On Jun 13, 8:27*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jun 13, 7:06*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:



A small step from that is looking at the Atlantic chart every 6 hours
and watching these small pressure waves build up. I don't pretend to
know their cause but you really can see Low pressure regions develop
as these things converge.

This is what I mean when I use the term "convergance".
I have no real idea what the more knowledgeable understand about it.

This is what one source (RA-Aus) says about convergence, divergence
and subsidence:

Atmospheric vertical motion is found in cyclones and anticyclones,
mainly caused by air mass convergence or divergence from horizontal
motion.

Meteorological convergence indicates retardation in air flow with
increase in air mass in a given volume due to net three dimensional
inflow. Meteorological divergence, or negative convergence, indicates
acceleration with decrease in air mass. Convergence is the contraction
and divergence is the spreading of a field of flow."

http://www.auf.asn.au/meteorology/section1b.html

I on the other hand am talking about an increase in the number of low
pressure waves. As they arrive already in combinations that take the
pressure to 990 to 980 millibars they already consist of a number of
wavlets each worth about 2 or 3 millibars decrease in pressure.

They converge off Iceland and Greenland as if waiting the full
pressure capacity required to get them over the Mid Atlantic Ridge.
This has to be some 970 or so minimum IIRC.

When they hit land once more you can see them separating out into
their constituent air masses. Blowing where they list.

The article goes on to describe what happens without explaing why. It
is difficult to see why an air mas floating free of any vessel has to
build up or con~/di~ ~verge:

"If, for example, the front end of moving air mass layer slows down,
the air in the rear will catch up – converge"

How? And more importantly; why?

"The air must move vertically to avoid local compression.

If the lower boundary of the moving air mass is at surface level all
the vertical movement must be upward. If the moving air mass is just
below the tropopause all the vertical movement will be downward
because the tropopause inhibits vertical motion."

How and why?

"If the front end of a moving air mass layer speeds up then the flow
diverges. If the air mass is at the surface then downward motion will
occur above it to satisfy mass conservation principles, if the
divergence is aloft then upward motion takes place.

Rising air must diverge before it reaches the tropopause and sinking
air must diverge before it reaches the surface.

As the surface pressure is the weight per unit area of the overlaying
column of air, and even though divergences in one part of the column
are largely balanced by convergences in another, the slight change in
mass content (thickness) of the over-riding air changes the pressure
at the surface."

See last post. Answer asked question.

"no forecast accuracy: no use"

On Jun 13, 7:06*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

I think even smallbrain should be able to follow that, and I don't mean
that in the way he usually runs up one's backside after every post.

Talking about chimneys, much has been advised about the stalling of
the trans ocean currents calle dthe Global Conveyor.

(Sub zero water leaving the Arctic arriving at the Weddel Sea is split
several ways as it runs around the Antarctic. Eventually it usually
arrives at the surface at certain rich fishing grounds.)

"Peter Wadhams, an oceanographer at the University of Cambridge, UK,
last year reported a substantial weakening of convection ‘chimneys’
down which surface water flows in the Greenland sea, but it is unknown
how much of the observed effect is due to natural variability."

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ation-changes/

(First time I have read such a quote that even mentions the
fundamental error of attributing new found data to global warming by
disaster mongers aka geo-science researchers.)

The point is that if these flat calms occur naturally as the phases of
the moon dictate then this sort of thing in the Pacific, Indian and
Atlantic oceans. (I have copied them, so you will be able to see them
at a later date provided I still have the required account(s) are
likely result of that and can thus be dated to runs of the lunar
code.)

https://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/efs/efs.html

You have to get a certificate from here before the other link will
open at the US military site https://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/public/)

One important permutation to this as a codicil to the previous post, a
run that is only one spell out of the ordinary can be overridden (I
know not how) by the original run if the following spells are also
part of the old run. As is the case this June (2009) I imagine this is
inertia (hysteresis) in the system when a fairly positive spell
doesn't have the ante to change the whole set up of all that water.

Which points to another opening in the knowledge base if a massive
quake occurs with the spell:

Oops, I got distracted and forgot what just occurred to me. "I'll be
back."

