7.7 Okhotsk Earthquake AGAIN at beginning of Earth, Venus,

Originally posted by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
reply to post by ttimez

 

FYI, he did cite one of Vidale's papers.

That's an unrelated reference in an unrelated paper for this discussion which is about his alignment paper and the Stevenson reference.

Thanks anyway.

Originally posted by cenpuppie
So many trolls and yet very few bothered to read the work. They are shooting it down with the good ol, your just wrong because i'm right. Typical.

It's interesting to say the least. I wonder if this is one of the reasons why the ancients where so good at astrology. Even the Hindu's concept of age is disturbing close to the truth from their Vedas. Then you have the Mayan calender (which was so good that those that defeated them started using it).

A prediction model for the window of 6.0+ EQs. It could simply be coincidental however. Then again not. Hard to say because plate tectonics not to mention man made factors need to be factored in. Like when the chinese made that damn that created that ginormous lake.

edit on 15-8-2012 by cenpuppie because: (no reason given)

Way I understand it, Omerbashich uses 6-7 only for demonstrating his mechanism (as manifested in form of a pattern), not for any prediction. 7+ are the real deal and he separates these in his alignments paper. The Greek confirmation is awesome IMHO, and it also goes for 7+.

Originally posted by Olivine
Melyanna, you state in your opening post:

This mechanism cannot predict earthquakes, but it can identify ALL times of the year when a Mega Quake is possible and identify ALL times of the year when a MEGA quake is not possible. For anyone interested in Earthquake causes, mechanisms, and predictions, we can definitely state that we know at least one cause.

I read through the PDF by Omerbashich you linked on page 1, and found something curious.

Let's look at pages 21 and 22 of the linked PDF, showing his forecasts for magnitude 6+ earthquakes, and subsequent 100% accuracy.

Here is his graph of long "alignments" and associated earthquakes for March:

(click thumbnail to enlarge)

I notice that every day of the month was included as being capable of producing a magnitude 6 or higher quake.

This is his graph for May 2012:


Again, every day of the month is included as being capable of producing a mag 6+ quake.

If you look at every graph from January through June 2012, (pages 21-22 of referenced PDF) there are only 6 days NOT capable of producing a large earthquake. 174/180 days were. According to Mr. Omerbashich's hypothesis 96.67% of the days during the first half of this year were.
And guess what? He nailed it!

I'm not sure how this shows that these "long alignments" cause earthquakes. He could just as easily say that these "long alignments" will cause a random spot on the globe to experience cloud cover, and have the same 100% accuracy.

***I have "alignments" in quotations because Mr. Omerbashich uses several "alignments" that (according to his paper page 22) are 'proximal'. He states

Note that proximal long alignments, marked with an *, occur when heavenly bodies are non-strictly aligned: when bodies never align themselves or they do on occasion, all while staying aligned to within the +/- 5 arc degrees.

IMO, he seems to be playing loose with his alignments to keep his 100% accuracy intact.

If you cast a wide enough net, you're certain to catch fish...

If I extrapolate out to a full year, there are 12 days that should be worry free concerning a large quake. I'm failing to see the usefulness of his hypothesis, let alone a causal mechanism.

edit on 8/15/2012 by Olivine because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/15/2012 by Olivine because: (no reason given)

Amazing how people keep misreading stuff that's written in plain English.

To repeat myself from the previous post: IMO, Omerbashich uses 6-7 only for demonstrating his mechanism (as manifested in form of a pattern), not for any prediction. 7+ are the real deal and he separates these in his alignments paper. The Greek confirmation is awesome IMHO, and it also goes for 7+.

Click here for more information.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

Except Omerbashich's proposed mechanism in this thread isn't astrology.

No one has to date dissected and attempted to refute his paper.

edit on 15-8-2012 by wujotvowujotvowujotvo because: (no reason given)

Which makes you wonder, why isn't astrology called astronomy, and astronomy called astrology?

I mean, logos means science in Greek, why do we refer to making horoscopes as if its science (and ridicule it at the same time), but we can't call it science when we study the heavens scientifically? What we are told to be astronomy is actually astrology and viceversea.

So were TPTB telling us for all these centuries that astrology is actually science, except it's being hidden from us? Omerbashich's research seems to point in that direction. Which is probably the reason why a government big shot would bother coming to a conspiracy internet forum and trying to debunk the undeniable (as in : math equations).

I have to be away for a week at my son's wedding, so if any outstanding questions come up, I will answer when I get back.

Have fun y'all.

Melyanna

What about Jupiter?...

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by CaticusMaximus
reply to post by Melyanna

 

A 7.7 is NOT a "mega" quake.

