| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
29 Dec 2004 07:07:44 AM |
| Object: |
Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
What is the big fuss?
Natural Selection is just enhancing it population control mechanism.
it has determine to rid the world of poverty by striking the poorest of
the poor in the third world.
is not evolution grand?
or maybe it was an american secret weapon to warn the muslim world..
or.. bible prophecy coming to light?
you decide...
and by all means.. where am I posting from?
.
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
02 Jan 2005 07:23:33 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 08:10:19 -0500, Great Googly Moogly
<blm555@aol.com> said in alt.atheism:
The writer claimed that major earthquakes always hit California after
every El Nino. His reasoning was that all of the heavy rains would
eventually drain into the Pacific Ocean, adding more pressure to an
already-stressed fault system. The article was published, of all
places, in a now-defunct investment magazine.
Can't argue with that, as long as the author was Christian and got it
straight from his god.
--
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at verizon dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
29 Dec 2004 09:37:50 AM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a disaster.
In short terms it just happened because everything just fell into place at
the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
29 Dec 2004 11:01:24 AM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a disaster.
In short terms it just happened because everything just fell into place
at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake
somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the difference.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
29 Dec 2004 12:31:23 PM |
|
|
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a disaster.
In short terms it just happened because everything just fell into place
at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake
somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
29 Dec 2004 12:48:26 PM |
|
|
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:RpadnVeBxZtmak_cRVn-rw@comcast.com...
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just fell
into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake
somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
I noticed that you never indicated that you did know the difference. Let me
give you a clue, clueless, the progression isn't arithmetic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
29 Dec 2004 03:56:19 PM |
|
|
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:H1DAd.26260$6c2.6887@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:RpadnVeBxZtmak_cRVn-rw@comcast.com...
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just fell
into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7"
earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
I noticed that you never indicated that you did know the difference. Let
me give you a clue, clueless, the progression isn't arithmetic.
logarithms aren't arithmetic?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rob Naylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 07:26:48 AM |
|
|
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:aaGdnZ01hpCZtU7cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
logarithms aren't arithmetic?
No, they're not.
Rob
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
29 Dec 2004 12:42:02 PM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a disaster.
In short terms it just happened because everything just fell into place
at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake
somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
29 Dec 2004 03:55:35 PM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just fell
into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake
somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84 Plus
and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant - I don't
do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago was between a 6
and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the power of the quake on
Sunday. How am I doing so far?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
29 Dec 2004 11:14:40 PM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just fell
into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake
somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84 Plus
and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant - I don't
do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago was between a 6
and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the power of the quake on
Sunday. How am I doing so far?
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 08:23:25 AM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33hh61F41and4U1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all
the right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just
fell into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's
there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7"
earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and
a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and
a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular
area every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84
Plus and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant - I
don't do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago was
between a 6 and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the power of
the quake on Sunday. How am I doing so far?
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
so, you don't use logarithms to calculate this stuff?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 09:57:44 AM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33hh61F41and4U1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all
the right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just
fell into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's
there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7"
earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and
a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and
a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular
area every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84
Plus and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant - I
don't do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago was
between a 6 and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the power of
the quake on Sunday. How am I doing so far?
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
so, you don't use logarithms to calculate this stuff?
Nope,
10^dM and 30^dM are quite sufficient.
(See another message in this thread)
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 01:20:42 AM |
|
|
Seppo Pietikainen wrote:
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and
all the right factors happening at just the right time to cause
such a disaster. In short terms it just happened because
everything just fell into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's
there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7"
earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular
area every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84
Plus and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant
- I don't do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago
was between a 6 and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the
power of the quake on Sunday. How am I doing so far?
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
Further clarification; The Northridge quake had 6.7 *Moment magnitude*, ~ 6.4 in Richter scale.
The Sumatra quake was a 9.0 Richter scale event.
