The MATRIX of 188 - LEY LINES of the 188 DAY Mega-Quake Cycle Discovered & linked to NEW MADRID QUAK

Originally posted by WaitingFever
reply to post by truthseekr1111

 

I told you so

I'm very curious to see if November 1st of 1755 matches this 188 day theory. It would be very interesting to see.

No it doesn't.

However, as I explained, what actually might be more interesting is that the quake hit directly on one of the main lines.

which raises even more interesting questions

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by truthseekr1111

whats cherry-picked or silly? I fail to see any evidence or argument to support that claim.

0 for 1

You are choosing to select quakes that are not on the 188 day cycle and choose to select quakes identified by the USGS and to also state that you reject the USGS when the quake is well below the cutoff.

actually, NO i'm not claiming the SIZE itself is validation itself alone in this case, since only the Mexico quake's size can better fit the pattern,,,at least for NOW, until the window concludes. I'm simply pointing out that we're still within the cycle's pattern and that these could be part of the cycle's foreshocks if not just because these quakes also hit directly on a key ley line of or part of the cycle.

You are 0 for 1.

Originally posted by stereologist
which proves or disproves WHAT???? I still fail to see how that disproves or proves anything here.

These so-called lines cover huge areas of real geological features that produce quakes.

SO WHAT??? besides, you give no context or logic for why it invalidates anything.

You are 0 for 2.

Originally posted by stereologistand your point is??? it proves or disproves WHAT???

The lines are not lines at all.

right... they're invisible and simply represent a pattern thats going on which the human "eye" cannot PHYSICALLY detect. Or in other words, as the presentation postulates... the map is a visual interpretation, translation of DATA within what might be described as computer language or binary "images" so to speak.

The images on the screen you're looking at, and letters you're typing, are in essence 1's & 0's.

Whats the process of SIGHT?

can you SEE MAGNETISM and its processes or mechanics? just because you can't visually, doesn't mean nothings there or not occurring.

You are 0 for 3.

Originally posted by stereologist
nothing you've said yet, addresses or even debunks the video and the evidence presented.

Nothing provided supports the wild eyed claims of the video.

nothing you've provided supports your wild eyed CLAIMS about the video or what i've said about the video

You are 0 for 4.

Originally posted by stereologist
Using curves that cover much of the world's active earthquake zones and cherry picking data makes for a silly story of no value.

claiming the video is simply about "curves covering much of the worlds active EQ zones" or that its cherry picking data when you haven't shown whats being cherry picked, makes for a silly argument against the video, however lacking it is in substance and context.

reply to post by truthseekr1111

actually, NO i'm not claiming the SIZE itself is validation itself alone in this case, since only the Mexico quake's size can better fit the pattern,,,at least for NOW, until the window concludes. I'm simply pointing out that we're still within the cycle's pattern and that these could be part of the cycle's foreshocks if not just because these quakes also hit directly on a key ley line of or part of the cycle.

So this is grasping at straws as well as cherry picking.

That's 0 for 1.

SO WHAT??? besides, you give no context or logic for why it invalidates anything.

It's quite obvious that an obvious baloney story such as this needs to pretend some validity by overlapping large parts of known active areas.

That makes 0 for 2. I think that needs to be upgraded to 0 for 3 since this is an ongoing issue.

right... they're invisible and simply represent a pattern thats going on which the human "eye" cannot PHYSICALLY detect. Or in other words, as the presentation postulates... the map is a visual interpretation, translation of DATA within what might be described as computer language or binary "images" so to speak.

That makes no sense at all. The ley lines are not lines. The broad, wide sweep across the globe is meant to cover areas known by science in order to trick the gullible.

The images on the screen you're looking at, and letters you're typing, are in essence 1's & 0's.

Completely irrelevant.

can you SEE MAGNETISM and its processes or mechanics? just because you can't visually, doesn't mean nothings there or not occurring.

More irrelevant commentary.

Now 0 for 5.

nothing you've provided supports your wild eyed CLAIMS about the video or what i've said about the video

It's painfully obvious that it does.

Now 0 for 6.

claiming the video is simply about "curves covering much of the worlds active EQ zones" or that its cherry picking data when you haven't shown whats being cherry picked, makes for a silly argument against the video, however lacking it is in substance and context.