The original post went on to explain:

"Everyone quoted is however agreed on one thing: "the notion that [a
future change in the themohaline circulation] may trigger a mini ice
age is a myth”.

The evidence of previous changes for instance at the Younger Dryas or
during the 8.2 kyr event is quite strong, and significant coolings
were observed particular around the North Atlantic, but even such
localised coolings are not predicted to occur if the circulation slows
as an effect of global warming."

There are certain things happening on the planet that were in days of
old put down to God acting to draw our attention to our waywardness. I
presume this is based on the contract set up between Moses's people
and the creator.

Since it is in a way God acting as if from heaven (the sun and moon
causing these runs) there may well be more to it than simple
deforestation. Of course the priests of Egypt can come up with counter
arguments and replications in their churches.

For instance denuding natural forest in tropical countries opens the
land to desertification. Deserts do not usually send vast quantities
of freshwater to sea and this article points out a natural flow in a
fairly arid modern USA can supply 500 cubic kilometres of the precious
stuff to the Gulf of Mexico.

Before the forests of North America were ruined by colonists in the
18th century the outflow must have been vast.

So it remains to be seen how much of this act of god can be restored
by human activity if anyone cared to start. Removing US influence in
Arab and South American nations would be a big help. Maybe relocate
the modern day nation of Israel. (Libya would make a nice change for
them.)

But I digress...

What I was thinking was that the displacement of these chimneys
according to the time of the phase of the moon, might find them
occurring in less well known regions. Areas yet to be exhausted of
fish by the fact that they don't live there in significant numbers,
yet.

Maybe God is giving the planet a breathing space to save it from
ourselves.

Meantime more of the same, I think, from the next spell:
15th June 2009 @ 22:15

Since this is classic volcano country the North Atlantic at least,
will remain negative.

Or not, as the case may be.
There is a seed for a storm over at the Philippines. So a TC with some
large Mag fives are on the cards. Maybe one or two sixes.

I wonder if it is the increase of submarine volcanic activity that
causes there slack surface pressures.

They would certainly mess with the Global Conveyance. And with the
convergence of low pressure from Newfoundland.

On Jun 14, 9:15*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Another permutation:
a run that is only one spell out of the ordinary can be overridden
I imagine this is inertia (hysteresis) in the system.

Which points to another opening in the knowledge base if a massive
quake occurs with the spell:

Maybe it is just such "Meteorological convergence indicates
retardation in air
flow with increase in air mass in a given volume due to net three
dimensional inflow."
Only applied below ground that causes them to build on one another:

Convergence indicates redirection in seismic flow with increase in
something something in a given scrambled eggs due to net three
dimensional flow.

It wants working on.

Got it:
The present set up has a seismic harmonic that will change for the
next one.
In the middle of the change, the acoustics hit a peak.

And the series of waves also peaks in a time that indicates the motion
of the trains. Consider the aftershock at Vanuatu. It was some hours
after the first three.

So the trains built up every so many hours. Of course by then some
components had already diverged. Which explains how with such events
the most powerful is considered to be the main shock and the others
aftershocks, despite the fact that aftershocks sometimes (often) occur
first.

"Well they would wouldn't they?"

5.1 2009/06/12 14:33 17.4S. 167.6N. Vanuatu
6.0 2009/06/12 09:44 17.6S. 167.7N. Vanuatu
5.0 2009/06/12 09:25 17.5S. 167.7N. Vanuatu
5.0 2009/06/12 08:48 17.5S. 167.7N. Vanuatu

Nearly 5 hours separate the last two quakes. Presuming these are all
the same trains of sound waves, the largest peaks are 5 hours apart.
That is roughly the time they take to cross the planet.

So the physics is possible.
Hell, the physics would explain the ring of fire.

Ah well, another one for the archives. I wonder how many must die
before anyone comes up with the above all on their own.

On Jun 14, 9:15*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jun 13, 7:06*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:



I think even smallbrain should be able to follow that, and I don't mean
that in the way he usually runs up one's backside after every post.

Talking about chimneys, much has been advised about the stalling of
the trans ocean currents calle dthe Global Conveyor.