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 12:03:02 AM |
|
|
Seppo Pietikainen wrote:
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and
all the right factors happening at just the right time to cause
such a disaster. In short terms it just happened because
everything just fell into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's
there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7"
earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular
area every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84
Plus and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant
- I don't do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago
was between a 6 and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the
power of the quake on Sunday. How am I doing so far?
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 08:27:58 AM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33hk0mF4090t9U1@individual.net...
Seppo Pietikainen wrote:
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all
the right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just
fell into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's
there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7"
earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular
area every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to
create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84
Plus and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant -
I don't do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago was
between a 6 and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the power
of the quake on Sunday. How am I doing so far?
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
so, I did have that right. And the magnitude calculations are logarithmic
in nature, and I do own a TI-84 Plus but other than that I wasn't even
close.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 09:51:21 AM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33hk0mF4090t9U1@individual.net...
Seppo Pietikainen wrote:
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all
the right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just
fell into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's
there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7"
earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular
area every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to
create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84
Plus and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant -
I don't do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago was
between a 6 and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the power
of the quake on Sunday. How am I doing so far?
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
so, I did have that right. And the magnitude calculations are logarithmic
in nature, and I do own a TI-84 Plus but other than that I wasn't even
close.
Hopefully you didn't bill yourself to pauperdom.
Yep, you got that latter part right. The Richter scale is logarithmic
in this sense it means that whenever the Richter-number grows by one,
the maximum *amplitude* of the quake grows tenfold (amplitude is what
you can see on those seismograms that those seismologists are peering
at with great consternation).
However, the energy release of the quake is approximately relative to amplitude^3.
This means in shorthand, that the "energy release" -scale, while also logarithmic,
but uses base ~30 (it is not exact, but close enough for shooting [you can
see values from ~29 to ~31]), not 10 (the Richter scale is a functional
approximation, there are others, and the seismologists are moving more
into "Moment Magnitude", for example [others exists, though]).
So, as in our example:
Mnorthridge = 6.4
Msumatra = 9.0
Amplitude cf: 10^(Msumatra-Mnorthridge) = 398.1
Energy release cf: 30^(Msumatra-Mnorthridge) = 6926.5
As you see, we're *not* talking about a tiny 200-fold difference in
energy release, we're talking about a monster close to 7000 times the energy
release in Northridge.
(You were not *extremely* far off in the *amplitude* chart, however)
One British seismologist (can't remember the name offhand) estimated that
the energy release in the Sumatra quake was greater than the *sum total* of
*all* earthquakes *globally* over a period of five years...
Now, how does this all relate to the link you provided <http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM> ?
Quote:
Venkatanathan and his guide N Rajeshwara Rao, research supervisor as he calls him,
admit that 'we didn't expect the extent of damage it will cause to the Tamilnadu
coast, since we expected the magnitude might be around 7.0, which cannot damage Tamilnadu.
We never expected the consequent tidal waves that would have such a devasting effect
on the coastal areas of Tamilnadu, admitted Rajeshwara Rao.
1. A magnitude 9 quake is about 900 times more powerful than a mag. 7 quake.
2. You might want to check the frequency of 6-7 magnitude quake on that general area...
(You don't have to use your trusty old TI-84 plus here, google is your friend...)
I don't see *anything* beyond a coincidence here.
Actually, I *don't* blame you at all for your understanding, or lack
thereof. I believe what you have is a misunderstanding shared by many
people, in exactly the same fashion as people share misunderstandings
and misconceptions about science in general. Many people do not understand
the theory of evolution, many do not even understand what the term
"Theory" means in context of science.
If one does not have the education, they really cannot be blamed of
accepting the superstitions that is *seemingly* freely available from
televangelists, rubber-doctors with diplomas from certified diploma mills,
drooling religious fundamentalists, that are kissing cousins to those
who were behind the 9/11.
*But*, they can be blamed for remaining *wilfully* ignorant.
Hopefully you didn't bill yourself to pauperdom.
Seppo P.
PS.
You might want to peruse:
<http://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/magnitude.html>
<http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/general/richter.html> (and follow the links)
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 11:11:58 AM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33imfnF41r1m4U1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33hk0mF4090t9U1@individual.net...
