Why was the Haiti Earthquake was not predictable?
in [Relativity]
|
From: BradGuth on 14 Jan 2010 15:11 On Jan 14, 10:43 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 14, 12:36 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 14, 9:11 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On Jan 14, 10:59 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Your obfuscation and transference is noted. > > > > And what did I obfuscate? > > > Pretty much anything of GW and earthquakes as having to do with our > > moon. > > > > > Try instead being constructive, or the least bit positive. > > > > I did. I gave you a pointer to how to do a self-check to see if your > > > idea is worth pursuing. This is called constructive criticism. > > > In other words, we're never supposed to read and learn about anything > > old or new, so as to incorporate these mostly public funded research > > efforts as valid science along with our own investigative research. > > And we're supposed to ignore whatever those educated deductive > > conclusions of others, especially if it's also supported by those > > pesky regular laws of physics that any halfwit 5th grader could manage > > to replicate. > > > It seems that you are the perpetual mainstream mindset that's forever > > topic/author stalking and subsequently excluding/obfuscating upon > > anything of our GW and earthquake prone environment, especially as > > having to do with our trusty moon(Selene). > > > Is there some special faith-based or political agenda reasons as to > > why we're not supposed to figure out how to best deal with GW, or go > > about predicting those earthquakes? > > > > I see > > > no value in encouraging someone to pursue a pointless venture. If an > > > idea is pointless, it is helpful to try to help get you to understand > > > why it is pointless. > > > Oddly, you're in good company because, that's exactly what those > > Rothschilds, Big Energy plus most every other ZNR on Earth has to > > say. Your policy of do nothing and learn to live with it, as such > > certainly doesn't rock any of those rich and powerful mainstream > > boats, does it. > > > > Being original is not a virtue in itself -- > > > That's certainly good-news for you, because when was the last time you > > had anything original to offer? (how about never) > > > > homeless, park-bench mutterers are original too -- but being original > > > and RIGHT is another matter. But to be original and right, you have to > > > learn how to check whether your originality is right or wrong. > > > > PD > > > This is where the well-to-do stick-in-the-mud folks like yourself and > > other brown-nosed clowns of the same old mainstream status quo are not > > helping one bit, not that you ever intended to in the first place. > > > ~ BG > > Boondoggles, no matter how well intentioned, are not helpful. They > distract attention from more carefully thought out attempts. You owe > it to this effort to be more careful and prepared about your attempts > before launching them out there, because as it is, you are just > generating noise that does not help. > > PD Then by all means, you are free to constructively assist in this effort of better understanding what our moon(Selene) is capable of doing to us (as having something to do with gravity, motion and IR thermal considerations), especially while it's most earthquake trigger assisting whenever sufficiently aligned with the sun and Venus, which thank god doesn't happen too often. The total tidal stress imposed upon a given tectonic plate is how much/ km2? Perhaps this should also be expressed as force or stress imposed per km3. ~ BG
From: PD on 14 Jan 2010 15:29 On Jan 14, 2:11 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 14, 10:43 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 14, 12:36 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 14, 9:11 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On Jan 14, 10:59 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Your obfuscation and transference is noted. > > > > > And what did I obfuscate? > > > > Pretty much anything of GW and earthquakes as having to do with our > > > moon. > > > > > > Try instead being constructive, or the least bit positive. > > > > > I did. I gave you a pointer to how to do a self-check to see if your > > > > idea is worth pursuing. This is called constructive criticism. > > > > In other words, we're never supposed to read and learn about anything > > > old or new, so as to incorporate these mostly public funded research > > > efforts as valid science along with our own investigative research. > > > And we're supposed to ignore whatever those educated deductive > > > conclusions of others, especially if it's also supported by those > > > pesky regular laws of physics that any halfwit 5th grader could manage > > > to replicate. > > > > It seems that you are the perpetual mainstream mindset that's forever > > > topic/author