I did not state that the video was cherry picking. I stated that you were cherry picking and you did.
I stated that the ley lines are not lines. They broad sweep of the lines is cover up for the fact that the features are not linear.

Originally posted by stereologist
www.abovetopsecret.com...]post by truthseekr1111

actually, NO i'm not claiming the SIZE itself is validation itself alone in this case, since only the Mexico quake's size can better fit the pattern,,,at least for NOW, until the window concludes. I'm simply pointing out that we're still within the cycle's pattern and that these could be part of the cycle's foreshocks if not just because these quakes also hit directly on a key ley line of or part of the cycle.

So this is grasping at straws as well as cherry picking.

evasion noted.

That's 0 for 1, again.

SO WHAT??? besides, you give no context or logic for why it invalidates anything.

It's quite obvious that an obvious baloney story such as this needs to pretend some validity by overlapping large parts of known active areas.

evasion of the evidence, issue and challenge again noted.

since if it was obvious baloney, the overwhelmingly majority let alone more than just you and 1 or two posters here, would support what you're asserting not to mention would have already presented an intelligent counter-argument showing exactly how and where whats been validated, is false.

Originally posted by stereologist
That makes 0 for 2. I think that needs to be upgraded to 0 for 3 since this is an ongoing issue.

then I guess that makes you 0 for 4

right... they're invisible and simply represent a pattern thats going on which the human "eye" cannot PHYSICALLY detect. Or in other words, as the presentation postulates... the map is a visual interpretation, translation of DATA within what might be described as computer language or binary "images" so to speak.

That makes no sense at all. The ley lines are not lines. The broad, wide sweep across the globe is meant to cover areas known by science in order to trick the gullible.

Even if what I've already explained (to which you've given no logical response refuting) wasn't valid, the fact that the 188 day pattern consistently correlates to dates where rare and unusual 7, 8 and 9 mag quakes occur as far back as 200 years, alone refutes your claim and supports what the video claims.

The images on the screen you're looking at, and letters you're typing, are in essence 1's & 0's.
Completely irrelevant.

no, its your opinion its irrelevant.

can you SEE MAGNETISM and its processes or mechanics? just because you can't visually, doesn't mean nothings there or not occurring.
More irrelevant commentary.

Now 0 for 5.

the fact you have no logical response at all, doesn't prove what I've said is irrelevant.

which means you're 0 for 6

nothing you've provided supports your wild eyed CLAIMS about the video or what i've said about the video
It's painfully obvious that it does.
Now 0 for 6.

the fact that you seem to be the only one with that OPINION and argument, suggests otherwise.

making you 0 for 7

claiming the video is simply about "curves covering much of the worlds active EQ zones" or that its cherry picking data when you haven't shown whats being cherry picked, makes for a silly argument against the video, however lacking it is in substance and context.

yeah, and the fact everyone knows australia and the where the quake hit is such an ACTIVE fault zone!



the fact that EVERY major quake on the 188 cycle has hit on these "imaginary" ley lines is such an OBVIOUS coincidence! Nothing interesting to see here folks!



I bow to your insightful wisdom, deductive reasoning and immense knowledge O wise one! lol

I did not state that the video was cherry picking. I stated that you were cherry picking and you did.
I stated that the ley lines are not lines. They broad sweep of the lines is cover up for the fact that the features are not linear.

What exactly am I cherry picking then?

your argument is broad sweep with no specifics or examples

which puts the final tally 0 for 8

and theres the magic number 8 again

lol

Anyone keeping up with the quake warnings put out by the video's author? I googled some of them and seems they've been extremely accurate. In fact the quake that just hit Chile yesterday happened on the exact date he warned back on 2/9/12! wow. So he's also warned about a significant or unusual seismic event that will occur on another date(s) he's warned about this month and the location being around the east coast on or near one of the MAIN but imaginary (according to stereo) ley line intersection points. Not too many intersection points to choose from on the east coast if you look at the MAP!

hmmmm

reply to post by truthseekr1111


did you get my pm regarding the aussie quake?

Originally posted by bellagirl
reply to post by truthseekr1111

 

did you get my pm regarding the aussie quake?

yes bella... did you get my reply??

