View Article & Comments

In case you missed it in the previous R5 discussion, here are my findings for the year so far:

"So, a quick look through the figures for 2012 to date.
41 6.5+ EQ
19.5% (8) fell in an R5 period
29.2% (12) fell in an extended R5 period

There have been 23 R5 periods so far
30%(7)had an M6.5+ EQ
39%(9)of the extended periods had an M6.5+

The R5 periods have covered 17.6% of the year so far and 30% of the year with an extended R5.
With 41 EQ's you would expect 7 EQ's to fall in an R5 period and 12 to fall in an extended R5 period.

The results for the year so far seem to show nothing better than chance."

Elim & Ulric

cognitive dissonance!

One of may favourite topics, good job you can spell:)

The math on the outcome does not seem to fit the forecast.

You say that Piers only has 1:5 R5 with an EQ M6.5 correct

What are you adding to the outcome for the chance?

The first throw of a six sided dice to land on what you call would be 1:5 (one chance in getting it right and five you don't)

If you wanted to make a call for your numbers to be correct on a 6 sided dice TWICE in a row would be 6 x 6 -1 = 1:35, and so on

Piers, for argument sake is making a call for the first month for a 17% spread of 30 days.

The second month, as per the second dice, is not as simple as saying the same 17% is over 60 days or three month for 90, and so on.

You have to build in another factor, as all you would be doing is looking at the results using a ONE MONTH hindcast.

A 1:5 return for Piers would be one month in five correct

Your saying Piers dice throw over ten months would result in him having 2 correct results in 10?

Piers has better results then this ratio, and thats because you have not built in a chance factor.

What you have done is to say if Piers had the FIRST two months correct then his results are taken as being spread over 10 months for the same risk each month.

After the FIRST month his task is harder, and so on.

The last two months have been very good, and yet by your calculations that would indicate pior to this period he was very poor, and that is not the case.

Elim

Yes I confirm the 41 EQ, how many were after shocks?

Of those, what % did you apply on the following EQ on his high R5+ ratings

18 M7+

7 M7.5+

2 M8+

I made it 90%, so maybe M6.5 is too low

M6.5+ had 41 events. 19.5% (8) fell in an R5 period. 29.2% (12) fell in an extended R5 period (Expected 7 and 12)

M7+ had 16 events. 37.5% (6) in an R5 period. 50% (8) in an extended period. (Expected 3 and 5)

M7.5+ had 6 events. 17% (1) fell in an R5 period. 33% (2) in an extended period (Expected 1 and 2)

M8+ had 2 events. 0% fell in an extended R5 period. (Expected 0.6)

I could not resist the below comment extract from Piers about the M8+ and I note that Piers had put up an R4 for this event with an expected M6.5, as you know he has changed this parameter so if he has a M6.5 it should be for an R5 and NOT an R4. Regretfully there have been several R4's that should have been R5's. The way to overcome this is to look at R4+ instead, and then your have a better stat, not that you want one of those:) This event was just that ONE EVENT with an after shock, and as I stated on the 41 M6.5 how many of those were after shocks

Solar Climate Change: The "Easter Shake Down" is one day late!: Updated by Piers Corbyn

WOW! Although not wishing such on anybody this confirms our R4 quake warning for ~8-10th NORTHERN HEMISPHERE Pacific Ring preferred:

http://climaterealists.com/?id=9413

Details on USGS:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php

M8.6 (that is enormous)
Location; Latitude +2.3deg (ie 2.3 degN) Indonesia confirming Pacific ring, Northern Hemisphere (if only just)
Depth 22.9 Km
Date and time 11th 08:38:37s UT within our +/-1day uncertainty of 8-10th (in this case within half a day = close edge period see below)

The depth puts it in the DEEP rather than shallow event category. Such a large quake at that depth is enormous energy. This backs up the comments by our main monitor(s) that our R4 and R5 QV quakes appear to be DEEP events.

It was preceded one hour earlier by an immensely deep 132km quake of M5.3 about 2000 miles away in the Banda sea, which was probably connected.

Timings note.

Since a measurement of one unit must be uncertain to half a unit we should really do three categories of timing

(a) narrow period eg 8-10th
(b) close edge period +/- half day eg 7.5 to 10.5 eg THIS ONE
(c) wider +/- one day which would be 7-11th full days.
also we might try and put timing to half a day in future because sometimes I am not sure which way to move a boundary to get it onto a specific date.

I suggest also have a look at previous CR post and last few comments - link above. Note
(i) The fact there wasn't much on the sun other than the Earth facing coronal hole supports our view that such is important and visible action is not the key - see my note to Emmet.
(ii) The Russian Kamchatka forecasted quake was not this, but they've given themselves until June 30th.

