Space weather...

[scissorhands]

A dolphin using his sonar, can detect whether a 10inch ball of steel has a 2 inch hollow core, or solid to the center. Easily too, a fairly recent pregnant woman can be detected.

I detect some stale pooh that needs to be excreted

[merv]

The Earth's crust is thin compared to its diameter and the moon certainly makes the tides happen and even that water moving around and shifting its weight plus the gravitational pull of the moon is bound to have some sort of influence on the pressures at the fault lines of the Earth. Remembering the crust is floating on liquid of course. The fact the plates of the crust move like they do like the skin on porridge it makes perfect sense to me that there may be some validity in Ken's theories that they can be influenced by these other forces.

Science only came from people many generations ago thinking stuff, then passing it on as teaching and then saying it is science and that they are the experts in it and their pupils gain a qualification in it. Current scientists should not dismiss anything new or different as not legitimate just because they don't agree with it yet. e.g. flat Earth.

[steve_t]

The Earth's crust is thin compared to its diameter and the moon certainly makes the tides happen and even that water moving around and shifting its weight plus the gravitational pull of the moon is bound to have some sort of influence on the pressures at the fault lines of the Earth. Remembering the crust is floating on liquid of course. The fact the plates of the crust move like they do like the skin on porridge it makes perfect sense to me that there may be some validity in Ken's theories that they can be influenced by these other forces.

Science only came from people many generations ago thinking stuff, then passing it on as teaching and then saying it is science and that they are the experts in it and their pupils gain a qualification in it. Current scientists should not dismiss anything new or different as not legitimate just because they don't agree with it yet. e.g. flat Earth.

Have a read of the link in my post which is #4 of this thread. Scientists aren't dismissing it because it's new or different, they are dismissing it because the evidence doesn't support the theory

[Oakie]

Science has accepted that gravity can cause geological activity.

Jupiters moon Io is riddled with volcanoes and earthquakes due to it's proximity to Jupiter and the gravitational stresses it is under.

http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/....cfm?Object=Io

The difference is that the Earth is somewhat larger than the moon while in the Jovian suituation Jupiter is somewhat fucking immenser than tiny little Io.

[merv]

Have a read of the link in my post which is #4 of this thread. Scientists aren't dismissing it because it's new or different, they are dismissing it because the evidence doesn't support the theory

What about once there is more evidence collected?

[steve_t]

What about once there is more evidence collected?

If new evidence, collected in an objective way, shows that there is a positive correlation between the moon's position and earthquakes, current theories will be reviewed/debunked. Evidence is constantly being collected and analysed. Any patterns will be recognised. It's those scientists' job to do so. Other people having theories won't be automatically dismissed but investigated thoroughly

[mashman]

you mean like the global warming over the next 20 years theory? Just because they thought it would happen, or the evidence suggested that it would happen?

I don't see how this "new theory" is any different, but for some reason I don't see this guy getting access to the data he needs, let alone the funding to study it "scientifically".

Science is happy with anomaly variances why is this science seen as such a crock?

[steve_t]

you mean like the global warming over the next 20 years theory? Just because they thought it would happen, or the evidence suggested that it would happen?

I don't see how this "new theory" is any different, but for some reason I don't see this guy getting access to the data he needs, let alone the funding to study it "scientifically".

Science is happy with anomaly variances why is this science seen as such a crock?

Is the globe not actually warming? I'm not up with the play. I thought the planet was warming but the bullshit was that humans were causing it. What's the latest?

Ken Ring's theory definitely deserves/deserved further research and data analysis. The theory is definitely plausible but unfortunately the data does not support the theory at this point in time. As much as I hated how John Campbell treated Mr Ring, I can't dispute suggestions that statements such as "an earthquake is likely to occur up to a week either side or a new moon or a week either side of a full moon" are so general that they cover every day of the month. Until there is further data to support the theory of the moon's influence on earthquakes, it will remain "busted"

[oldrider]

you mean like the global warming over the next 20 years theory? Just because they thought it would happen, or the evidence suggested that it would happen?

I don't see how this "new theory" is any different, but for some reason I don't see this guy getting access to the data he needs, let alone the funding to study it "scientifically".

Science is happy with anomaly variances why is this science seen as such a crock?

Relatively true! "Our way" or the highway!

[shrub]

The Earth's crust is thin compared to its diameter and the moon certainly makes the tides happen and even that water moving around and shifting its weight plus the gravitational pull of the moon is bound to have some sort of influence on the pressures at the fault lines of the Earth. Remembering the crust is floating on liquid of course. The fact the plates of the crust move like they do like the skin on porridge it makes perfect sense to me that there may be some validity in Ken's theories that they can be influenced by these other forces.

Science only came from people many generations ago thinking stuff, then passing it on as teaching and then saying it is science and that they are the experts in it and their pupils gain a qualification in it. Current scientists should not dismiss anything new or different as not legitimate just because they don't agree with it yet. e.g. flat Earth.

One of the characteristics of a scientist - or for that matter, any scholar, is an insatiable curiosity.