Sensationalist tripe.

It is sensationalist.

I too thought that a 7.7 quake was not 'mega', until I looked it up.

From the MacMillan Dictionary:

mega-quake noun a very powerful earthquake, which measures more than 7 on the Richter scale

I was surprised. I figured megaquakes would be much more powerful.

do you realize how powerful a 7.7 actually is or how the richter scale works?????

from wiki

"A Richter Magnitude Scale is any of a number of ways to assign a single number to quantify the energy contained in an earthquake.

In all cases, the magnitude is a base-10 logarithmic scale obtained by calculating the logarithm of the amplitude of waves measured by a seismograph. An earthquake that measures 5.0 on the Richter scale has a shaking amplitude 10 times larger and corresponds to an energy release of √1000 ≈ 31.6 times greater than one that measures 4.0.[1]

Since the 1970s the use of the Richter Magnitude Scale has largely been supplanted by the moment magnitude scale in many countries. However, the Richter Magnitude Scale is still widely used in Russia and other CIS countries."

So basically every 1 you go up is 10 times more powerful than the one below with an enormously larger release of energy. A 7.7 is #ing huge. Excuse the language but it is no small potatoes. The scale is orientated the way it is for simplicity, how ever many misconstrue the system as it appears in such small numerical value.

I'm not trying to insult you so I apologize if it comes off that way, but a 7.7 is a pretty big deal.

Dr Mensa wasn't wrong about Elenin at all. The problem is that Elenin inexplicably disappeared(my guess is aliens zapped it) before it ever had a chance to make the final and most major alignments. How can you disprove his theory about Elenin, when it never got a chance?

Therein lies the problem with all of these predictions and theories: if the aliens interfere and don't show, then we will never know anything(you can even use aliens to explain macro-evolution and the lack of transitional fossils, but that's another story. The point is aliens should always be considered a factor).

All this science stuff tends to blow my mind a bit, but I have been on to the solar system live page today and had a look at where all the planets are in relation to each other.

If you discount the sun, the Earth is more or less in line with Mars, Saturn and Uranus. Now also consider todays date ( here in the uk its the 16th of August ). Didn't I see a post somewhere warning about the 16th?

If thats the case, and if there is any truth in this theory, something big should happen today, but I am not going to swear my life on it.

Only trouble is, if something does happen, is it prophecy or sheer coincidence?

Will wait and see.

Solar system live map:

www.fourmilab.ch...

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by paradisepurple

I had never heard of Mensur Omerbashich before and was surprised to read RationalWiki's description of him, it's so scathing it almost seems as if someone is trying really hard to discredit him....

Agree.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by np6888
Dr Mensa wasn't wrong about Elenin at all. The problem is that Elenin inexplicably disappeared(my guess is aliens zapped it) before it ever had a chance to make the final and most major alignments. How can you disprove his theory about Elenin, when it never got a chance?

Therein lies the problem with all of these predictions and theories: if the aliens interfere and don't show, then we will never know anything(you can even use aliens to explain macro-evolution and the lack of transitional fossils, but that's another story. The point is aliens should always be considered a factor).

Obviously ELEnin is still there, or some leftover pieces of it, we just don't see them but they travel in the sun's ecliptic so they make alignments longer than 3 days. Just as Omerbashich predicted in his paper.

See his plot for August, it's an ELEnin alignment that has caused the 7.7! So if you really believe he's right (as you say you do) then you should take it from the master himself, correct? seismo.info...

Originally posted by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
reply to post by Blaine91555

 

Except Omerbashich's proposed mechanism in this thread isn't astrology.

No one has to date dissected and attempted to refute his paper.

edit on 15-8-2012 by wujotvowujotvowujotvo because: (no reason given)

They can't. Because, how do you refute math equations where left and right side are equal?

Long live the math!

Originally posted by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
Most of his math/mechanism is there on georesonance - reference 2, just below the Nature article cited for tectonics, which the pdf is here for fulltext billt4.com/Documents/PhysicsHandouts/NatureEarthEvolution.pdf (pg 264 in article, 4 of 5 in pdf reader)

Surprising to see as if Omerbashich didn't detail them.

It was published when the journal was by French Lavoisier SAS, now under Taylor and Francis.

Omerbashich, M. (2007) Magnification of mantle resonance as a cause of tectonics.Geodinamica Acta 20 (6):369-383

www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3166/ga.20.369-383

arxiv.org/abs/physics/0612177

sites.google.com...

True.

You forgot the paper called Scale invariability, where he gives math live I've never seen before. He expresses gravity in terms of speed of light, G via c: arxiv.org...

If that's not for Nobel then nothing is!

Click here for more information.

-

-