been warm. Obviously a
regional thing but the warmth has been remarked upon by some here and
by some weather forecasters on the telly.
> Significant earthquake - where?
Earth. That's where all earthquakes take place.
There is a fallacy that the prediction of quakes must have a specific
time limit and an unreasonably close window. I don't subscribe to such
limited concepts and have nothing whatsever to do with such thickoes.
First it is neccessary to find out what causes them.
> The demonstrable link is - where?
I have mooted the subject time and again but have nothing concrete and
irrefutable as I am still learning the bonds.
> The causal element is - where?
You mean you couldn't guess?
> I asked you previously for some supporting information for your theory but you
> did not send me any. Are you surprised if one thinks that is because there is
> none? I look forward to reading the data.
I thought I had replied to you, some time ago wasn't it?
Here is the latest couple of posts I had flitted earlier to a couple
of groups more in keeping wit the type of subject:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.talk.weather/browse_frm/thread/73dd6e4d8bf8d00d/#
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.earthquakes/tree/browse_frm/thread/4bcb97d3b01076eb/75b7c2ab9d562c4a?rnum=1&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fsci.geo.earthquakes%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2F4bcb97d3b01076eb%2F%3F#doc_5ce29a1ce6995516
There is more out there from me on this but again they are mostly
forecasts. Fortunately for me they all had coincidences shot through
them.
But that's the good thing about miracles and the like isn't it? Timing?
Gianna
> Gianna wrote:
>> Unusually warm - where?
>
> Parts of the UK. I have had a remarkably cold month of it but
> immediately prior to the earthquakes, it had been warm. Obviously a
> regional thing but the warmth has been remarked upon by some here and
> by some weather forecasters on the telly.
>
>> Significant earthquake - where?
> Earth. That's where all earthquakes take place.
Yes but does a warm spell in a part of the UK (a tiny place) cause earthquakes
in far away places? If so, what happens if there is a warm spell in Sri Lanka,
or a cold spell in Tibet? Does that cause earthquakes in the same places as
warm spells in a part of the UK, or in different places?
> There is a fallacy that the prediction of quakes must have a specific
> time limit and an unreasonably close window.
Is there? I did not know that.
> First it is neccessary to find out what causes them.
Warm spells?
>> The demonstrable link is - where?
>
> I have mooted the subject time and again but have nothing concrete and
> irrefutable as I am still learning the bonds.
But do you not have some sort of table with weather conditions on one side and
earthquakes on the other - if you have, is there a pattern? If you haven't,
then why not? You must have *some* evidence or else you would have nothing to
base your theory (or even an hypothesis) upon.
>> The causal element is - where?
>
> You mean you couldn't guess?
As a retired statistician, I never guess. If as you say, you have yet to
establish the link, you cannot possibly guess if such a link would be causal.
>> I asked you previously for some supporting information for your theory but you
>> did not send me any. Are you surprised if one thinks that is because there is
>> none? I look forward to reading the data.
>
> I thought I had replied to you, some time ago wasn't it?
I fear not. And a copy of the table I mention above would be appreciated,
rather than a couple of links to some of your posts on Usenet.
>
> But that's the good thing about miracles and the like isn't it? Timing?
>
Not really, welcome events are welcome at any time.
--
Gianna
Weatherlawyer
Gianna wrote:
>
> Yes but does a warm spell in a part of the UK (a tiny place) cause earthquakes
> in far away places?
The UK is not a tiny place. It extends over some 10 by 3 or 4 degrees
of some of the most interesting weather patterns on the globe.
However some on here have reported unusually warm periods. As for the
size of the regions that concern me it is where I am feeling the
effect at the time.
> What happens if there is a warm spell in Sri Lanka,
> or a cold spell in Tibet?
That would be a job for a statistician to work on. I don't have the
concentration. Ia m a synergism not a statistics person. Stats don't
work for me nor the weather.
> Does that cause earthquakes in the same places as
> warm spells in a part of the UK, or in different places?
The cause of warmth is not insolation alone, otherwise the poles would
be hot places not cold ones with their tendency to anticyclones.
> > There is a fallacy that the prediction of quakes must have a specific
> > time limit and an unreasonably close window.
>
> Is there? I did not know that.
I think it is a get out clause for all the people who can't solve the
riddle of the earth, having been paid millions to try.
Or maybe it's one of those early intros to the earth science courses
similar to the induction would be chemists get (a lesson in taking
care when preparing particularly nauseous chemicals.)
Whatever the reasoning, all it has done is procure a set of imbeciles
that refuse to look at facts.
>
> > First it is necessary to find out what causes them.
>
> Warm spells?
I am going to make believe that you are not being particularly dense
on purpose.
> >> The demonstrable link is - where?