Originally posted by truthseekr1111

Originally posted by bellagirl
reply to post by truthseekr1111

 

did you get my pm regarding the aussie quake?

yes bella... did you get my reply??

thanks mate, just read your reply. i am sending you another message but buggered it up will reply soon

reply to post by truthseekr1111


You still continue to use USGS when it suits your purposes and you dismiss it when it doesn't. That's cherry picking. That is what is happening here.

reply to post by truthseekr1111

since if it was obvious baloney, the overwhelmingly majority let alone more than just you and 1 or two posters here, would support what you're asserting not to mention would have already presented an intelligent counter-argument showing exactly how and where whats been validated, is false.

The ley lines is simply a hoax with no merit. It relies in a meaningless attempt to overlay some of the active tectonic boundaries discovered by science.

reply to post by truthseekr1111

Even if what I've already explained (to which you've given no logical response refuting) wasn't valid, the fact that the 188 day pattern consistently correlates to dates where rare and unusual 7, 8 and 9 mag quakes occur as far back as 200 years, alone refutes your claim and supports what the video claims.

That has not been done. Your making this up now. Where was the recent quake? Why are some of the dates already given not on 188 day intervals? I and others have already pointed this out in previous posts.

reply to post by truthseekr1111

no, its your opinion its irrelevant.

Please provide any relevancy for this 1s and 0s claim. Please show how the imaging modality is of interest.

reply to post by truthseekr1111

the fact you have no logical response at all, doesn't prove what I've said is irrelevant.

The entire thread is about cherry picking. It is about faking data in some cases of the 188 day interval. It is about irrelevant discussions of magnetism.

reply to post by truthseekr1111

the fact that you seem to be the only one with that OPINION and argument, suggests otherwise.

This is a logical fallacy. Two mistakes. One is that it is opinion. Two that numbers are meaningful. It's the data that is important and that data strongly suggests otherwise.

reply to post by truthseekr1111

yeah, and the fact everyone knows australia and the where the quake hit is such an ACTIVE fault zone!

Strawman argument. I never made any statements about that. What I did point out was that the quake was not a M6 or greater.

reply to post by truthseekr1111

the fact that EVERY major quake on the 188 cycle has hit on these "imaginary" ley lines is such an OBVIOUS coincidence! Nothing interesting to see here folks!

Choosing so-called lines that overlap much of the quake zones of the world simply shows a reliance on science. Skipping over most of the quakes that do not fit the cycle is cherry picking. Claiming 188 day cycle when quakes do not hit on those days is fibbing.

reply to post by truthseekr1111


So we are left with a failure of this hoax of ley lines:
1. not lines
2. cherry picking
3. missed dates
4. irrelevant issues tossed in
etc.

just posted to google: wow
--------------------------------------
Uh Oh!

Whats this??!?!?!

Yet another Large Quake on the EXACT DATE of 3/27 I've warned about for over a MONTH now...

earthquake.usgs.gov...
6.0 2012/03/27 11:00:44 39.866 142.116 10.0 EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN

other stations say 6.4

quakes.globalincidentmap.com...
6.4 Tuesday March 27 2012, 11:00:44 UTC 68 minutes ago East coast of Honshu, Japan. 112.0 GeoScience Australia

and WHERE is JAPAN?

Oh YEAH, thats right... its DIRECTLY ON a MAJOR LEY LINE of 188!

But of course, its all just another COINCIDENCE

So far, nearly EVERY date i've warned of for LARGE & MAJOR Quakes this month have been DEAD ON

Now on 3/27, yet another big quake hits Japan during the 188 pattern & cycle's window

Is this a foreshock for a MAJOR quake about to hit? Or worse,,, a GREAT QUAKE?

Well, I've been concerned and repeatedly warning that 3/27 is a KEY date during this current cycle of the 188 day pattern

3/29
3/31

being the final two key dates of the 188 pattern I've explained.

So lets see what happens

A quake of M6 or better happens almost every other day on average.

That's like the flip of a coin in picking a day on which a M6 or better hits.

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by truthseekr1111

 

You still continue to use USGS when it suits your purposes and you dismiss it when it doesn't. That's cherry picking. That is what is happening here.

NOPE, its called showing CONTRAST with other stations that have different readings.

and since there's evidence that shows USGS has manipulated data and/or failed to correct errors in its data, anyone with a brain who's investigated this GOVERNMENT controlled source, knows that other data must be considered IN CONTEXT.