Someone is predicting quakes........

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
Suspicious0bservers earthquake watch validated again.

Planetary conjunctions combined with large coronal hole coincides with Russian an Indonesian earthquakes. You can decide for yourselves if it is just coincidence or related, and think about why mainstream science doesn't talk about what should be significant news in the field of earthquake prediction.

What planetary conjunction do you blame

You seem to avoid this question when asked!

reply to post by wmd_2008


I have said I'm not the one making the predictions, I just happen to agree with them and thought it was an interesting message to pass along, and I have said the said conjunctions are in the videos, have you watched them? Do I have to summarize everything in the videos after thoroughly summarizing the main points? This Indonesian quake was related to a Mars-Venusian conjunction combined with a large geo-effective coronal hole.

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

This Indonesian quake was related to a Mars-Venusian conjunction combined with a large geo-effective coronal hole.

Venus and Mars on the other side of the Sun that day!!!

Originally posted by wmd_2008


Venus and Mars on the other side of the Sun that day!!!

Thanks genius, no need to get excited.

Yes, Venus and Mars were lined up on the other side of the Sun that day, so it falls under the category of "heliocentric" alignments, it doesn't matter if they are on the same side of the Sun as earth or the opposite side.

Do you understand the term equillibrium and what happens when equillibriums are disturbed?

Just because we notice a correlations between planetary alignments and/or coronal holes and earth based earthquakes doesn't mean the correlation is invalid because we cannot explain it.

This is how science works, and how new discoveries are made, and I might add usually by scientists who are not afraid to go outside of consensus.

An anomaly is first observed, something which cannot be explained by present theories. Then hypostheses are formulated. That is the stage where we are at now, having recently observed the anomaly - is anyone in the scientific community paying attention? Suspicious0bservers has put forth some hypostheses for the observed anomalies. Next they need to be rigorously tested before any theories can be put forth.

Can you draw an imaginary line in the picture below between the earth, the Sun and Mars and Venus? That is what is meant by a heliocentric alignment, which Suspicous0bservers has hypothesized is a more likely time for larger earthquakes, especially in conjunction with geo-effective coronal holes - and viola we had two significant earthquakes. Seems to me the predictions are pretty much bang on. If you're having trouble following I suggest you watch the videos a few more times.

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


Actually, you can't say it's "bang on"

If a person grabs a deck of cards and starts tossing them at a hat, eventually they'll get one to land in the hat.

You (or whomever) need to show consistent results. This means looking at past data where the same situation is there, and whether or not there were any significant quakes, or not.

Then you have to look at that data and see how it stacks up:

How many times when these conditions were present, did earthquakes happen?
How many times when these conditions were present, did earthquakes NOT happen?
How many times when these conditions were NOT present, did earthquakes happen?

If you can show that the majority of the time when the planets and coronal holes are "aligned" that major earthquakes happen the majority of the time, then you might be on to something.

Anything else is wild conjecture, because right now what you and the SO are saying is the same as saying: "A guy got shot in the chest and didn't die, therefore every time someone gets shot in the chest, they are not going to die."

In other words, you're jumping the gun.

reply to post by eriktheawful


I'd like to see the figures for the last solar maximum, the period between 2000 and 2002.

I bet the "predictions" fall apart...

reply to post by eriktheawful


All those stats on are the first page, did you read the OP? Here are the predictions stats once again, there have been 7 uptick "watches" and 100% of those have seen upticks, does that seem random to you?

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE

Can you draw an imaginary line in the picture below between the earth, the Sun and Mars and Venus?

No, not a straight line , maybe two straight lines, Earth - Sun, Sun - Venus - Mars.

How is that any sort of alignment even on a 2D pic.

Just put a ruler or piece of straight paper through Earth and the sun and that is all that aligns.

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


Yes I did, and it's NOT good enough. It's not enough data.

You (or whomever) need to go back years, and years with the data.

What part of that did you not understand?

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


When someone makes a claim don't always believe their claim or data without checking.

Sun Coronal Hole.

CH549 trans equatorial 2013.01.03

Earthquakes worldwide

Earthquakes Jan 3rd 2013

Coronal hole facing Earth and NO repeat NOT one mag 6.0 Earthquake that day.

Lets look at the planets on that day.



Lots of lines can be drawn between the Earth other planets yet NO above 6 mag quake that day.

This is a useful tool

www.solarsystemscope.com...

A 3d model of the solar system you can rotate zoom change time date etc.

reply to post by eriktheawful


Like I said above, its not proof of anything, just a very interesting anomaly, seems like a correlation, and a good place to start a new hypothesis.

What's wrong with you? You used to be so civil, get new marching orders, or is this a new Erik?

reply to post by wmd_2008


I see below a coronal hole, becoming geo-effective around midday April 5 UTC, and the Russian quake was on April 5, 1pm UTC.



I am very glad to see you are taking these predictions seriously, and would like to thank you for your interest and participation in this thread.

Originally posted by PlanetXisHERE
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

Like I said above, its not proof of anything, just a very interesting anomaly, seems like a correlation, and a good place to start a new hypothesis.