(Sub zero water leaving the Arctic arriving at the Weddel Sea is split
several ways as it runs around the Antarctic. Eventually it usually
arrives at the surface at certain rich fishing grounds.)

"Peter Wadhams, an oceanographer at the University of Cambridge, UK,
last year reported a substantial weakening of convection ‘chimneys’
down which surface water flows in the Greenland sea, but it is unknown
how much of the observed effect is due to natural variability."

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...tlantic-circul...

(First time I have read such a quote that even mentions the
fundamental error of attributing new found data to global warming by
disaster mongers aka geo-science researchers.)

The point is that if these flat calms occur naturally as the phases of
the moon dictate then this sort of thing in the Pacific, Indian and
Atlantic oceans. (I have copied them, so you will be able to see them
at a later date provided I still have the required account(s) are
likely result of that and can thus be dated to runs of the lunar
code.)

https://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/efs/efs.html

You have to get a certificate from here before the other link will
open at the US military site https://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/public/)

One important permutation to this as a codicil to the previous post, a
run that is only one spell out of the ordinary can be overridden (I
know not how) by the original run if the following spells are also
part of the old run. As is the case this June (2009) I imagine this is
inertia (hysteresis) in the system when a fairly positive spell
doesn't have the ante to change the whole set up of all that water.

Which points to another opening in the knowledge base if a massive
quake occurs with the spell:

Oops, I got distracted and forgot what just occurred to me. "I'll be
back."

The original post went on to explain:

"Everyone quoted is however agreed on one thing: "the notion that [a
future change in the themohaline circulation] may trigger a mini ice
age is a myth”.

The evidence of previous changes for instance at the Younger Dryas or
during the 8.2 kyr event is quite strong, and significant coolings
were observed particular around the North Atlantic, but even such
localised coolings are not predicted to occur if the circulation slows
as an effect of global warming."

There are certain things happening on the planet that were in days of
old put down to God acting to draw our attention to our waywardness. I
presume this is based on the contract set up between Moses's people
and the creator.

Since it is in a way God acting as if from heaven (the sun and moon
causing these runs) there may well be more to it than simple
deforestation. Of course the priests of Egypt can come up with counter
arguments and replications in their churches.

For instance denuding natural forest in tropical countries opens the
land to desertification. Deserts do not usually send vast quantities
of freshwater to sea and this article points out a natural flow in a
fairly arid modern USA can supply 500 cubic kilometres of the precious
stuff to the Gulf of Mexico.

Before the forests of North America were ruined by colonists in the
18th century the outflow must have been vast.

So it remains to be seen how much of this act of god can be restored
by human activity if anyone cared to start. Removing US influence in
Arab and South American nations would be a big help. Maybe relocate
the modern day nation of Israel. (Libya would make a nice change for
them.)

But I digress...

What I was thinking was that the displacement of these chimneys
according to the time of the phase of the moon, might find them
occurring in less well known regions. Areas yet to be exhausted of
fish by the fact that they don't live there in significant numbers,
yet.

Maybe God is giving the planet a breathing space to save it from
ourselves.

Meantime more of the same, I think, from the next spell:
15th June 2009 @ 22:15

Since this is classic volcano country the North Atlantic at least,
will remain negative.

Or not, as the case may be.
There is a seed for a storm over at the Philippines. So a TC with some
large Mag fives are on the cards. Maybe one or two sixes.

I wonder if it is the increase of submarine volcanic activity that
causes there slack surface pressures.

They would certainly mess with the Global Conveyance. And with the
convergence of low pressure from Newfoundland.

Just answer what I asked of you W and stop trying to pull the wool
over people's eyes by writing a lot.

"no forecast accuracy: no use"

On Jun 14, 9:15*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Since this is classic volcano country the North Atlantic at least,
will remain negative.

The N Pacific looks negative too
http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/data/...is/947_100.gif

Or not, as the case may be.
There is a seed for a storm over at the Philippines. So a TC with some
large Mag fives are on the cards. Maybe one or two sixes.

2009/06/14
6.1 M. 05:59. 5.4 N. 126.5 E. Mindanao, Philippines

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...uakes_all.html

On Jun 14, 8:16*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jun 14, 9:15*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:



Since this is classic volcano country the North Atlantic at least,
will remain negative.