Once you get beyond undergraduate level at universities you will find that the teachers are continuously needling their students to discover new shit and answer unanswered questions. Before you even publish an article you conduct a literature review which means you read damn near everything there is on a subject to find gaps in the knowledge. For my masters, the lit review will end up taking several months of almost solid reading and I have already read nearly 100 papers and articles ranging from 5 pages to 50 pages and I am not even half way through. I have also emailed as many of the key people who work in my area around the world as possible to find out what they're doing and what I'm planning to do so we don't end up covering the same ground and am planning a trip to Wellington in a few weeks to meet with a group of academics who have done very similar work. And that's only a masters thesis which is pretty much the bottom of the academic pyramid.

On the outside Ken Ring's theories make sense, which guarantees that they will have been explored at considerable length elsewhere by people with much, much more skill and hugely better resources. If there was ANYTHING in them, they would be taken seriously and poor old Ken would get no more attention than if I stood up and said "guess what, the world is round!", but the fact that the experts dismiss them almost guarantees that they are not correct.

Ken gets attention because people are desperate for anything that can help them make sense of the inexplicable in the same way tarot readers are real busy right now.

[scissorhands]

If new evidence, collected in an objective way, shows that there is a positive correlation between the moon's position and earthquakes, current theories will be reviewed/debunked. Evidence is constantly being collected and analysed. Any patterns will be recognised. It's those scientists' job to do so. Other people having theories won't be automatically dismissed but investigated thoroughly

What a load of bollocks. Most/all herbal healing modalities are pooh poohed also by science. Plants used for millennia, useful, safe and free to grow....



Its the church, corporations like big pharma, but more than anything knowledge must be kept away from the masses.

Slaves must be kept in chains. People who should know better with closed minds who obey the overlords and part of the problem of dumbing down.

Wanting to sit at the table of their lord, whores of babylon, tools of the state, an inner circle party member.

sieg heil!!

[shrub]

Is the globe not actually warming? I'm not up with the play. I thought the planet was warming but the bullshit was that humans were causing it. What's the latest?

The latest is that the globe is warming because of the impact of human activity. More and more evidence is surfacing to support that theory (and yes, it's only a theory, just like gravity). I have yet to see anything to support the argument it isn't caused by human activity and the few arguments that keep surfacing have been so resoundingly debunked it amazes me that they are still given any credence. But then when scientists discovered the world was round and the earth rotated around the sun it took a long time to convince the religious leaders otherwise. I'm just glad that heresy is no longer a hanging offence or the scientific community would be decimated.

[shrub]

What a load of bollocks. Most/all herbal healing modalities are pooh poohed also by science. Plants used for millennia, useful, safe and free to grow....!

Actually that's not true. A huge number of medicines are either synthesised compounds that occur naturally in plants or deriviatives of them. They are done that way because you can more accurately measure doses, isolate active ingrediants while avoiding harmful ingredients, and most importantly make money. Lots and lots of money.

And many medicines come from plants - opiates are a good example.

[oneofsix]

One of the characteristics of a scientist - or for that matter, any scholar, is an insatiable curiosity.

On the outside Ken Ring's theories make sense, which guarantees that they will have been explored at considerable length elsewhere by people with much, much more skill and hugely better resources.

.

enjoyed your post and generally agree however there are couple of comments. The topmost quote whilst very true don't allow for them sometimes getting stuck on a path, not seeing the forest for the trees. A bad example would be the shape of the earth, still working on the theory of a flat earth even though centuries before another old scholar had proven it to be round using shadows.
Once a theory has been dismissed on the evidence available to date it is often not reassessed until all other more 'reasonable' theories have been exhausted even thought the knowledge around it has been improved.
I should have retained your quote on tarot readers because it so well sums up the other side of the argue. He could be a dreamer, but ...
I had heard the Chinese tried a similar idea centuries age but then again they get blamed for a lot.

[shrub]

enjoyed your post and generally agree however there are couple of comments. The topmost quote whilst very true don't allow for them sometimes getting stuck on a path, not seeing the forest for the trees. A bad example would be the shape of the earth, still working on the theory of a flat earth even though centuries before another old scholar had proven it to be round using shadows.
Once a theory has been dismissed on the evidence available to date it is often not reassessed until all other more 'reasonable' theories have been exhausted even thought the knowledge around it has been improved.
I should have retained your quote on tarot readers because it so well sums up the other side of the argue. He could be a dreamer, but ...
I had heard the Chinese tried a similar idea centuries age but then again they get blamed for a lot.

You're right, but these days it is so much easier to explore new theories. I'm sitting in my study in Christchurch and I have access to databases from around the world and can access a depth of information that would have been inconceivable only a few years ago. And there are hundreds of thousands of bright young (and no so young) people desperate to make their mark and find something new, and that means existing theories are constantly revisited. People are always looking for ideas that have been explored and discounted in the hope of finding an angle that nobody else found, or of adding new knowledge to complete an incomplete study.

I'd love Ken Ring to be right because then life would be easier. Yesterday I was stuck in traffic on an overbridge, and quietly shitting myself because if another biggun hit I could well be in trouble, and I'd like to be able to lock the doors at night instead of leaving them unlocked so we can get out fast. If dear old Ken was right then I'd pack everything up and brace myself for the 20th, then get on with life knowing it was all over.