It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Interesting predictive App for Eathquakes

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 05:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: scubagravy
a reply to: anonentity

True American is the only App i need



Damn. I'm just an App now.
I guess tomorrow I'll have to decide whether I'm an apple or an android. Aww jeez.




posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueAmerican

LOL, sorry that hurt you my friend. It was complementary. If i hear or see anything at all on the news, i'll logon here like nobodys business and see what you may have published.

You're a valued member, thank you.




posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 07:05 AM
link   
There's a twice yearly predictable EQ pattern, And in the time between alignments we experience a lull period, all this is because of an alignment between Planet X, the sun and earth. This is the best predictor we have so far! See Terral03.

Planet X (and Jupiter to some extent) are syphoning the Suns electromagnetic energy, so this explains the lack of activity on the sun at times..of coarse we need to keep an eye on the sun, and I'll be keenly reviewing the link provided. Thanks for that Op! Just wanted to offer Some input.

edit on 25-1-2017 by EndOfDays77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77

What have you done?

Please don't make this about planet x...

Hehee. It's hard enough to get people to associate space weather as an enhancement to natural tectonics without throwing nibiru in there.
edit on 25-1-2017 by Bobaganoosh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bobaganoosh
a reply to: anonentity

Been running the app since beta.

It just broke 80% accuracy.

Can't wait to attend the conference in April.
Any chance you want to post the next 10 predictions here so we can see if the 80% holds up with 7-9 of those being true? I watched the video and I didn't hear an explanation of the criteria for calculating accuracy, but I bet I can beat 80% with this prediction:

There will be at least one earthquake in California every day.

I doubt there will be any days without earthquakes in CA in the next year, but even if there are 1 or 2 of them, my accuracy rate is still better than 99% with 363/365 days having earthquakes. My prediction method uses nothing but recent historical statistics:

earthquaketrack.com...

California, United States has had: (M1.5 or greater)

24 earthquakes in the past 24 hours
145 earthquakes in the past 7 days
1,153 earthquakes in the past 30 days
7,878 earthquakes in the past 365 days
That's just M1.5 or greater, but instead of just 24 earthquakes in the last 24 hours, if you count all earthquakes there were likely over 100 in the last 24 hours.

What I've seen some people do on earthquake predictions is keep widening the gap for matches until I don't even know what criteria they are using for a match anymore. If the prediction is for a magnitude 7 on January 29th, what if there's a magnitude 6 on January 30, does that count as a correct prediction? What about a magnitude 4 on February 2, does that match the prediction? Exactly how are the lines drawn on what counts as a match for calculating accuracy?

In my prediction I drew the lines so wide that I can achieve 99+% accuracy, so the criteria used for the accuracy calculation matter.

edit on 2017125 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Criteria are predicting M 6+. It also must strike within an alert zone.

The prediction. Maps are posted to Twitter, but I don't use Twitter so I can't post them. I will try to take screenshots within the app and see if that works. Gimme a minute to get today's map.



Lol. Easier than I thought.

Red and yellow are alert zones, high and medium risk respectively.

He will sometimes use stars as well, if the OLR maps are showing some high energy in a specific location.
edit on 25-1-2017 by Bobaganoosh because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Bobaganoosh
Thanks. What kind of time frame is specified for the prediction? Is this supposed to happen within 24 hours, 48 hours, 1 year?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 01:13 AM
link   
I believe it is 72 hours. He says anything beyond that would instill a sense of complacency, and wouldn't do any good as far as preparation would be concerned.

I forgot to mention in my previous post that anything downgraded by USGS below 6 is considered a miss as well. That has happened a couple of times where initial reports are 6.1 or so, then downgraded for whatever reason.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 01:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Bobaganoosh

So this app isn't available to all yet?
You have a beta version?

I'd like to have this app!
What is the twitter account where the maps are posted?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bobaganoosh
I believe it is 72 hours. He says anything beyond that would instill a sense of complacency, and wouldn't do any good as far as preparation would be concerned.

I forgot to mention in my previous post that anything downgraded by USGS below 6 is considered a miss as well. That has happened a couple of times where initial reports are 6.1 or so, then downgraded for whatever reason.
72 hours? When does that 72 hours expire in that prediction? When was it made?

If it's 72 hours, I'm not sure what this app is telling me that I don't already know without it. Here's what I know without the app:

We expect an earthquake of 6.0 magnitude or above approximately every 2.4 days or every 57.6 hours on average, and most of those will be in the areas shown on that map, though he could have made the Chili line slightly longer and the risk extends more to the east over the top of India as seen here:

www.bgs.ac.uk...