> >
> > I have mooted the subject time and again but have nothing concrete and
> > irrefutable as I am still learning the bonds.
>
> But do you not have some sort of table with weather conditions on one side and
> earthquakes on the other - if you have, is there a pattern? If you haven't,
> then why not? You must have *some* evidence or else you would have nothing to
> base your theory (or even an hypothesis) upon.
>
> >> The causal element is - where?
> >
> > You mean you couldn't guess?
>
> As a retired statistician, I never guess. If as you say, you have yet to
> establish the link, you cannot possibly guess if such a link would be causal.
All I asked was that you should have been aware of more of my stuff
than you seem to be. I appreciate that you have put me in your
killfiles a few times so I am going easy on you.
> >> I asked you previously for some supporting information for your theory but you
> >> did not send me any. Are you surprised if one thinks that is because there is
> >> none? I look forward to reading the data.
> >
> > I thought I had replied to you, some time ago wasn't it?
>
> I fear not. And a copy of the table I mention above would be appreciated,
> rather than a couple of links to some of your posts on Usenet.
Table?
I used to think that the weather depended on the division of the
phases by three or rather by six. It does adhere to that slot and you
will have to look up some of my posts on the subject if you can. I
don't intend to go over them all again.
I now think that the time of the phase just indicates where a standing
wave meets a point of dwell that induces whatever I say it does. Which
is slightly different from my earlier ideas.
If you want to enter into arguments with me you will have to quote the
posts you are pulling them from for as far as I am concerned, this
thread is finished as far as disseminating knowledge goes.
Lawrence Jenkins
Oi Gianna, and you have the nerve to call me looney. How comes lunar-tic
ain't on yer killfile Silk?
I'm warning you, I'm not prepared to put up with the way you treat me. I
want a trial seperation, I'm going back home to Sydenham.
Gianna
> The UK is not a tiny place. It extends over some 10 by 3 or 4 degrees
> of some of the most interesting weather patterns on the globe.
The UK, at best, represents about 0.048% of the surface area of the plant.
While the weather is indeed interesting, the UK is, in fact, tiny.
>> What happens if there is a warm spell in Sri Lanka,
>> or a cold spell in Tibet?
>
> That would be a job for a statistician to work on. I don't have the
> concentration. Ia m a synergism not a statistics person. Stats don't
> work for me nor the weather.
Then you have no data.
>> Does that cause earthquakes in the same places as
>> warm spells in a part of the UK, or in different places?
>
> The cause of warmth is not insolation alone, otherwise the poles would
> be hot places not cold ones with their tendency to anticyclones.
>
... which does not answer my question.
>>> First it is necessary to find out what causes them.
>> Warm spells?
>
> I am going to make believe that you are not being particularly dense
> on purpose.
That was called 'light relief', or a 'sense of humour'.
>> But do you not have some sort of table with weather conditions on one side and
>> earthquakes on the other - if you have, is there a pattern? If you haven't,
>> then why not? You must have *some* evidence or else you would have nothing to
>> base your theory (or even an hypothesis) upon.
>
> All I asked was that you should have been aware of more of my stuff
> than you seem to be. I appreciate that you have put me in your
> killfiles a few times so I am going easy on you.
Only twice I think, and along time ago. You are not innately unpleasant. I
only have a small number of people kill-filed these days ... Loony Larry, a
couple of bigots, and a few trolls.
My awareness of your stuff is not the problem. I would like to see the data on
which your posts, and the stuff therein, are based.
Assuming you have a list of the phases, the weather events linked to them, and
the earthquake activity linked to that, the easiest way of displaying such data
would probably be in tabular format. So, do you have the data and could I see
it please?
>>> I thought I had replied to you, some time ago wasn't it?
>> I fear not. And a copy of the table I mention above would be appreciated,
>> rather than a couple of links to some of your posts on Usenet.
>
> Table?
Yes, as above, the data on which your hypotheses are founded.
> I used to think that the weather depended on the division of the
> phases by three or rather by six. It does adhere to that slot and you
> will have to look up some of my posts on the subject if you can. I
> don't intend to go over them all again.
Nor do I - do you have the data on which they were based?
> I now think that the time of the phase just indicates where a standing
> wave meets a point of dwell that induces whatever I say it does. Which
> is slightly different from my earlier ideas.
May I see the data which has caused you to think that?
> If you want to enter into arguments with me you will have to quote the
> posts you are pulling them from for as far as I am concerned, this
> thread is finished as far as disseminating knowledge goes.
I do not wish to enter into arguments, nor do I need to pull quotes from your
posts - it is the information behind your posts which is of interest.
This thread has not disseminated any knowledge yet, so cannot be finished as far
as that goes.