The N Pacific looks negative too http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/data/...is/947_100.gif

Or not, as the case may be.
There is a seed for a storm over at the Philippines. So a TC with some
large Mag fives are on the cards. Maybe one or two sixes.

2009/06/14
*6.1 M. 05:59. 5.4 N. 126.5 E. Mindanao, Philippines

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...uakes_all.html

I wondered when you'd notice that. I'll give you it. Good guess. 2/9
22% from 9 monitored forecasts. Still hopeless, but I want you to see
I can be generous. What I liked here was that it was a slightly
clearer forecast. However, there was no indication of when the
earthquake should have occurred in, but we'll forgive you that this
time. Now if you are going to forecast, be clear about it, or I'll
have to begin to take your half-suggestions as forecasts and then your
accuracy percentage will drop faster than an Italian Prime Minister's
trousers.

If there is no earthquake around the Isthmus of Panama, you'll be back
down to 20% from 10 tomorrow. If you wish to claim "forecasts" you are
also expected to return to all those you get wrong as well, remember.

On Jun 14, 8:41*pm, Dawlish wrote:
On Jun 14, 8:16*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:





On Jun 14, 9:15*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:

Since this is classic volcano country the North Atlantic at least,
will remain negative.

The N Pacific looks negative too http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/data/...is/947_100.gif

Or not, as the case may be.
There is a seed for a storm over at the Philippines. So a TC with some
large Mag fives are on the cards. Maybe one or two sixes.

2009/06/14
*6.1 M. 05:59. 5.4 N. 126.5 E. Mindanao, Philippines

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...uakes_all.html

I wondered when you'd notice that. I'll give you it. Good guess. 2/9
22% from 9 monitored forecasts. Still hopeless, but I want you to see
I can be generous. What I liked here was that it was a slightly
clearer forecast. However, there was no indication of when the
earthquake should have occurred in, but we'll forgive you that this
time. *Now if you are going to forecast, be clear about it, or I'll
have to begin to take your half-suggestions as forecasts and then your
accuracy percentage will drop faster than an Italian Prime Minister's
trousers.

If there is no earthquake around the Isthmus of Panama, you'll be back
down to 20% from 10 tomorrow. If you wish to claim "forecasts" you are
also expected to return to all those you get wrong as well, remember.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No earthquake around the Isthmus of Panama. 2/10; 20% over 10
predictions. A small sample, but I've been very generous too. It's not
going well, is it, W.

I do hope you come back to explain why this prediction was wrong.

On Jun 13, 8:24*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jun 12, 11:22*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:



The background noise is 5.5 M "whatevers" for negative North
Pacific and Atlantic anomalies combined.

As there is a certain lack of convergence.
So here is another set of permutations:
A state where both oceans are negative, giving the above results.
(Tornadoes.)
One where the Atlantic is negative and the Pacific is positive (I
think this indicates a surge of Hawaiian volcanic activity.)
Another where the Pacific is negative and the Atlantic is positive.
And one where both oceans are positive. (Lots of convergence above and
below ground.)

For positive anomalies: According to the height and depth of the sea
level pressures, the likelihood for runs of greater than 6 M. increases
with the contrast of air pressure systems at sea level.

5.1 * *2009/06/12 14:33 * * *17.4S. * * * * *167.6N.. * * Vanuatu
6.0 * *2009/06/12 09:44 * * *17.6S. * * * * *167.7N.. * * Vanuatu
5.0 * *2009/06/12 09:25 * * *17.5S. * * * * *167.7N.. * * Vanuatu
5.0 * *2009/06/12 08:48 * * *17.5S. * * * * *167.7N.. * * Vanuatu

So this 6.0M. was pushing it. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...uakes_all.html

When we have 4 medium sized quakes showing up consecutively
at almost the same location.

It has the same effect as a much larger quake. The weather changes
with very large quakes. Contemporary models and such come
"right" (possibly needing less correction. I wish I could say.)

I haven't checked the Atlantic sea level charts but I have no doubt
that there were a sequence of parallel occlusions accompanying one or
two Lows predicted before the Vauatuans occurred.

