19 Apr 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI've said it at least 3 three times now and you cannot or will not address the point. Why is that?
Wow it really is the best you can do.
You are the biggest crybaby on this site; constantly whining on and on and on about people "not addressing content", "making it personal" blah blah...and all you have done in response to my pertinent and on topic posts is reply with abuse and personal ridicule. Why is that?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI had a little time to spare this morning so I had a look at the data you presented. All I can say is [shakingthehead]'Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear'[/shakingthehead].
The scientific data is well known and understood and demonstrates an accelerated trend in the frequency of earthquakes over a magnitude of 6.99 for the given period. You can either accept it or deny or explain it by any means necessary.
This is from your link -
For example, between 1986 and 1996 (incl), a period of 11 years, there were "just" 15 earthquakes listed by USGS of magnitude 7.0 or greater.
Really? So I went to the USGS website to check their data. What I found was astonishing. The data is wrong, not just plain wrong, but 'off the chart' wrong. In 1990 alone for example, a single year, the USGS lists 18 earthquakes above 6.99!!!! Your guy/gal is claiming there were only 15 in 10yrs!!! This person is either incredibly poor at counting or just flat out lying. Compare the two links, it's embarrassing.
http://www.earth.webecs.co.uk/refns.htm
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/year/info_1990s.php
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by finneganOh my dear Finnegan you were called upon to substantiate your claim and could not and no wonder because there is no other epoch in history which adequately and reasonably can be construed as a truly global conflict prior to the first world war, where 'Kingdom rose against Kingdom and nation against nation'. We have our time frame.
Your questions is a time waster since we both know very well that Paul and the early Christians anticipated the imminent return of the Messiah, the probably insane author of Revelations certainly got into a froth over the prospect of avenging Nero's murderous treatment of Christians, and succeeding generations have produced an unending series of claims that ...[text shortened]... rrived on earth in our times, perhaps in a little town south of Glasgow? (Not even in America!)
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by FMFI think if you read to the end of the article you would understand who Michael Snyder is... a reporter, writer or blogger. It's a news story FMF with clippings from other newspapers, that's all.
It's written by Michael Snyder. He says:
"If you are familiar with my work, then you already know that I believe that we have entered a period of time during which we will see seismic activity on a scale that none of us have ever experienced before. This great shaking will combine with other factors such as financial collapse, geopolitical instability and civ ...[text shortened]... r with my work..." When he says "my work", is he referring his work in geology and seismography?
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by yoctobyteSo his "work" is telling people that the 'end is nigh' then, is that it?
I think if you read to the end of the article you would understand who Michael Snyder is... a reporter, writer or blogger. It's a news story FMF with clippings from other newspapers, that's all.
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHow has your organisation fared with its predictions regarding "1914"?
Oh my dear Finnegan you were called upon to substantiate your claim and could not and no wonder because there is no other epoch in history which adequately and reasonably can be construed as a truly global conflict prior to the first world war, where 'Kingdom rose against Kingdom and nation against nation'. We have our time frame.
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by finneganwhat sorcery and trickery is this?
Mathew 24:35-36 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven,[b]nor the Son, but the Father alone."
Reading this sentence carefully, I wonder if Jesus was qualified to make the prediction you claim?[/b]
First of all let us take a look at what was actually asked of Jesus.
While he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached him privately, saying: “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?”
This is a threefold question. The first deals with the destruction of Jerusalem (see the context and prior verses), the second concerns Christ's presence in Kingdom power and the third with the conclusion of the system of things.
Jesus proceeds to give the answer as a composite sign which rather than answer the questions directly provide certain details which the discerning could comprehend. The exact timing, or 'the day and the hour', he does not know but then again no one has claimed that this is the actual case despite your attempts to impute this to me. What he does provide are details which would mark 'the beginning of the end of the system rather than the exact day or hour of its end. The two are hardly synonymous as you have attempted to construe, why, I cannot say.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour link claims there were only 15 earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 6.99 for the period 1986-1996(incl), yet the USGS website lists 107 for the period 1990-1996(incl) alone. Thats quite a spectacular difference.
The scientific data is well known and understood and demonstrates an accelerated trend in the frequency of earthquakes over a magnitude of 6.99 for the given period. You can either accept it or deny or explain it by any means necessary.
Edit - In fact there 139 earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 6.99 between 1986-1996 according to the USGS.
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by yoctobyteI didn't "gather" it. Snyder explicitly referred to what he called "my work". Have I misrepresent what his "work" is? No, I haven't. As for the conversation here, it is about the data=trend claim that robbie made but it has been dismantled. Snyder's "work" has no bearing on the fate of robbie's claim except that his "work" could be used as an example to illustrate what "confirmation bias" means.
Is that what you gather? The article had some interesting snippets that I thought would contribute to the conversation.
Originally posted by Proper KnobSo what, they make it clear,
Your link claims there were only 15 earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 6.99 for the period 1986-1996(incl), yet the USGS website lists 107 for the period 1990-1996(incl) alone. Thats quite a spectacular difference.
Edit - In fact there 139 earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 6.99 between 1986-1996 according to the USGS.
List of earthquakes from Jan 1986 to Dec 1996 which are counted in this report.
1996 06 10 - Andreanof Islands, Alaska - M 7.9
1995 05 27 - Sakhalin Island - M 7.5 Fatalities 1,989
1994 06 09 - Bolivia - M 8.2 Fatalities 5
1993 08 08 - South of the Mariana Islands - M 7.8
1992 12 12 - Flores Region, Indonesia - M 7.5 Fatalities 2,500
1992 09 02 - Nicaragua - M 7.6 Fatalities 116
1992 06 28 - Landers, California - M 7.3 Fatalities 3
1992 04 25 - Cape Mendocino, California - M 7.2
1991 10 19 - Northern India - M 7.0 Fatalities 2,000
1990 07 16 - Luzon, Philippine Islands - M 7.8 Fatalities 1,621
1990 06 20 - Western Iran - M 7.7 Fatalities 50,000
1988 03 06 - Gulf of Alaska - M 7.7
1987 11 30 - Gulf of Alaska - M 7.8
1987 03 06 - Colombia-Ecuador - M 7.0 Fatalities 1,000
1986 05 07 - Andreanof Islands, Alaska - M 7.9
and they provide the sources
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/historical.php
and its not been claimed that these are the only earthquakes that occurred during that period as you have once again erroneously assumed in your ardour to attack the findings. Infact they make it clear that some have been ignored due to there being no record of aftershock.
19 Apr 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf the data is deliberately incomplete or not reliable in any other ways how can you be citing it or extrapolating trends from it?
and its not been claimed that these are the only earthquakes that occurred during that period as you have once again erroneously assumed in your ardour to attack the findings.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm going to ask this question before we continue, do you have some sort of learning difficulties or special needs because I refuse to believe anyone can actually be this dense?
So what, they make it clear,
List of earthquakes from Jan 1986 to Dec 1996 [b]which are counted in this report.
1996 06 10 - Andreanof Islands, Alaska - M 7.9
1995 05 27 - Sakhalin Island - M 7.5 Fatalities 1,989
1994 06 09 - Bolivia - M 8.2 Fatalities 5
1993 08 08 - South of the Mariana Islands - M 7.8
1992 12 12 - Flores Region, ...[text shortened]... nfcat they make it clear that some have been ignored due to there being no record of aftershock.[/b]