Re: Scientific Prediction: Central America: 9/14 to 9/28

On Sep 13, 7:27 pm, shoppersplace <marclevitt...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Please go to my website,www.earlyearthquakes.com
to read my theory of predicting earthquakes.
<snip>

Meager site It says you have developed a 'theory' that says that
quakes on one side of the world cause subsequent quakes on the
opposite side. But you don't provide any of the data that you used in
the development of your 'theory'. In science, an idea that's just
pulled out of the air without being built on supporting data is called
a 'guess', not a theory.

Apparently your methodology for proving your 'guess' isn't actually a
methodology either. Your site says that you predicted that an
Indonesian quake would cause an earthquake of unknown magnitude in the
Columbia-to-Peru area. When such a quake didn't happen, but a small
M4.1 hit the Sea of Cortez in Mexico, you took credit because it was
"close enough". What kind of methodology is it where you claim that
you are correct when clearly you are not. How can anyone accept any
of your 'facts' when you make such statements?

Fun touch, though, in your paired maps showing the opposite side of
the world for any location.

Summary: Incorrect use of scientific terminology. Bad methodology.
One clever map (but not clever enough).
Overall grade: F

--mirage

.