stalking and subsequently excluding/obfuscating upon > > > anything of our GW and earthquake prone environment, especially as > > > having to do with our trusty moon(Selene). > > > > Is there some special faith-based or political agenda reasons as to > > > why we're not supposed to figure out how to best deal with GW, or go > > > about predicting those earthquakes? > > > > > I see > > > > no value in encouraging someone to pursue a pointless venture. If an > > > > idea is pointless, it is helpful to try to help get you to understand > > > > why it is pointless. > > > > Oddly, you're in good company because, that's exactly what those > > > Rothschilds, Big Energy plus most every other ZNR on Earth has to > > > say. Your policy of do nothing and learn to live with it, as such > > > certainly doesn't rock any of those rich and powerful mainstream > > > boats, does it. > > > > > Being original is not a virtue in itself -- > > > > That's certainly good-news for you, because when was the last time you > > > had anything original to offer? (how about never) > > > > > homeless, park-bench mutterers are original too -- but being original > > > > and RIGHT is another matter. But to be original and right, you have to > > > > learn how to check whether your originality is right or wrong. > > > > > PD > > > > This is where the well-to-do stick-in-the-mud folks like yourself and > > > other brown-nosed clowns of the same old mainstream status quo are not > > > helping one bit, not that you ever intended to in the first place. > > > > ~ BG > > > Boondoggles, no matter how well intentioned, are not helpful. They > > distract attention from more carefully thought out attempts. You owe > > it to this effort to be more careful and prepared about your attempts > > before launching them out there, because as it is, you are just > > generating noise that does not help. > > > PD > > Then by all means, you are free to constructively assist in this > effort of better understanding what our moon(Selene) is capable of > doing to us (as having something to do with gravity, motion and IR > thermal considerations), especially while it's most earthquake trigger > assisting whenever sufficiently aligned with the sun and Venus, which > thank god doesn't happen too often. > > The total tidal stress imposed upon a given tectonic plate is how much/ > km2? And why are you not capable of starting this calculation yourself? You tossed out a number earlier. How did you get it? Start first by finding out the energy deposited on the surface of the Earth by sunlight. You can Google that. Then let's say that any number we get from tidal interactions that is significantly less than that is not worth worrying about, ok? Deal? PD > > Perhaps this should also be expressed as force or stress imposed per > km3. > > ~ BG
From: Scott Campbell on 14 Jan 2010 15:46 Androcles wrote: > "Scott Campbell" <thundering_puddles(a)msn.com> wrote in message > news:3ek749.hqr.19.1(a)news.alt.net... >> Sanny wrote: [...] > Can I write [...] too? Doubtful. Have you cleared it with headquarters? You really need to quit sleeping through the meetings, man. -- Scott Campbell "I take lip-synching very seriously." - Sporty Spice
From: BradGuth on 14 Jan 2010 15:54 On Jan 14, 12:29 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 14, 2:11 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 14, 10:43 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 14, 12:36 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 14, 9:11 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On Jan 14, 10:59 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Your obfuscation and transference is noted. > > > > > > And what did I obfuscate? > > > > > Pretty much anything of GW and earthquakes as having to do with our > > > > moon. > > > > > > > Try instead being constructive, or the least bit positive. > > > > > > I did. I gave you a pointer to how to do a self-check to see if your > > > > > idea is worth pursuing. This is called constructive criticism. > > > > > In other words, we're never supposed to read and learn about anything > > > > old or new, so as to incorporate these mostly public funded research > > > > efforts as valid science along with our own investigative research. > > > > And we're supposed to ignore whatever those educated deductive > > > > conclusions of others, especially if it's also supported by those > > > > pesky regular laws of physics that any halfwit 5th grader could manage > > > > to replicate. > > > > > It seems that you are the perpetual mainstream mindset that's forever > > > > topic/author stalking and subsequently excluding/obfuscating upon > > > > anything of our GW and earthquake prone environment, especially as > > > > having to do with our trusty moon(Selene). > > > > > Is there some special faith-based or political agenda reasons as to > > > > why we're not supposed to figure out how to best deal with GW, or