I strongly urge - and I make no apology for saying so - people who want to follow or support this work to buy quake or weather forecasts because it is only through such sales ANY of this is possible.

Given the almost total control of CO2 ideology on funding it is very unlikely we will ever get any funding for science that works.

For full Quakes forecast for April is available on
=> Extreme Events Rest Of World
AND AS AN EASTER/APRIL GIFT ALSO WITH
=> B+I 45day (inc 30d) forecasts AND
=> EUROMAPS (pressure scenarios and Words)
The link is:

http://www.weatheraction.com/wactmember5.asp

I thank all who have subscribed in the past and THANK YOU IN ADVANCE if you now decide to also subscribe.

I suggest rather than continue discussion on last quake entry people comment via this one.

Cheers Piers

ADMIN EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Kevin Mannerings (Twitter) on Apr 12th 2012, 1:42 PM EDT
Earthquake statistics for 11 April on USGS are not yet fully reviewed, so these comments are preliminary. However, two points Piers Corbyn is making appear to be confirmed. There was a swing from shallow to deep quakes and a swing to the northern hemisphere on 11 April. This contrasts with Corbyn's predictions for February, which also showed a big swing to deep quakes but initially in the southern hemisphere, as he predicted.

The big quakes in Indonesia itself were, according to the USGS not deep. However there were ten deep quakes (>30km) on the same day with several very deep quakes from 100 to 500 km deep.

Here are the USGS figures for the big quakes.

8.2 2012/04/11 10:43:09 0.773 92.452 16.4 km deep OFF THE WEST COAST OF NORTHERN SUMATRA

8.6 2012/04/11 08:38:37 2.311 93.063 22.9 km deep OFF THE WEST COAST OF NORTHERN SUMATRA

Would like to say that my statistics have been done during rare lulls in other work and do not yet have the quality and rigour expected of scientific analysis. Anyone interested in helping on an open basis can get in touch.

That being said, there is exciting preliminary evidence that when solar wind is buffeting the earth's magnetic shield from coronal holes as predicted by Corbyn, there is an increase in deep quakes which is significant and deserving serious study.

There is also the possibility of using Fourier analysis to find out whether there are other rhythmic factors at work apart from the solar wind.

Please note that this work is at a very early trial stage.

Kevin Mannerings

Comment edited by Kevin Mannerings (Twitter) on Friday April 13, 2012 at 11:39 AM EDT
ADMIN EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Apr 12th 2012, 10:26 PM EDT
Further comment from Piers (just back from the Kent Freedom Movement meeting in Gravesend which was attended by the local Member of Parliament and had good discussion on quake matters, weather+Climate and HAARP (US GOV artificial influencing of ionosphere and...)

Thanks for that Report Kevin.

So it seems we can say - SO FAR - and we now have a string of results Feb, March and start April.
When our SLAT7(Q) forecast predicts R4 or R5 quake events they have come:
- in the periods predicted (within half a day, and usually in tight period);
- in the hemisphere of earth predicted (in all cases so far);
- and are extra major (eg M6.5+) when we have warned of that;
- and (and this is apparent thanks to Kevin's monitoring) are associated with deep quake events although the main big hit result itself might not be (very) deep.

Quake-Volcano trial, Red Weather warnings and Tornado-thunder risk forecasts (RTQ forecasts) are available via links in my posting above either alone or with other weather forecasts

At the KFM Meeting I was asked about HAARP and confirmed that HAARP is real and is being used to influence the ionosphere (and other things?) for secret purposes.
As to whether it could set off weather or earthquake events I said I thought it could only do that IF the natural stage was already set for events to happen.

We at WeatherAction now have a fair number of successful predictions of major quakes and many of extreme weather events and it is unlikely that HAARP have been switching on just to give us a quake or storm!
Nevertheless since earthquakes and extreme weather storm events are results of critical processes 'waiting to happen' and are triggered by the huge energies in the solar wind (but which are small compared with the light radiation from the sun) it IS possible that some events could be made to come early or changed by artificial influences - eg HAARP (or cloud seeding**) - at critical times, which although, tiny compared with solar wind flux could make a difference in the right place at the right time.
All were urged to watch this space.
[**cloud seeding - getting clouds to drop rain or snow early by dropping catalytic droplet forming substances in them - silver iodide or solid CO2 (cheaper!) is real]

Aside. I note someone on twitter said that HAARP could (but is this true?) be used to destabilise the electronics of rocketry and that the North Korean rocket just crashed.

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Friday April 13, 2012 at 2:42 PM EDT
ADMIN EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Apr 17th 2012, 2:12 AM EDT
AND Now the next WeatherAction.com Quake warning trail period 16-17th is confirmed.

