Ogygos Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >>The moon "relates" to the Pleiades in

> exactly the same position every 28 days.<<

> So that is 3.6% probability for a match on this

> particular event.

Actually, it's a "100% probability." You factored in only one month (the month of the quake) and the quake (as we know) did happen then.

Look at the real statistics for 100 years or 500 years or 1,000 years or 5 billion years and the odds of any major earthquake happening on any given day of the year are roughly equal. If you count minor earthquakes, then the chance of an earthquake on any day you care to pick are 100%: [

earthquake.usgs.gov]

> But. If one uses the ecliptic

> longitude which is a better indicator of alignment

> then at the time we have exactly 66,6 degrees the

> longitude deviation of the Moon and the brightest

> Pleiades star Alcyone is 0.172 degrees. So that is

> 0.05% probability for a match on this particular

> event.

Again, you can find the moon in correlation with any set of stars you care to pick for any earthquake. A statistically significant pattern would be it happening 95% of the time that this particular setup occurs in a long sequence of time (a hundred years would be a good start.)

> 3 years is 39 moon months. So that is 2.6%

> probability for a match on this particular event.

> Combined event yeilds: 0.05% x 2.6% => 0.0008%

> probability.

Your stats are off, but I agree with the conclusion your numbers produce: that the chance of this being a real and valid pattern is vanishingly small (smaller than 0.0008%)

> From a data base of 3 last triplets, we had 2

> superquakes out of 3 , that's 67%.

Yes, as the data shows, we live on a geologically active planet. There's a magnitude 8+ earthquake every 2-4 years.

> On the other

> hand from a data base of 114 months {[(3 x

> 13)-1]x3} = 114, of non closest approaches we had

> zero superquakes , that's 0%, but even if we had

> one that would be 0.9% probability.

I... err.. don't think we had the same course in statistics. And you need to look at 100 years of data, not the 3 most recent ones. Astrologers have been trying to find a pattern for hundreds of years (I kid you not) and still haven't found one that predicts quakes -- because that's the point of the data. You examine the data, run the stats, and run several tests.

>

> >>The altitude isn't the same as the

> altitude of Japan.<<

> What do you mean? Why would someone want to encode

> the latitude of Japan, we all know where the quake

> took place. The altitude of the Moon I posted is

> that as seen from the epicenter position at the

> time it took place, not what it is in London or

> Paris.

I... don't think you and I are talking about the same thing.

> >> The moon has an altitude of 66.6 degrees

> at some point every single night of the

> year.<<

> Depending on the year it might or might not,

> during the day or night but a superquake does not

> occur every single moment of the day. We are

> interested at what's happening during this

> particular instance.

You can derive all sorts of correlations between any event and any pattern you like. Look at the examples from the astrologers that I posted and you will see that they've come up with a number of very different correlations, just as you did, and all based on a single incident.

And since the moon's orbit is a regular pattern, based on physics, you can find it with an altitude of 66.6 degrees at some point on every single night of the year.

The quake's epicenter is shown here:

[

www.mapsofworld.com]

It's on about the same latitude as Pennsylvania (in the US) [

www.mapsofworld.com]

And if you use this table (which generates altitudes of the sun and moon (pick moon)), you can try any date you like... and you will see that at some point during the day, the moon will be at 66.6 degrees:

[

www.usno.navy.mil]

-- Byrd

Moderator, Hall of Ma'at