go > > > > about predicting those earthquakes? > > > > > > I see > > > > > no value in encouraging someone to pursue a pointless venture. If an > > > > > idea is pointless, it is helpful to try to help get you to understand > > > > > why it is pointless. > > > > > Oddly, you're in good company because, that's exactly what those > > > > Rothschilds, Big Energy plus most every other ZNR on Earth has to > > > > say. Your policy of do nothing and learn to live with it, as such > > > > certainly doesn't rock any of those rich and powerful mainstream > > > > boats, does it. > > > > > > Being original is not a virtue in itself -- > > > > > That's certainly good-news for you, because when was the last time you > > > > had anything original to offer? (how about never) > > > > > > homeless, park-bench mutterers are original too -- but being original > > > > > and RIGHT is another matter. But to be original and right, you have to > > > > > learn how to check whether your originality is right or wrong. > > > > > > PD > > > > > This is where the well-to-do stick-in-the-mud folks like yourself and > > > > other brown-nosed clowns of the same old mainstream status quo are not > > > > helping one bit, not that you ever intended to in the first place. > > > > > ~ BG > > > > Boondoggles, no matter how well intentioned, are not helpful. They > > > distract attention from more carefully thought out attempts. You owe > > > it to this effort to be more careful and prepared about your attempts > > > before launching them out there, because as it is, you are just > > > generating noise that does not help. > > > > PD > > > Then by all means, you are free to constructively assist in this > > effort of better understanding what our moon(Selene) is capable of > > doing to us (as having something to do with gravity, motion and IR > > thermal considerations), especially while it's most earthquake trigger > > assisting whenever sufficiently aligned with the sun and Venus, which > > thank god doesn't happen too often. > > > The total tidal stress imposed upon a given tectonic plate is how much/ > > km2? > > And why are you not capable of starting this calculation yourself? > You tossed out a number earlier. How did you get it? The centripetal force that's roughly equal to the gravitational force that exist between Earth and that pesky moon of ours. Why is that so hard for you to figure out? > > Start first by finding out the energy deposited on the surface of the > Earth by sunlight. You can Google that. Then let's say that any number > we get from tidal interactions that is significantly less than that is > not worth worrying about, ok? Deal? > > PD > > > > Perhaps this should also be expressed as force or stress imposed per > > km3. In other words, you agree with all the ZVRs and those Rothschilds on this one, by insisting that our moon has nothing measurably important to offer. Good for you, in thinking there's no point in trying to figure out whatever triggers earthquakes or global warming, as I'm certain all those families and communities that lost members of their own will understand your total lack of remorse, as well as your well- to-do lack of benevolence to boot. We should all be so lucky and as public funded as rabbi Saul Levy and yourself, so that we too could care less about others less fortunate. ~ BG
From: PD on 14 Jan 2010 16:08
On Jan 14, 2:54 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 14, 12:29 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jan 14, 2:11 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 14, 10:43 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 14, 12:36 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 14, 9:11 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> On Jan 14, 10:59 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Your obfuscation and transference is noted. > > > > > > > And what did I obfuscate? > > > > > > Pretty much anything of GW and earthquakes as having to do with our > > > > > moon. > > > > > > > > Try instead being constructive, or the least bit positive. > > > > > > > I did. I gave you a pointer to how to do a self-check to see if your > > > > > > idea is worth pursuing. This is called constructive criticism. > > > > > > In other words, we're never supposed to read and learn about anything > > > > > old or new, so as to incorporate these mostly public funded research > > > > > efforts as valid science along with our own investigative research. > > > > > And we're supposed to ignore whatever those educated deductive > > > > > conclusions of others, especially if it's also supported by those > > > > > pesky regular laws of physics that any halfwit 5th grader could manage > > > > > to replicate. > > > > > > It seems that you are the perpetual mainstream mindset that's forever > > > > > topic/author stalking and subsequently excluding/obfuscating upon > > > > > anything of our GW and earthquake prone