187/188 DAYS ? ---- WOW----Strong 7.9/8m long earthquake shakes Mexico City

Originally posted by GLontra
Don't try to change and spin the facts.

The "theory" NEVER said it can predict EVERY major quake in the world, nor said that every major quake is related to the "cycle".

The "theory" said: every 188 days, a large quake (above 7.0) happens somewhere in the world. It may happen 2 or 3 days earlier, or 2 or 3 days after the target date, but it ALWAYS happen.

Lol, I'm not changing or spinning anything. You're the one who said 7.5 after I posted 7+, and now you want to go back to 7.0 again?

Make up your mind--your'e the one who's changing the goal posts here, not me.

And in any case, the theory is still idiotic. Since it doesn't speak to ALL the earthquakes that happen outside of the cycle, THEN IT'S NOT A CYCLE. Get it?

If earthquakes happen on average 3 times a month, and when you have some dumb window that allows for + or - 10 days, then guess what--you can pick just about any number you want and you'll find you'll be close to the target.

A theory and a number that is so loosely interpretive explains nothing and means nothing.

Class dismissed.

One more interesting detail: at the time when the quake hit, it was already March 21 in China, Bangladesh, Japan and lots of other countries...

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
Two points:

1. The 188 day earthquake theory is not meant to explain all large earthquakes. Of course there will be other large quakes that do not fall on these days and are caused by other forces. Those that complain about cherry-picking the data do not seem to understand this distinction.

You haven't explained why there is a distinction though, just that there is one? That's my main issue.

I'm not trolling and I'm not denying the oddness of it but

1 People are, like it or not, cherry picking the data. You can't deny that. Earthquakes outside of the cycle are being ignored.

2 The Earth doesn't have a clock or calendar on it, as far as I know. So how would it know when one is 'due'?

who cares if tis 187-189 days, its still within the error of margin give or take a day or so! maybe earth has sped up its spinning a little more than we thought or not! anyway, i think that this was still bang on prediction since it was on the layline shown on the pacific coast, for an amature guess i say that its pretty BANG ON!! so hide under a rock all you naysayers!!!

reply to post by Chefspicy

so hide under a rock all you naysayers!!!

i like the way you spread love XD

reply to post by paratus


That is certainly an interesting little tidbit of information.




It may be off topic for some, but I like to check the magnetosphere during quake activity... can anyone tell me with the NICT simulation site is down for them as well?

www2.nict.go.jp...

Originally posted by camus154

Originally posted by GLontra
Don't try to change and spin the facts.

The "theory" NEVER said it can predict EVERY major quake in the world, nor said that every major quake is related to the "cycle".

The "theory" said: every 188 days, a large quake (above 7.0) happens somewhere in the world. It may happen 2 or 3 days earlier, or 2 or 3 days after the target date, but it ALWAYS happen.

Lol, I'm not changing or spinning anything. You're the one who said 7.5 after I posted 7+, and now you want to go back to 7.0 again?

Make up your mind--your'e the one who's changing the goal posts here, not me.

And in any case, the theory is still idiotic. Since it doesn't speak to ALL the earthquakes that happen outside of the cycle, THEN IT'S NOT A CYCLE. Get it?

If earthquakes happen on average 3 times a month, and when you have some dumb window that allows for + or - 10 days, then guess what--you can pick just about any number you want and you'll find you'll be close to the target.

A theory and a number that is so loosely interpretive explains nothing and means nothing.

Class dismissed.

Do you understand the concept of mathematical probabilities?

Let's say that I pick a random interval of 5 days, with a "target date" in the center of this interval...

Let me choose one random date... Hmmm... what about April 7?

OK, April 7. Let's imagine that I am PREDICTING that an earthquake above 7.0 in the Richter scale will happen on April 7, give or take 2 days.

Do you realize what are the probabilities that I am WRONG????

Do you realize what are the probabilities that NO earthquake above 7.0 happens in the 5 day period between April 5 and April 9?

The probabilities that I will be WRONG are VERY HIGH. It's over 90%.

So, if I'm NOT wrong, this is simply FANTASTIC and INCREDIBLE.

Get it?

To the Nibiru Fanclub: if Dear Destroyer is supposed to be approaching, then wouldn't it make sense that the earthquakes would be increasing in magnitude?!?!

Shouldn't this event have been greater than the last one, and then Japan before that?

If you slam a square peg enough times with a mallet, you'll eventually get to fit through the round hole.

I just read about 188 day pattern this morning..(I admit I did not read everything)...but still I'm pretty shocked...It's kinda freaky.

Somebody help me out ? I'm getting nothing on mainstream.
Peyton Manning blah blah blah.

reply to post by camus154


We didnt have a 7.4 back in October. LOL

Originally posted by GLontra
Do you realize what are the probabilities that NO earthquake above 7.0 happens in the 5 day period between April 5 and April 9?

The probabilities that I will be WRONG are VERY HIGH. It's over 90%.

So, if I'm NOT wrong, this is simply FANTASTIC and INCREDIBLE.

Get it?

There's only one slight problem with your entire example:

You left out how often these things occur.

Without that, you can't predict the probability AT ALL.

So your calculations and probabilities are utterly meaningless.

And since, as you yourself stated, this theory says NOTHING about all the 7+ earthquakes that happen "outside" the cycle, then the theory is just as meaningless.

Originally posted by gwydionblack
reply to post by paratus

 

That is certainly an interesting little tidbit of information.




It may be off topic for some, but I like to check the magnetosphere during quake activity... can anyone tell me with the NICT simulation site is down for them as well?

www2.nict.go.jp...

edit on 20-3-2012 by gwydionblack because: (no reason given)

yes.. i have not been able to access that site for almost a week now

use this site solarimg.org...

5 pages in and the thread has gone down the drain with arguing over a margin of error.

Originally posted by PassedKarma
5 pages in and the thread has gone down the drain with arguing over a margin of error.

Well no, it's not margin of error, it's confirmation bias and data selection actually.

Originally posted by aarys
reply to post by camus154

 

We didnt have a 7.4 back in October. LOL

Actually, you did.

reply to post by khimbar

1 People are, like it or not, cherry picking the data. You can't deny that. Earthquakes outside of the cycle are being ignored.

You are ignoring the information of the theory. It does not state that it accounts for ALL large earthquakes, but guarantees that an earthquake WILL occur in the window. There are a number of different things that cause earthquakes, the only thing is that these 188 day quakes obviously have a common occurring factor... which leads to...

2 The Earth doesn't have a clock or calendar on it, as far as I know. So how would it know when one is 'due'?

The Earth doesn't need a clock or calendar. All the theory is saying is that every 188 days, something must occur that causes an earthquake to occur. If proven to be true, I believe the next step would be to figure out exactly WHAT is happening. There are many theories, some which are more popular than others, but there are no definitive answers as of yet.

7.4
5.3
5.1
look to be subsiding

Wow, this it totally nuts. I had written off the 188ers as tinfoil hat nuts but I am having to rethink it.

Magnitude 6.2 - PAPUA, INDONESIA
This was 5 min prior to Mexico Quakes across the Ocean