Solar Climate Change: Public Warning for 27th June 2nd July- Piers Corbyn

i can understand the possibility of plates being effected similar to the oceans being pulled by the moon.(or at least the logic behind the assumption) the problem is, predicting earthquakes in such a fashion isn't accurate location wise. also, it is impossible to know if his predictions are merely coinciding with natural earthquake activity, or is he actually on to something? time will tell i suppose.

reply to post by purplemer


I am also not an expert in many fields but I do know geology and the proven causes and effects of things in this field such as volcanoe's, earthquakes, landslides, floods, erosion, and others and because my science is not related to astonomy or meteorolgy does not mean that I don't understand what they do and their effects. Currently I know of no research ongoing in relation to solar and earthquakes but I do know scientists have studied this in the past and it was inconclusive, Berkely if I remember correctly were the ones who looked at it.

Scientists are actively searching for ways to predict earthquakes as it would save lives and destruction and if this was plausible in any way I would have heard about it. You would be surprised at some of the things they research in order to find causes of earthquakes.

There is a whole team right now searching the bottom of the Marianna Trench looking for stuff but solar effects just are not taking seriously.

In order to qualify this man as having any sort of credibility you would need to get a list of his specific predictions and see how well he has actually done. Predicting a magnitude 8 quake around Japan is far from extraordinary in and of itself so I'd like to see what's he's actually done.

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Advantage

 

Where ....as in location on the planet. He have an idea? It would be interesting to see if he is accurate on location.

hey, he does not do location, just a probable time frame...

Ahhhh gotcha. Well, that sort of takes his "accuracy in forecasting" down a bit. I can say with all confidence and accuracy that there will be an earthquake between July 1 and 17th... and Id be correct. WIthout location it seems like a guess. **shrug** who knows.

reply to post by kro32


The OP gave you some examples of what he's done...what, not impressed?? Ok. I'll sit up and listen to someone with a record like that, just to see if he's right again.

Originally posted by kro32

Originally posted by purplemer

Originally posted by kro32
I would like to see some of these predictions and see how specific they are. I don't know much about the solar part but I know geology and will tell you that there is no way that they can be predicted by any scientifc means. Not even in a general sence.

The only time one can assume there will be earthquakes is near a volcanic eruption

He is not using geology to predict earthquakes, he is using solar activity too. How can you say there is no way they can be predicted by any scientific means when you claim not to know any solar science....

Because I know geology and there is no scientific evidence in the slightest that solar activity has any effect on earthquakes whatsoever.

Do you know the amount of solar anything it would take to move something the size of one of the earths plates. It is simply not possible.

Earth Tides. If you read up on it you might learn something a bit new to you.

Originally posted by highfreq
At first i thought an earthquake prophet was just a popular fad, but some of these people are actually very intelligent, and accomplished in there respective fields of study. The solar geological correlation fascinates me, and though I always take these threads with a grain of salt it can't hurt to maybe mentally prepare oneself.....just in case.

Thanks for having an open mind. I used to be the same way...then I started to keep track of things.

Go back and look at the CME solar flare activity that is around the solstice, equinox, and stargate dates (example 8/8, 10/10...etc) for 2010, 2011.

It will be "enlightening"!

Regards and Nameste,

-Chung

this seems a little more creditable than the face book kid that's for sure.
thanks for posting the info ill be interested to see how accurate his predictions are over the next week or 2

A 6.6 earthquake is "massive"? Ok.

Since there are an average of 150 6.0+ earthquakes a year (about every 2.5 days) the odds are pretty good that one will occur in any given 5 day period. "Viola! I was right!"

Of course, since solar activity is on the rise it gets easier to "connect" earthquakes to it. It's like when you're getting in the shower (A) and the phone rings (B). Most of the time it doesn't happen but when it does it's really annoying and you are made particularly aware of it. Does it mean that getting into the shower induces someone (anyone) to call you at that moment? What about all those times you get into the shower and the phone doesn't ring? Is something preventing those people from calling at that moment? What about when the phone rings when you're sitting around doing nothing? Is the correlation of (A) and (B) of any significance?

Now, let's say it's your birthday and you've got a lot of friends and family. All these people are calling to offer you their best wishes. You're getting a lot more calls than you normally do. The chances are greatly increased that just as you step into the shower someone will call. On your birthday the chances of (B) following (A) are increased.

See what's happening? Two unrelated events which, when they occur simultaneously, you notice more than you normally would. Now if you increase the frequency of just one of those events. You increase the chances that both will occur at the same time.

Now, instead of getting into the shower we have an earthquake (A) and instead of a phone call we have solar activity (B). When there isn't much solar activity (solar minimum) there are just as many earthquakes as there ever are. Sometimes an earthquake follows solar activity and sometimes it doesn't. But what happens at solar maximum? That phone is ringing (B) a lot more often. Because there is more solar activity, the chances that an earthquake will follow it are increased, even though the earthquake would have happened anyway. The correlation is dependent upon the frequency of only one of the events. Now, if the occurrence of (A) and (B) increase and decrease together the correlation is stronger (though causation is still not implied). But in the case of earthquakes and solar activity that relationship is not seen. All we see is that sometimes an earthquake occurs after solar activity, the same way that sometimes the phone rings when you step into the shower.