Seppo Pietikainen wrote:
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33gc3pF40ak6kU2@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ltBAd.26240$ni1.12044@fe04.lga...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all
the right factors happening at just the right time to cause such
a disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything
just fell into place at the right time.
I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's
there.
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7"
earthquake somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake
and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular
area every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to
create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
Seppo P.
I can tell you right now that he doesn't have a clue as to the
difference.
do you ever get tired of being so wrong so often?
You wouldn't feel overly bothered to answer then?
Seppo P.
I'd be happy to, but in order to do so I'd have to bring out my TI-84
Plus and do some logarithms and I bill for that. Life as a consultant -
I don't do it for free. The Norridge quake in CA a few years ago was
between a 6 and a 7, if I recall and that was about 1/200 of the power
of the quake on Sunday. How am I doing so far?
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
so, I did have that right. And the magnitude calculations are
logarithmic in nature, and I do own a TI-84 Plus but other than that I
wasn't even close.
Hopefully you didn't bill yourself to pauperdom.
Yep, you got that latter part right. The Richter scale is logarithmic
in this sense it means that whenever the Richter-number grows by one,
the maximum *amplitude* of the quake grows tenfold (amplitude is what
you can see on those seismograms that those seismologists are peering
at with great consternation).
However, the energy release of the quake is approximately relative to
amplitude^3.
This means in shorthand, that the "energy release" -scale, while also
logarithmic,
but uses base ~30 (it is not exact, but close enough for shooting [you can
see values from ~29 to ~31]), not 10 (the Richter scale is a functional
approximation, there are others, and the seismologists are moving more
into "Moment Magnitude", for example [others exists, though]).
So, as in our example:
Mnorthridge = 6.4
Msumatra = 9.0
Amplitude cf: 10^(Msumatra-Mnorthridge) = 398.1
Energy release cf: 30^(Msumatra-Mnorthridge) = 6926.5
As you see, we're *not* talking about a tiny 200-fold difference in
energy release, we're talking about a monster close to 7000 times the
energy
release in Northridge.
(You were not *extremely* far off in the *amplitude* chart, however)
One British seismologist (can't remember the name offhand) estimated that
the energy release in the Sumatra quake was greater than the *sum total*
of
*all* earthquakes *globally* over a period of five years...
Now, how does this all relate to the link you provided
<http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM> ?
Quote:
Venkatanathan and his guide N Rajeshwara Rao, research supervisor as he
calls him, admit that 'we didn't expect the extent of damage it will
cause to the Tamilnadu coast, since we expected the magnitude might be
around 7.0, which cannot damage Tamilnadu.
We never expected the consequent tidal waves that would have such a
devasting effect
on the coastal areas of Tamilnadu, admitted Rajeshwara Rao.
1. A magnitude 9 quake is about 900 times more powerful than a mag. 7
quake.
2. You might want to check the frequency of 6-7 magnitude quake on that
general area...
(You don't have to use your trusty old TI-84 plus here, google is your
friend...)
I don't see *anything* beyond a coincidence here.
Actually, I *don't* blame you at all for your understanding, or lack
thereof. I believe what you have is a misunderstanding shared by many
people, in exactly the same fashion as people share misunderstandings
and misconceptions about science in general. Many people do not understand
the theory of evolution, many do not even understand what the term
"Theory" means in context of science.
If one does not have the education, they really cannot be blamed of
accepting the superstitions that is *seemingly* freely available from
televangelists, rubber-doctors with diplomas from certified diploma mills,
drooling religious fundamentalists, that are kissing cousins to those
who were behind the 9/11.
*But*, they can be blamed for remaining *wilfully* ignorant.
Hopefully you didn't bill yourself to pauperdom.
Seppo P.
PS.