If I just look at this seismic hazard map and say we expect an earthquake of 6.0 magnitude or above approximately every 2.4 days on average, and most of them will be in the red zones, how do I know that's not a more accurate prediction than what you're getting from the app? I don't have to consider coronal holes or anything other than historical statistical frequencies for 6.0 and above and the known seismic hazards.

a reply to: violet
According to the video it went live late in December 2016, but was in beta before that.

edit on 2017126 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 03:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Your methods could very well be more accurate than the app. I would also assume that you have been working on your method for much longer than a year.

Many of us simply don't have the knowledge or time to analyze the statistical history as you have done. So, think of the laymen such as myself. I could get on the PC and dig around for hours, likely not even fully understanding what it is I'm looking for, or I could spend three bucks on an app that does the hard work for me. I know that's a lazy rebuttal, but it satisfies my passing interests in the subject.

I also hope that over time the modeling improves to a point that it saves lives, so a chance at that was worth my meager investment.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 02:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Bobaganoosh
Geology and Earthquakes have been an interest of mine as a hobby but never professionally so I tend to defer to professionals in the field for their expertise and research, and as the video in the opening post says they are very skeptical about our ability to predict precise timing of earthquakes in the short term. I'm very skeptical of the hypothesized link between coronal holes and earthquakes, and to say I'm skeptical about anything labeled with the "electric universe" or "thunderbolts" camps would be an understatement since they seem to reject the very foundations of mathematics used to make modern science what it is. The leaders generally seem to have a dearth of quantitative predictive models and the followers seem to love that there's no math but that to me also means there's no science.

The People Who Believe Electricity Rules the Universe

The electric universe concept does not meet the National Academy of Sciences’ definition of a “theory,” which is “a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence” and “can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed.”

In physics, theories need math. That’s how you predict, gather evidence, verify, disprove, and support. But EU theory isn’t big on math. In fact, “Mathematics is not physics,” Thornhill said. While that equation aversion makes the theory pretty much a nonstarter for “mainstream” astronomers, it is the exact thing that appeals to many adherents.


Scientists feel very confident we can calculate built-up stresses since the last major earthquake from precision measurements of movement of tectonic plates measured by satellite to make long term statistically based predictions, so using that approach they tell us the probability of California having a major earthquake in the next 30 years is almost 100%, and other probabilities like the ones I cited which I can't take credit for, I'm just paraphrasing the work of professionals from the link I cited. I presented some very rough statistics but the link I posted explains how to calculate statistical probabilities more accurately using a poisson distribution, so if you really wanted more precision you could use that instead of the rough figures I cited.

For saving lives, what we can do personally is look at the map I posted and see if we live in one of the red zones, or even a yellow or orange zone, and be prepared for a disaster with emergency food, water and other necessities on hand at all times.

Emergency Management

Putting together an emergency kit does not have to be difficult or expensive. We recommend that your kit has enough supplies to last you seven to 10 days. Its also could to have a smaller to-go kit in case you need to quickly leave your home. Having kits at work and in your car is also a good idea. To get you started, here are five things that are absolutely necessary to have in an emergency kit.

Water

1 gallon per person per day
1/2 for drinking, 1/2 for cooking/sanitation

Food

Store food that's high in calories and has a long shelf-life
Consider meal replacement bars, canned foods and dry food items that don't need to be cooked to eat
Make sure to include food you like to eat

Light Source

Avoid candles to minimize fire risk
Include safe light options like a battery-powered flashlight with extra batteries or a hand-crank flashlight
Light sticks are a long-lasting source of light that are inexpensive and fits easily into any size bag

Warm & Dry Clothes

Include at least one change of clothing
If you get wet, it's important that you get dry as soon as possible because moisture pulls heat away from your body (wool or synthetic clothing that wicks moisture away from your body is recommended)
To stay warm and dry you can also pack extra blankets, a tarp or rain gear

First Aid Kit

Include items for basic care like adhesive bandages, antiseptic wipes, gauze pads, scissors, tweezers and pain-relief medication
Make sure to include medications and equipment specific to your needs

Following those guidelines is one of the simplest things we can do to save lives because it's hard to live a week without water and some people might be without a water supply for that long after a major earthquake.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I think you are just a little jealous that the predictions work.




posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 07:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: KrzYma
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I think you are just a little jealous that the predictions work.
Someone said they work 80% of the time, but he doesn't show the 20% that didn't work.

Meanwhile my prediction accuracy has consistently been 100% and I haven't had a miss yet so my 100% clearly beats his 80% for raw accuracy.

I would expect him to do better than 80% if he's taking events we know happen every 56 hours on average and then saying they will occur within 72 hours, how is that not nearly a slam dunk without knowing anything else?

edit on 201729 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join