Michael, I am sorry to press you on this but if you have no supporting data at
all, tabular or otherwise, then your hypotheses cannot be sound.
--
Gianna
Gianna
> The UK, at best, represents about 0.048% of the surface area of the plant.
But she intended to write:
The UK, at best, represents about 0.048% of the surface area of the planet.
--
Gianna
Weatherlawyer
What percentage of an explosive is the detonator?
What has size got to do with it?
There was another forecast of hill fog and unusually warm weather on
the telly just now. That will end in tears for some not a million
miles away. Take that for your data. As it happens I am trying to put
a spreadsheet together that compares the dates of the lunar phases
with the dates of the cyclones mentioned on the MetO website.
But it is a major drag and I don't like doing it at all. My data is in
my predictions. I don't get paid for compiling data I do this as an
hobby. I find it interesting when my predictions come true.
All the times I have been on the ball add proof to me (the only person
I am interested in proving my stuff to.) And the bits that go wrong
are just as interesting if only slightly less depressing than
compiling statistics -to me.
I have learned a lot and have put it all online so that if I should
kick the bucket someone also finding out that what I say is true will
have access to what I said. It is a cheap way to get it down in
writing in the public domain.
I don't expect anyone to take me seriously. I have not been let down
in that regard. Should I eventually publish the list I am not going to
think that that will be taken any more seriously no matter how near
the mark it turns out to be.
The reason I want to do it is that I might learn a lot more about
which phases tend to cause which events and maybe where. Even
supposing I nail it down to the minute and arc second, I don't expect
anyone will be offering me pots of money.
On the bright side even if I prove myself wrong, I shan't be cutting
my throat in despair either.
If you are really interested in it then have a go at it yourself it is
dead easy to do and you apparently like wrangling with statistics.
Gianna
> Gianna wrote:
>>
>> The UK, at best, represents about 0.048% of the surface area of the planet.
>
> What percentage of an explosive is the detonator?
>
> What has size got to do with it?
I asserted that the UK was tiny, you stated that it was not. I produced
evidence to support my assertion. You ask what that has to do with it?
Everything.
> As it happens I am trying to put
> a spreadsheet together that compares the dates of the lunar phases
> with the dates of the cyclones mentioned on the MetO website.
Perhaps you would let me have a copy when it is ready.
> But it is a major drag and I don't like doing it at all. My data is in
> my predictions. I don't get paid for compiling data I do this as an
> hobby. I find it interesting when my predictions come true.
How can supporting your own hypothesis be a drag?
You seem to be pulling your horse with your cart.
Your data (of actual events) should be the basis on which your predictions (of
future events) are made, unless you are claiming some form of clairvoyance.
I do not get paid for compiling my weather data, it is my hobby too. It
provides the data on which I might base any arguments or predictions.
When I say that January was the second coldest in my record, I have the data to
prove it. If I forecast that February will be less warm than last year, I have
the data to support it.
> I have learned a lot and have put it all online so that if I should
> kick the bucket someone also finding out that what I say is true will
> have access to what I said. It is a cheap way to get it down in
> writing in the public domain.
But it will all be ignored if there is no supporting data.
> I don't expect anyone to take me seriously. I have not been let down
> in that regard. Should I eventually publish the list I am not going to
> think that that will be taken any more seriously no matter how near
> the mark it turns out to be.
Well if you publish the actuals in a spreadsheet, then there will be no dispute.
> The reason I want to do it is that I might learn a lot more about
> which phases tend to cause which events and maybe where. Even
> supposing I nail it down to the minute and arc second, I don't expect
> anyone will be offering me pots of money.
Of course not. It is all in the public domain.
> If you are really interested in it then have a go at it yourself it is
> dead easy to do and you apparently like wrangling with statistics.
>
If it is dead easy, you do not need help.
--
Gianna
Weatherlawyer
19 killed as storms rake central Florida
Grim searches amid rubble
By Jim Ellis | Associated Press | Story updated at 3:37 AM on
Saturday, February 3, 2007
LADY LAKE, Fla. - Disaster crews with dogs went from one pile of
debris to another in a search for bodies Friday after powerful storms,
including at least one tornado, smashed hundreds of homes across
central Florida and killed at least19 people.
It was the deadliest combination of thunderstorms and tornadoes to hit
Florida in nearly a decade, cutting a 40-mile swath of destruction
across four counties just before daybreak, terrorizing residents of
one of the nation's biggest retirement communities, and leaving trees
and fields littered with clothes, furniture and splintered lumber.
"It was scary, really scary," said Patrick Smith, who lives in the
Paisley area, where at least 13 deaths were reported. He said he saw a
weather alert on television, grabbed his wife and "went straight to
the floor." After the storm passed, he pulled the bodies of a man and
his 9- or 10-year-old son from a neighboring house.