environment, especially as > > > > > having to do with our trusty moon(Selene). > > > > > > Is there some special faith-based or political agenda reasons as to > > > > > why we're not supposed to figure out how to best deal with GW, or go > > > > > about predicting those earthquakes? > > > > > > > I see > > > > > > no value in encouraging someone to pursue a pointless venture. If an > > > > > > idea is pointless, it is helpful to try to help get you to understand > > > > > > why it is pointless. > > > > > > Oddly, you're in good company because, that's exactly what those > > > > > Rothschilds, Big Energy plus most every other ZNR on Earth has to > > > > > say. Your policy of do nothing and learn to live with it, as such > > > > > certainly doesn't rock any of those rich and powerful mainstream > > > > > boats, does it. > > > > > > > Being original is not a virtue in itself -- > > > > > > That's certainly good-news for you, because when was the last time you > > > > > had anything original to offer? (how about never) > > > > > > > homeless, park-bench mutterers are original too -- but being original > > > > > > and RIGHT is another matter. But to be original and right, you have to > > > > > > learn how to check whether your originality is right or wrong. > > > > > > > PD > > > > > > This is where the well-to-do stick-in-the-mud folks like yourself and > > > > > other brown-nosed clowns of the same old mainstream status quo are not > > > > > helping one bit, not that you ever intended to in the first place.. > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > Boondoggles, no matter how well intentioned, are not helpful. They > > > > distract attention from more carefully thought out attempts. You owe > > > > it to this effort to be more careful and prepared about your attempts > > > > before launching them out there, because as it is, you are just > > > > generating noise that does not help. > > > > > PD > > > > Then by all means, you are free to constructively assist in this > > > effort of better understanding what our moon(Selene) is capable of > > > doing to us (as having something to do with gravity, motion and IR > > > thermal considerations), especially while it's most earthquake trigger > > > assisting whenever sufficiently aligned with the sun and Venus, which > > > thank god doesn't happen too often. > > > > The total tidal stress imposed upon a given tectonic plate is how much/ > > > km2? > > > And why are you not capable of starting this calculation yourself? > > You tossed out a number earlier. How did you get it? > > The centripetal force that's roughly equal to the gravitational force > that exist between Earth and that pesky moon of ours. Why is that so > hard for you to figure out? The centripetal force is NOT roughly equal to the gravitational force between the Earth and the Moon. At best, the tidal force is 1/2 the *difference* in the gravitational force between the near face of the earth and the moon, and the far face of the earth and the moon. It is this difference that gives rise to the tides in the first place. Now that I've given you a solid hint, and since you calculated the force between the earth and the moon, surely you can calculate this difference. > > > > > Start first by finding out the energy deposited on the surface of the > > Earth by sunlight. You can Google that. Then let's say that any number > > we get from tidal interactions that is significantly less than that is > > not worth worrying about, ok? Deal? > > > PD > > > > Perhaps this should also be expressed as force or stress imposed per > > > km3. > > In other words, you agree with all the ZVRs and those Rothschilds on > this one, by insisting that our moon has nothing measurably important > to offer. I didn't say that. What I said is that we should calculate it and then compare that number to something we're not worried about. If the number is smaller than the one we're not worried about, then I don't see the point of worrying about the smaller number anyway. Do you? > Good for you, in thinking there's no point in trying to > figure out whatever triggers earthquakes or global warming, Oh, I'm all in favor of figuring it out. I just figure that if we can calculate for sure that the effect of the moon is smaller than sunlight, then that's one cause we can rule out. That's helpful, you see, because then we wouldn't be distracting everyone with a boondoggle about the moon if we learn that it can't possibly be the cause. That way, we could turn our attention to what the REAL reason for the earthquakes might be. Don't you think that makes sense? > as I'm > certain all those families and communities that lost members of their > own will understand your total lack of remorse, as well as your well- > to-do lack of benevolence to boot. > > We should all be so lucky and as public funded as rabbi Saul Levy and > yourself, so that we too could care less about others less fortunate. > > ~ BG |