You might want to peruse:
<http://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/class/100/magnitude.html>
<http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/general/richter.html> (and follow the links)
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in other
words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close when you
chose another measure that I didn't and then call me ignorant. You folks
crack me up.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 11:37:14 AM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in other
words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close when you
chose another measure that I didn't and then call me ignorant. You folks
crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 12:22:05 PM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in
other words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close when
you chose another measure that I didn't and then call me ignorant. You
folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then define
the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate others. In
spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you went with a
different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 02:57:35 PM |
|
|
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in
other words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close
when you chose another measure that I didn't and then call me ignorant.
You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then define
the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate others. In
spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you went with a
different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't correct. Of
course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 03:31:23 PM |
|
|
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U0_Ad.309$NC2.68@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in
other words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close
when you chose another measure that I didn't and then call me
ignorant. You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then define
the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate others.
In spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you went with
a different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't correct.
Of course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
where was I wrong? He said I had Norridge correct, I said between a 6 and a
7 and it was 6.7. I said it was logarithmic and the amplitude is
logarithmic and the 200X was pretty close to being exact. So everything I
said was correct. He just picked another measurement of the earthquake and
showed I didn't have that so therefore I am wrong.
and the original question was whether I knew anything about earthquakes and
how they are measured and I think I proved that one too.
I'm going to miss you when I go back to work, Tom. Can I call you
occasionally so you can cuss me out and make me laugh?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
31 Dec 2004 08:06:44 AM |
|
|
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:wtSdnZnWgdMx7kncRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U0_Ad.309$NC2.68@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in
other words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close
when you chose another measure that I didn't and then call me
ignorant. You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then
define the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate
others. In spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you
went with a different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't correct.
Of course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
where was I wrong? He said I had Norridge correct, I said between a 6 and
a 7 and it was 6.7. I said it was logarithmic and the amplitude is
logarithmic and the 200X was pretty close to being exact. So everything I
said was correct. He just picked another measurement of the earthquake
and showed I didn't have that so therefore I am wrong.
and the original question was whether I knew anything about earthquakes
and how they are measured and I think I proved that one too.
I'm going to miss you when I go back to work, Tom. Can I call you
occasionally so you can cuss me out and make me laugh?
Why of course you can, anonymous person, but first you will need a name.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
30 Dec 2004 11:31:10 PM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U0_Ad.309$NC2.68@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in
other words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close
when you chose another measure that I didn't and then call me
ignorant. You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then define
the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate others.
In spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you went with
a different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't correct.
Of course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
where was I wrong? He said I had Norridge correct, I said between a 6 and a
7 and it was 6.7. I said it was logarithmic and the amplitude is
logarithmic and the 200X was pretty close to being exact. So everything I
said was correct. He just picked another measurement of the earthquake and
showed I didn't have that so therefore I am wrong.
and the original question was whether I knew anything about earthquakes and
how they are measured and I think I proved that one too.
I'm going to miss you when I go back to work, Tom. Can I call you
occasionally so you can cuss me out and make me laugh?
Norridge, my *****! You cannot even spell Northridge correctly.
The Northridge Richter magnitude was not 6.7, it was 6.4.
The amplitude difference was 400X, not 200X.
The energy release (which was the original question, which
apprently wen't far beyond your ability to comprehend),
was not 200X, it was 7000X.
Shows pretty well that you are a complete and utter fake, malodorous person.
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
31 Dec 2004 08:48:18 AM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33k6guF41riuqU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U0_Ad.309$NC2.68@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in
other words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close
when you chose another measure that I didn't and then call me
ignorant. You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then
define the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate
others. In spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you
went with a different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't correct.
Of course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
where was I wrong? He said I had Norridge correct, I said between a 6
and a 7 and it was 6.7. I said it was logarithmic and the amplitude is
logarithmic and the 200X was pretty close to being exact. So everything
I said was correct. He just picked another measurement of the earthquake
and showed I didn't have that so therefore I am wrong.
and the original question was whether I knew anything about earthquakes
and how they are measured and I think I proved that one too.
I'm going to miss you when I go back to work, Tom. Can I call you
occasionally so you can cuss me out and make me laugh?
Norridge, my *****! You cannot even spell Northridge correctly.
The Northridge Richter magnitude was not 6.7, it was 6.4.