Florida's emergency management chief, Craig Fugate, said it could take
several days to determine the exact number of dead, and the main
priority was finding survivors who may be trapped.
Gov. Charlie Crist declared a state of emergency in four counties, but
the worst damage was reported where the twister touched down in
northern Lake County and eastern Volusia County. In typical tornado
fashion, the storm hopscotched across the landscape, demolishing some
homes and leaving others virtually untouched.
"Our priority today is search and rescue," said Crist, who toured the
damaged area in his first natural disaster since taking office last
month. "Everything's being done to get them the aid and assistance
that they need."
Lake County spokesman Christopher Patton said there were 19 confirmed
deaths, all in Lake County, about 50 miles northwest of Orlando. The
dead included at least two high school students, authorities said.
Authorities said hundreds of houses, mobile homes and other buildings
were damaged or destroyed.
The storm left yards strewn with chairs, beds and clothes, knocked
tractor-trailers onto their sides as if they were toys, and tore away
roofs.
Bernadette Fields, 67, said two of her neighbors in mobile homes were
blown through a bedroom wall into Lake Mack. Their bodies were found
by their own dog, she said.
Dozens of rescue workers - many hardened by experience with Florida's
multiple hurricanes - went from house to house, spray-painting big red
X's to mark the husks of buildings that they had checked.
While Lake County got the worst of it, Volusia County officials
reported that 69 homes were damaged in New Smyrna Beach.
Friday's storms were reminiscent of past tornados during years where
El Nino was a weather factor, as it was again in this case, said state
meteorologist Ben Nelson.
In February 1998, five twisters hit near Orlando over two days,
killing 42 people and damaging or destroying about 2,600 homes and
businesses. It was Florida's deadliest tornado event on record.
Published in the Athens Banner-Herald on 020307
(Nice paragraph spacings. Someone there knows what they are doing.)
http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/020307/news_20070203054.shtml
I posted this in a set of events that were abnormal for the UK. Things
have since cleaned up around here with temperatures dropping last
night and the skyscape turning to what it should be in a North
Atlantic Anticyclone. We even have frost on our lawns. (Of course
frost is like fog when it comes to extra tropicals.)
Weatherlawyer wrote:
> It is anticyclonic by the sounds coming from my TV. And the
> discussions on here but I always thought in winter the Highs were lows
> temperaturewise.
>
> So what is happening? Isn't it true that the last time we had
> unusually warm (read that as: remarked upon fairly recently) we had
> (read that as "there was") a significant earthquake.
>
> Looks like we are headed the same way. Another thing to look out for
> are assertions of mists and fogs. They presage severe cyclonic storms
> over the tropics and just outside of them.
Of course it didn't take long for the mages to crawl out of the
woodwork when it comes to Usenet posts that are slightly unusual.
Apparently one of the following posters has a sense of humour. Much
good may it do them:
I always thought earthquakes were caused by farting cows
Only if the president is in Turkey, I think.
But if all the methane were ignited at once, it could trigger a new
clear winter
of discontent. That would stop the globular forming.
It did provoke the following response:
at my shit:
http://satellite.ehabich.info/hurricane-watch.htm
Which contained a link to a graphic of a cyclone called Dora.
I should have left it there but ever eager to please fools I got
hooked.
Having been sidetracked from what I should have been thinking about,
we ended up on both these newspgroups with almost no comment about the
tragedies in South America and of course, the one above.
Neither of which could have been prevented of course but perhaps
lessons might have been learned. (Not.)
New things learned?
A couple maybe.
First off I am too sensitive.
Let the trolls have the high ground. They will eventually find a cave
that suits them or a pit to fall into on their own.
I had a crick in my shoulder last night but as is usually the case a
computer problem at the same time. It's almost extrasensory if not
quite demonic. Perhaps if angels are watching I aught to start
controlling my language?
Anyway before I could call up a map for Madagascar's weather I had to
reinstall AOL then I found out that tornadoes had struck Florida, my
shoulder has eased off and the computer is working. (Almost, it just
threw a wabbler and rebooted. Fortunately Firefox was built with
Windows in mind and the post was saved despite Microsoft's usual
attentions.)
Now then where can I get an archive for thunderstorms in the Indian
Ocean...
Oh, yes; if there is a phase timed at or near 6-ish (Feb 2 05:45,
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/phase/phase2001gmt.html) keep
and eye on the Atlantic.
And to put them all together?
If the magnitude of earthquakes peak before you think it aught to
(http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/phase/phase2001gmt.html) start
making changes in the way you are looking at things.
I've got a list here somewhere...
....Now where did I put that data base...
Ah...
...hmmm...
No...
Mmmmm... where on earth...