Since we are moving toward solar maximum it can be expected that we will see more solar activity. Does that mean more earthquakes? Evidence does not seem to indicate so.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks for posting this. I'll be following this thread and this gut just to see his accuracy. His track record seem to indicate he may be onto something.

reply to post by Phage


He said in the video that the predictions were not based solely on the sun's activity, but how solar activity interacts with the moon - the combined effect on earth. it's interesting I think.

reply to post by Pilot

Interesting. Ok.

A hypothesis which "predicts" an earthquake somewhere on Earth within in a 5 day timespan is not very impressive. Or useful.

reply to post by Phage


Lately it seems like the entire globe ought to be on alert for something!

reply to post by kro32


as usual Kro
you are making tub bubbles again

In an interview published on October 13, 1989, one day before the start of baseball's 1989 World Series, Berkland predicted that an earthquake with magnitude between 3.5 and 6.0 would occur in the San Francisco Bay Area between October 14 and October 21.[3][4] The 6.9-magnitude Loma Prieta earthquake occurred on October 17, just before the start of the third game of the Series. Berkland claims that government officials told him not to make any more predictions, fearing mass panic, and he was suspended for two months from his Santa Clara County geology position in late October, 1989.

en.wikipedia.org...


Piers Corbins is using similar solar lunar trending
his track record is light years better then the MET office in britian for example
the global warmist hate the man..
haha
he is costing them their jobs.
...............................................................................................................
Corbin is a weather forcaster
the quake thing is just a side line...
watch to see who has the most run away pets...in the classifieds just prior to that time...
or does everyone else have to do all the work for youze

edit to add

the 1975 evacuation of Haicheng in China, just hours before a major earthquake, is often cited as a success story for animal prediction.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

reply to post by Danbones


OK
so nothings is perfect
prediction being one thing that of course isn't..
hell, some people can't even predict the past.....

a person has to use their head about such things...

don't put nuclear reactors in tsunami and fault zones,
and don't live down wind of them...

don't plan for will go right
plan for what will go wrong

Nothing is going to happen, my birthday is July 2 and nothing really ever happens then. The last thing I recall is the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. Seems to have been pretty quiet since. That is my scientific evidence.

reply to post by kro32

that may be what you think or feel, but thats not the truth.

Apparently this guy has a method that provides some accuracy, and theres some threads on ATS that talks about the correlation between sun activity and weather activity. Your wild if you think the sun doesnt play a role on the weather here!

Originally posted by kro32

Originally posted by purplemer

Originally posted by kro32
I would like to see some of these predictions and see how specific they are. I don't know much about the solar part but I know geology and will tell you that there is no way that they can be predicted by any scientifc means. Not even in a general sence.

The only time one can assume there will be earthquakes is near a volcanic eruption

He is not using geology to predict earthquakes, he is using solar activity too. How can you say there is no way they can be predicted by any scientific means when you claim not to know any solar science....

Because I know geology and there is no scientific evidence in the slightest that solar activity has any effect on earthquakes whatsoever.

Do you know the amount of solar anything it would take to move something the size of one of the earths plates. It is simply not possible.

Some claim that there is a correlation between sunspot minima and earthquakes, and considering that they're now predicting a long solar minimum this might be a good time to check that theory. I don't know what the strength of that correlation is but hey, it's worth looking at.

We don't yet know the effects of a weak solar minimum and the sun's magnetic field on the Earth's magnetic field, and maybe that has something to do with it. This minimum might wreak havoc with our climate but we now have the chance to learn tons about how these things all interact.


Corbyn is scarily accurate with his weather and climate forecasts. The London bookies got tired of losing money to him so they stopped accepting his bets. He has something like an 80% accuracy rate. He apparently takes lunar declination and other factors into account when making his calculations and predictions.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Pilot

 

Interesting. Ok.

A hypothesis which "predicts" an earthquake somewhere on Earth within in a 5 day timespan is not very impressive. Or useful.

Thank you for your reply. if they amount 6 earthquakes you give in a given year is correct then predicting a level 6 earthquake over a few days is not impresive. I thought he was trying to say that there could be a very serious earthquake in the given time frame.Considering the ones listed beforehand go up to 6.5. I presume he means something of greater severity...

reply to post by kro32

Thank you for you reply. I am not an expert either. I have a BSc in Environmental Science. That gives me a very limited understanding of the interactions of our biosphere. I dont have the answers, but I do know that our knowledge ifs very limited. So I remain open to different ideas because there is so much we do not know....

reply to post by Advantage


Hey I dont think he was saying there was going to be any earthquake, I think he was saying there is a greater probability of a serious earthquake between the given dates....