Your post, your words:
Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:03 AM
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
forgive me for quoting you. I will not make the mistake of assuming you
know what you are talking about again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
31 Dec 2004 09:02:25 AM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33k6guF41riuqU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U0_Ad.309$NC2.68@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge quake
right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude correct, in
other words, everything I said was true, but you say I wasn't close
when you chose another measure that I didn't and then call me
ignorant. You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then
define the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate
others. In spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you
went with a different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't correct.
Of course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
where was I wrong? He said I had Norridge correct, I said between a 6
and a 7 and it was 6.7. I said it was logarithmic and the amplitude is
logarithmic and the 200X was pretty close to being exact. So everything
I said was correct. He just picked another measurement of the earthquake
and showed I didn't have that so therefore I am wrong.
and the original question was whether I knew anything about earthquakes
and how they are measured and I think I proved that one too.
I'm going to miss you when I go back to work, Tom. Can I call you
occasionally so you can cuss me out and make me laugh?
Norridge, my *****! You cannot even spell Northridge correctly.
The Northridge Richter magnitude was not 6.7, it was 6.4.
Your post, your words:
Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:03 AM
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
forgive me for quoting you. I will not make the mistake of assuming you
know what you are talking about again.
Yes, twit. The magnitude was 6.7 measured in *moment magnitude*, not Richter,
as I pointed out in my very next message, but you don't have the two neurons
required to understand it.
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
Further clarification; The Northridge quake had 6.7 *Moment magnitude*, ~ 6.4 in Richter scale.
The Sumatra quake was a 9.0 Richter scale event.
Seppo P.
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
31 Dec 2004 09:23:39 AM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33l800F415vu4U1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33k6guF41riuqU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U0_Ad.309$NC2.68@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge
quake right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude
correct, in other words, everything I said was true, but you say I
wasn't close when you chose another measure that I didn't and then
call me ignorant. You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then
define the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate
others. In spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you
went with a different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't
correct. Of course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
where was I wrong? He said I had Norridge correct, I said between a 6
and a 7 and it was 6.7. I said it was logarithmic and the amplitude is
logarithmic and the 200X was pretty close to being exact. So everything
I said was correct. He just picked another measurement of the
earthquake and showed I didn't have that so therefore I am wrong.
and the original question was whether I knew anything about earthquakes
and how they are measured and I think I proved that one too.
I'm going to miss you when I go back to work, Tom. Can I call you
occasionally so you can cuss me out and make me laugh?
Norridge, my *****! You cannot even spell Northridge correctly.
The Northridge Richter magnitude was not 6.7, it was 6.4.
Your post, your words:
Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:03 AM
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
forgive me for quoting you. I will not make the mistake of assuming you
know what you are talking about again.
Yes, twit. The magnitude was 6.7 measured in *moment magnitude*, not
Richter,
as I pointed out in my very next message, but you don't have the two
neurons
required to understand it.
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
Further clarification; The Northridge quake had 6.7 *Moment magnitude*, ~
6.4 in Richter scale.
The Sumatra quake was a 9.0 Richter scale event.
Seppo P.
when I said 6.7, did I specify moment or Richter? No. I did not. You want
to make me wrong, so you assume the Richter so you can show off those Oxford
debate skills and call someone a name. In fact, when you posted that, you
didn't clarify whether you were talking about Richter or moment magnitude
either. So call yourself a twit and have a nice day.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Seppo Pietikainen" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
31 Dec 2004 09:56:04 AM |
|
|
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33l800F415vu4U1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33k6guF41riuqU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U0_Ad.309$NC2.68@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge
quake right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude
correct, in other words, everything I said was true, but you say I
wasn't close when you chose another measure that I didn't and then
call me ignorant. You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then
define the measuring device to reinforce your theories and invalidate
others. In spite of being totally accurate in everything I stated, you
went with a different measurement and invalidate. Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't
correct. Of course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
where was I wrong? He said I had Norridge correct, I said between a 6
and a 7 and it was 6.7. I said it was logarithmic and the amplitude is
logarithmic and the 200X was pretty close to being exact. So everything
I said was correct. He just picked another measurement of the
earthquake and showed I didn't have that so therefore I am wrong.
and the original question was whether I knew anything about earthquakes
and how they are measured and I think I proved that one too.
