Database shows rise in volcanic events in 2011, and an even sharper rise in 2012

reply to post by GLontra


I will ask again, where is the evidence that the Long Count said anything significant about 2012? You seem to keep ignoring this question.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


And who said I believe the Mayans said something about the end of the world in 2012?

Maybe some "powerful people" who knew about the 2012 events simply manipulated the story of the Mayan calendar, as a way to warn us, and create more awareness about the events that those "powerful people" somehow knew that would happen in 2012.

I really don't care if the Mayans predicted or not the end of the world in 2012. I only care about the fact that this "end of the world in 2012" is being talked about for almost 40 years now, since the 1970's.

If the Mayans didn't predicted it, other people predicted, more than 30 years ago. And that's all that matters, together with the FACTS that are CONFIRMING those predictions now.

reply to post by stereologist


Sorry, but I don't have time for your game of "point-to-point" answers. That's a waste of time, and is the main tactic the "skeptics" use to make a thread lose the focus, and make people don't think about the facts presented.

I'm not defending a thesis in the University, so, I don't care if some people don't agree with what I say.

Everytime a temperature hits a "record high" are we supposed to assume its abnormal and something is amiss?

There are peaks and valleys with everything. Doesn't mean it's the end of the world, neither literal nor metaphorical.

reply to post by GLontra


Therefore it stands that the claim of a a rise of volcanic events is a meaningless issue. At best this confirms that random events allow people to see patterns where there are no patterns.

reply to post by GLontra


The only one who made a 2012 prediction prior to 1984 was McKenna. His prediction does not relate to the end of the world. As for the others that have been predicting the end for 30 years they have been using a false representation of Mayan culture as their basis. The first to do so was Frank Waters, although his prediction used the old December 24, 2011 date as his book predated the GMT correlation. This book pretty mcuh established in the minds of the New Age and fringe crowds that the Mayan calendar ends with the 13th baktun. The 2012 craze started with Jose Arguelles who established many of the tropes we see even in modern 2012 predictions.

The fact of the matter is that 2012 predictions revolve around the Maya. Without the Maya the entire basis for 2012 predictions falls apart. Now I have two questions. The first I have asked before. The second is new. If these people were making legitimate predictions about 2012, channeling accurate information, or what have you why weren't these predictions being made before 1984? Second, if these predictions are accurate why do so few corroborate each other?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by GLontra

 

The only one who made a 2012 prediction prior to 1984 was McKenna. His prediction does not relate to the end of the world. As for the others that have been predicting the end for 30 years they have been using a false representation of Mayan culture as their basis. The first to do so was Frank Waters, although his prediction used the old December 24, 2011 date as his book predated the GMT correlation. This book pretty mcuh established in the minds of the New Age and fringe crowds that the Mayan calendar ends with the 13th baktun. The 2012 craze started with Jose Arguelles who established many of the tropes we see even in modern 2012 predictions.

The fact of the matter is that 2012 predictions revolve around the Maya. Without the Maya the entire basis for 2012 predictions falls apart. Now I have two questions. The first I have asked before. The second is new. If these people were making legitimate predictions about 2012, channeling accurate information, or what have you why weren't these predictions being made before 1984? Second, if these predictions are accurate why do so few corroborate each other?

I don't know, I'm not God, and I don't pretend to have answers to everything.

But the volcanoes are more active this year. That' all that I know...

reply to post by GLontra


They are more active than the mean? What is this more active mean?

One of the basic things that has to be decided is what is being counted? So what is being counted in t his more active claim?

Well, apparently nobody is interested in this thred, just the "serial debunkers" of always...

So, I have nothing more to add here.

Today, April 10th 2012, the number for 2012 so far is 45 events.

As of April 17th, we have:

Volcanic Activity - 35

Volcanic Eruption - 16

Total: 51

Your listing numbers. Would you like to offer some interpretation or is this just bumping a thread?

Originally posted by stereologist
Your listing numbers. Would you like to offer some interpretation or is this just bumping a thread?

There was never any attempt for "interpretation" in this thread.

The thread just state the obvious: there was increased activity in 2011, and even more increased activity in 2012.

This thread is about FACTS, not about "interpretations".

Are you feeling bothered because this thread was not "forgotten"?

reply to post by GLontra


The fact is that activity is not up. That is the fact.

Your claims were demonstrated to be false. Are you concerned about your continued promoting of a hoax?

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by GLontra

 

The fact is that activity is not up. That is the fact.

Your claims were demonstrated to be false. Are you concerned about your continued promoting of a hoax?

The fact is that the activity IS up, my claims were NEVER demonstrated to be "fake", and the only "hoax" here are YOUR fake "debunking" arguments.


YEARLY AVERAGE of events in the FIVE YEAR period from 2006 to 2010: 61 events per year.

Maximum number of events in a single year in the same period: 68 events.



Number of events in 2011: 112 events

Number of events in 2011 was 83% higher than the average of the previous FIVE years.

Number of events in 2011 was 64% higher than the maximum number of events in a single year in the previous FIVE years.



The number of events in the first quarter of 2012 indicates a pace that, if unchanged, will bring the total number in 2012 to 160 events or more.


So, there is nothing to discuss here. The volcanic activity is WAY UP in 2011 and 2012, compared to the previous FIVER YEARS period. This is a FACT, and there is nothing you can do to change it.

reply to post by GLontra


Can you provide the following information:
1. What is an event?
2. Where did you get the data?

The volcanic activity is WAY UP in 2011 and 2012, compared to the previous FIVER YEARS period.

That is your claim. This boils down to what you are counting.

So let's check what you are claiming.

well it's hard to say if they have been on the increase, but you can find some interesting data here.

www.volcano.si.edu...

this graph shows also some interesting data in that since 1950 with the exception on the mid nineties, it has increased beyond and seemingly average of 55 per year and much higher then the past highs of around 70.

reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

this graph shows also some interesting data in that since 1950 with the exception on the mid nineties, it has increased beyond and seemingly average of 55 per year and much higher then the past highs of around 70.

The line through the data is a best fit line. This line is very close to the mean. There are big outliers that would move the line significantly from the mean.

The plot is a count of events that are well defined. There is also justification as to why these events are counted.

Not a single episode of "ATS Recap" after this thread was posted...

can someone post an update on the numbers in 2012 using the link in the OP?? i tried it but nothing happened. not sure if it's my computer or me or the site.

thanks!