=> http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Maps/10/290_-35.php
M6.7 CHILE MAJOR EARTHQUAKE 17th 03:50ut
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php

CONFIRMS WeatherAction Major Quake Warning 16-17th - See Sec5
http://www.weatheraction.com/displayarticle.asp?a=449&c=5
This is the biggest quake since some aftermath of the Indonesia massive hit 5 days earlier - on 12th

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Tuesday April 17, 2012 at 2:20 AM EDT

Comment edited by Co2sceptic (forum) on Monday December 17, 2012 at 9:00 AM EST

Elim

The original R4 forecast is on this link

Solar Climate Change: Is Earth's Easter period (8th - 10th April) due for a shake down?: Updated by Piers Corbyn

Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Apr 7th 2012, 8:08 AM EDT
Thanks for post.

Sums for kids over Easter!
The first two periods were confirmed and we've worked out the probability of simply that happening by chance - A short problem for kids over Easter:

http://www.weatheraction.com/displayarticle.asp?a=445&c=5
ADMIN EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Apr 9th 2012, 2:22 AM EDT
Impressive Coronal Holes moving to center of solar disc for April 9th as we predicted. Coronal holes image is for 8th which means the biggest one will be Earth-Facing (EF) on 9th, the middle of our 8-10th period.

http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?day=09&month=04&year=2012&view=view

Note the official forecasts say to expect solar wind from these holes to hit Earth ~12-13th. This may be true but our work shows the important time for (earlier) influences giving Eartthquakes is when the holes are EF, give or take a day.

Now watch out for major quakes, mainly in Northern Hemisphere, as in forecast above.

For full Quakes forecast for April go to link below.

The Quakes Forecast is available on
=> Extreme Events Rest Of World
AND AS AN EASTER/APRIL GIFT ALSO WITH
=> B+I 45day (inc 30d) forecasts AND
=> EUROMAPS (pressure scenarios and Words)

http://www.weatheraction.com/wactmember5.asp

Thanks, Piers

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Monday April 09, 2012 at 4:00 AM EDT

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Monday April 09, 2012 at 7:43 AM EDT

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Tuesday April 10, 2012 at 11:05 PM EDT
ADMIN EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Emett Kay (Twitter) on Apr 10th 2012, 1:08 AM EDT
So by EF earth facing you specifically mean centre of disc longitudinally? And that once in that position the high speed solar wind stream emitted becomes quickly/immediately geoeffective?
ADMIN EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Apr 10th 2012, 3:57 PM EDT
Emmett, that is often the important position (longitudinally, yes) seen but the reasons why might not be as simple as that to explain the timing. There are electromagnetic as well as solar wind effects all bound together. Fast solar wind is more important than slow for this stuff.
Piers
ADMIN EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Apr 10th 2012, 11:02 PM EDT
IMPORTANT EARTHQUAKE FORECASTING ADVANCES NEWS (April 10th).

The International EarthQuake+Volcano Prediction Center (IEVPC) Warn the Russian Far East (Kamchatka peninsula) is likely to suffer a quake and Pacific Tsunami.
They say: "A major earthquake and possible tsunami will strike between now (April 9th) and the end of June 2012. Immediate preparations should be taken.:

http://www.ievpc.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/cwnkamchatkastage6announcement040912.pdf

THIS WARNING IS IN LINE WITH OUR WEATHERACTION WARNING above issued two weeks earlier for the PRESENT period.
If this and other IEVPC warnings are reliable some long range specific location forecasts will become possible.
Our Weather Action forecasts are specific about timing and hemispheres. The IEVPC work uses local warning signs to say a particular location is vulnerable.
These two forecasts can be combined to give the likely time windows - eg Northern hemisphere R4 periods - for this specific earthquake.
This means that the first period for which the Kamchatka peninsula is vulnerable is around now 8-10th April, give or take a day after that a serious hit is unlikely until the next R4 Northern Hemisphere risk hit.

To get the full 'RTQ' forecasts of world (hemisphere) quake risk go to

http://www.weatheraction.com/wactmember5.asp

Earthquake risk is part of 'Extreme Events Rest of World' forecasts which are also inclusive with B+I 45day and full Euromaps 30day subscriptions.

USG Quake reports are on:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/quakes_big.php

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Tuesday April 10, 2012 at 11:10 PM EDT

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Tuesday April 10, 2012 at 11:48 PM EDT
EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Co2sceptic (forum) on Apr 11th 2012, 6:20 AM EDT
Piers, the Earth has just had a "one day late" Easter Shake Down.