I'm going to miss you when I go back to work, Tom. Can I call you
occasionally so you can cuss me out and make me laugh?
Norridge, my *****! You cannot even spell Northridge correctly.
The Northridge Richter magnitude was not 6.7, it was 6.4.
Your post, your words:
Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:03 AM
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
forgive me for quoting you. I will not make the mistake of assuming you
know what you are talking about again.
Yes, twit. The magnitude was 6.7 measured in *moment magnitude*, not
Richter,
as I pointed out in my very next message, but you don't have the two
neurons
required to understand it.
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
Further clarification; The Northridge quake had 6.7 *Moment magnitude*, ~
6.4 in Richter scale.
The Sumatra quake was a 9.0 Richter scale event.
Seppo P.
when I said 6.7, did I specify moment or Richter? No. I did not. You want
to make me wrong, so you assume the Richter so you can show off those Oxford
debate skills and call someone a name. In fact, when you posted that, you
didn't clarify whether you were talking about Richter or moment magnitude
either. So call yourself a twit and have a nice day.
No you didn't. But the set of questions were:
So?
Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake
somewhere
in the area.
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 7 earthquake?
Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
Richter 9 earthquake?
Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
every year?
Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
"Richter magnitude" is a different animal from "moment magnitude", and
your calculations were based on conflating the two.
So, your results were off by 100% in amplitude, and 3500% in energy release,
not exactly "exactly right" as you tried to holler.
Seppo P.
Seppo
.
|
|
|
| User: "anonymous person" |
|
| Title: Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action? |
31 Dec 2004 10:43:07 AM |
|
|
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33lb4iF2gk6mrU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33l800F415vu4U1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33k6guF41riuqU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U0_Ad.309$NC2.68@fe04.lga...
"anonymous person" <at@dot.com> wrote in message
news:cLidnSSLC9nT2kncRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:33ism8F3tj9jcU1@individual.net...
anonymous person wrote:
<amputation>
I love you guys and gals. "not even close". I had the Norridge
quake right, I had the logarithmic correct, I had the amplitude
correct, in other words, everything I said was true, but you say
I wasn't close when you chose another measure that I didn't and
then call me ignorant. You folks crack me up.
No, you never did. You were never even close.
You were close to the ballpark, but never qualified.
So, you *really* are a wilful dork.
Seppo P.
wonderful study here. When you have a specific viewpoint you then
define the measuring device to reinforce your theories and
invalidate others. In spite of being totally accurate in everything
I stated, you went with a different measurement and invalidate.
Amazing.
What is more amazing is your inability to admit that you weren't
correct. Of course that is a characteristic of all fundies.
where was I wrong? He said I had Norridge correct, I said between a 6
and a 7 and it was 6.7. I said it was logarithmic and the amplitude
is logarithmic and the 200X was pretty close to being exact. So
everything I said was correct. He just picked another measurement of
the earthquake and showed I didn't have that so therefore I am wrong.
and the original question was whether I knew anything about
earthquakes and how they are measured and I think I proved that one
too.
I'm going to miss you when I go back to work, Tom. Can I call you
occasionally so you can cuss me out and make me laugh?
Norridge, my *****! You cannot even spell Northridge correctly.
The Northridge Richter magnitude was not 6.7, it was 6.4.
Your post, your words:
Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:03 AM
To clarify a bit; the Northridge quake of '94 had a magnitude of 6.7
Seppo P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
forgive me for quoting you. I will not make the mistake of assuming you
know what you are talking about again.
Yes, twit. The magnitude was 6.7 measured in *moment magnitude*, not
Richter,
as I pointed out in my very next message, but you don't have the two
neurons
required to understand it.
Not even close. You can trot out our TI-84 plus and bill yourself.
Seppo P.
Further clarification; The Northridge quake had 6.7 *Mo | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