What's wrong with you? You used to be so civil, get new marching orders, or is this a new Erik?

Nothing is wrong with me at all. But then I don't like it when people claim that I don't read the OP of a thread. I ALWAYS read not only the OP, but the entire thread of ANY thread I post in. Always.

And I am being civil. I'm telling you that the data shown proves nothing and is only, (as you are now saying), an interesting coincidence.

For it to be anything more than that, it has to be shown that this happens over and over.

reply to post by eriktheawful


Well, it seems a little more than coincidence, but too early for a theory, but a good place to begin a new hypothesis, as I said in this post:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Anyway, I'm glad its the same old Erik, you always were one if the nicest ones attached to me.

North Korea and now Iran. Was the one in North Korea a underground nuke test? There has been several EQ's in Iran over the last few years.

A 6.1 magnitude earthquake killed at least three people in a sparsely populated area in southern Iran, state TV reported on Tuesday.

The report said the earthquake struck the town of Kaki some 96 kilometers (60 miles) southeast of Bushehr, a town on the Persian Gulf that is home of Iran's first nuclear power plant.

The Iranian media originally reported that the quake hit nearby Khormooj.

SOURCE

Interesting. We just had a failed "lamestream" science attempt to debunk Suspicious0bservers observations. Funny how it has come out within days of me posting this thread on ATS.

Here is the debunking attempt:

link to debunking attempt

One of Suspicious0bservers suscribers responds to the article:

This was just posted “No link between solar activity and earthquakes” at phsy.org One of the arguments is that there was little solar activity for the Sumatra earthquake occurred on boxing day in 2004. Well on a cursory look, there was a center disc earth facing coronal hole starting around Dec 22, full moon on the 25th and some planet conjunctions.

Suspicious0bservers comment to the above response:

Problem is that only factors in solar activity. You correctly state the factors they missed, but ALSO - we got hit with a tremendous cosmic ray burst... one of the largest ever recorded.

Other Suspicious0bservers comments/responses on the article or to subsribers comments on the article:

It's not my hypothesis... period. I even said here that was NOT what I use for factors. I have shown the books published 100 years ago absed on ancient science - EVERYONE using this stole it from our ancestors. "I am not special" "I am not any smarter than you" "All this is freely available for you to find" - my repeated quotes regarding this work. (I took the liberty of eding out the "Fail" comments)

NOBODY, and I mean nobody, should mistake the strength of my assertions as arrogance; those who have been here, observed diligently, and done their homework are very aware of the manipulation of facts to sway public opinion... and we are frustrated.

Suspicious0bservers has focused on the correlation between coronal holes and/or planetary alignments with earthquakes, these stats are in the OP on the first page. However, this attempt at debunking talks mostly about something else:

One theory is that a rise in solar activity, like sunspots, solar wind speed, or magnetic storms could trigger more, or larger, earthquakes.

which has little in common with what Suspicious0berservers has been observing in his EQ and coronal hole/planetary alignments.

Here is his Youtube response to the article, at about 20 seconds in:

Suspicious0bervers called a minor watch for yesterday due to a minor coronal hole and mimimal blockage of the hole by umbral fields and was validated once again with 2 x 6.0+ EQ's.

His prediction for the rest of the month is here, we should get a downtick after Monday of this week, until the 19th when we have more conjunctions. Of course a single large quake during this time will not refute his observations, as anyone familiar with stats knows you do not need 100% correlation to prove a theory, just as you do not need 0% correlation to disprove a theory.

Here are the upcoming alignments:



Here he differentiates between a minor and major uptick EQ watch:



Let us hope if there are large 6.0 EQ's the damage and loss of life will be minimal or zero.

Here is today's video discussing it all:

Suspicious0bservers posted a video yesterday to go over his methodology and record for those who are interested:



Eyes open, no fear!

Here is person what originally doing this from long time ago, planetary alignment, the sun, weather, coronal hole, sunspot, CME's, cyclone etc etc ..

Also he predicting EQ's all the time, others just use info from him and that's not go0d ..

You all need to be thankful to this person and not like this advertising some you-tube channels of copy "work" and originally already predicted EQ's for planetary alignment 2013 or solar influences ..

When someone make some prediction before him that's only noteworthy, also I'm not advertising my own channels and I'm not that person

www.solarwatcher.net...

"Skyywatcher88"

www.youtube.com...

"thebarcaroller"

www.youtube.com...

Planetary Alighment / Earthquake Watch 2013

www.youtube.com...

Planetary Alighment / Earthquake Watch 2012

www.youtube.com...

Planetary Alighment / Earthquake Watch 2011

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by MariaLida


Thanks. I'll go through these when I have some more time to see if they are talking about the same factors. Remember Suspicious0bservers never claimed to be the original one to call attention to these factors, in many of his earlier videos he showed pictures of texts decades old or older that talked about the same phenomenon - that he gave much credit to.

So he has freely admitted that before, he just seems to do a better job than most of actually documenting it, and also does a better job of putting together the stats that seem to back up his assertions.