Latest 8.7

Large Aceh quake triggers Indian Ocean tsunami warning - BBC News
ADMIN EDIT | REPLY | REPORT Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Apr 11th 2012, 11:06 PM EDT
Easter shake-down within half a day - and what a shake
As now posted elsewhere on CR -
along with Monitor Report and report of discussion at Kent Freedom Movement meeting on 12th April :

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=9424

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Friday April 13, 2012 at 2:21 PM EDT

Guys

I have used a NEW tag so you can look information up on THIS YEARS M7.5+ EQ, just click it and you will have as much info as you need (inc. the Piers Corbyn Red Warning forecast), I will try and find time to have a second tag for this years EQ>=M7 <M7.5 later

Earthquake (>=M7.5) 2012

Looking at R4+ (R4 & R5)warning periods so far this year.
32%(113)days were covered by an R4+ warning.
56%(197) days were covered by an extended R4+ period.

30% (12) of M6.5+ fell in an R4+ period. Expected = 13
56% (23) of M6.5+ fell in the extended period. Expected = 23

Still seeing nothing but chance I'm afraid.

I noticed you have NOT added anything for the math adjustment and also did not make any comment on the highest EQ of the year that you say was zero and Ulric failed to list!!!!!

What 'adjustment' do you want to make to the maths?
The largest EQ (April 11th) fell during an extended R4 period. It was a zero when looking at R5.

Elim

The math ajustment

First month would be 18% chance

After the first month the odds for it to just be all down to luck/chance changes

What your saying is that it Piers calculations remain at 18% each month.

If it is down to luck/chance then after the first month he has less luck/chance and so on, after a few months he would have NO chance.

So, the luck/chance factor has to have an adjustment in his favour as he maintains a good ratio, be it you say 20-30%

Try this, deal yourself 30 cards and divide them into 6 groups of 4, Piers, according to you can pick one group correct.

Then deal another 30 cards and repeat the process.

The law of averages say the more deals and groups he has the less Piers will get a correct result, but he doesnt, he maintains the same level of success.

Piers does this without LUCK and CHANCE.

However you show the results bias to having the result as just down to LUCK AND CHANCE as you have not built into the results a factor for this.

As I have mentioned before, I am a Bookmaker, dont tell me about about how the odds work, Piers has a SKILL factor

You're a bookmaker and you think rolling a dice gives you a 1 in 5 chance of choosing the right number?
"The first throw of a six sided dice to land on what you call would be 1:5 (one chance in getting it right and five you don't)"

These are independent events CO2, the result of one month doesn't mean there has to be an adjustment for the next month.

Breaking it down into months for R4+ extended and M6.5+EQ
January:
3 forecast periods covering 48% of the month (15 days)
4EQ's. 2 fall within a forecast period. Expected by chance = 2

February:
5 forecast periods covering 69%(!) of the month (20 days)
3EQ's. 2 fall within a forecast period. Expected by chance = 2

March:
2 forecast periods covering 19% of the month (6 days)
6EQ's. 1 falls within a forecast period. Expected by chance = 1

April:
2 forecast periods covering 33% of the month (10 days)
7EQ's. 3 fall within a forecast period. Expected by chance= 2

May:
3 forecast periods covering 48% of the month (15 days)
1EQ. 0 in forecast period. Expected by chance = 0

June:
5 forecast periods covering 67% of the month (20 days)
No EQ's

July:
5 forecast periods covering 61% of the month (19 days)
3 EQ's. 3 fall in the forecast period. Expected by chance = 2

August:
4 forecast periods covering 55% of the month (17 days)
5 EQ's. 3 fall in the forecast period. Expected by chance = 3

September:
5 forecast periods covering 60% of the month (18 days)
2EQ's. 1 falls within a forecast period. Expected by chance = 1

October:
4 forecast periods covering 68% of the month (21 days)
4EQ's. 2 fall in the forecast period. Expected by chance = 3

November:
4 forecast periods covering 60% of the month (18 days)
4EQ's. 4 fall within a forecast period. Expected by chance = 2

Of the 43 forecast periods up to the end of November 37% (16) contained an M6.5+EQ


Forecast periods covered 53% of the year to November (179 days)
53% of EQ's (21) occured in this period. Expected by chance = 21!!

I don't know what else I can do to show you that this is just showing that the forecast period successes are down to chance.

Elim

Your funny sometimes, of course there are 6 sides to a dice, but thats NOT one chance your right and six your not!!!

If you price up a 6 race event and the chances are equal they have a 5/1 chance 1:5 (one chance your right and five your not)

In the real world of Bookmaking you have to have a margin so you make sure you win from what has been invested more times then you dont

So I'd give a return of 4/1 instead of 5/1, otherwise I would only break even

I can see from your above understanding of odds you fall short on this topic and I can see why you have no grasp on a SKILL factor for Piers

CO2, you're confusing 'odds' with chance (probability)! If you throw a dice you have a 1 in 6 chance that you will call correctly.
Which has steered you nicely away from facing up to the fact that the forecast success rate is clearly no better than chance.