Yep!
But only one pair of parallels as far s I know. And that with a 997 mb
Low just west of the UK. I have no doubt* that this Low was some 80
degrees from Vanuatu when the series occurred.

But I have not checked my facts. I'd bet too that in another part of
the ocean or in the N Pacific some 80 degrees from said series there
is the other pair on file.

There is one for midnight on this site: http://www.wetterzentrale.de/topkarten/fsfaxsem.html
Zeigen for the 13th June

A pair indicates that the meteorological storms are ended. That is,
there will be no more tornadoes; and three indicates that the storms
extant are ended but that another is due to scale up.
4 of them is something quite rare.

Pity this set was flawed. But talking about convergence. They were
some 5 or 6 minutes apart:
*14:33
09:44
09:25
*08:48

If they had all arrived on time it would have been a very large quake.
Contemporary theory has it that magnitudes don't add up in the same
way I'd put them and I don't intend to find out what they consider the
increase would be. It was on line once as that is where I read it.

Anyone except Dawlish wishing to follow it up can do so at their
leisure. I imagine Dawlish would eat his teeth before finding out
anything, even if he knew how.

But I am being unkind to an unfortunate. I should be more generous. He
provides so much entertainment. I hope he doesn't hang himself in his
desponderence one day, when he could be trained with so little effort.

Do they have trains at Exitdoor?
I'm sure they do. Let's hope the driver knows him.

I suddenly realised that these ocean basin oscillations are the next
order of magnitude to the convergence thingie.

However powerful a tropical storm may be. We usually have the same
phenomena most weeks in the North Atlantic which is how I reckon the
state of the oscillation.

But Tropical Storms do more damage as the tides associated with them
are similar in proportion to northern hemisphere tides. A 20 or 30
meter tide is a twice daily, 6 or 7 days a month phenomenon in British
waters for example.

However powerful a tropical storm may be, the storm is only a small
part of the system.

As an whole, the convective currents on or in the oceans are in
themselves only a part of the thing. And in the series of spells still
ongoing, the fact that all the oceans are negative is the next order
of magnitude in events.

But even then these things are mere covering, superficial.

I'd always thought there was a step between the three body problem and
any direct occurrences because of the sun and moon. Such is a given
for ocean tides and the same is true for so called disastrous
phenomenon.

It is only logical that there is more to this next order of magnitude;
the oscillating of its air pressure systems and the oscillation of the
whole set of seas. (As an aside I wonder how the Arctic ice fits in.
Maybe that too is down to a negative oscillation in the Arctic.)

I wonder what other steps there are between the engineering miracle we
live on and its reactions to the other planet in our orbit.

On Jun 12, 11:22*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:

2009/06/12
5.1M. 14:32:56 * * *-17.355 * * * * *167.7 Vanuatu
4.1M. 11:42:52 * * * 53.090 * * * * *172.6 Near Islands
6.0M. 09:44:20 * * *-17.611 * * * * *167.8 Vanuatu
5.0M. 09:24:45 * * *-17.540 * * * * *167.7 Vanuatu
5.0M. 08:47:43 * * *-17.491 * * * * *167.7 Vanuatu

Having removed everything below 4M. (blasted Alaskan 4.1!!!) we have 4
medium sized quakes showing up consecutively at one place.

I haven't checked the Atlantic sea level charts but I have no doubt
that there were a sequence of parallel occlusions accompanying one or
two Lows predicted before the Vauatuans occurred.

A pair indicates that the meteorological storms are ended. That is,
there will be no more tornadoes; and three indicates that the storms
extant are ended but that another is due to scale up. 4 of them, on
the other hand, is something quite rare.

Now the USGS has redrawn the minimum datum line. Instead of cropping
the list at 4.0 M. for the minimal list, they are using that magic
number 5.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...quakes_big.php

It makes more sense but without a backdrop to gauge the number of
lesser quakes, it feels a little naked. But I think it will save me a
bit of time in the long run.

Meanwhile there is still this list
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...uakes_all.html

On Jun 17, 9:19*am, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jun 12, 11:22*pm, Weatherlawyer wrote:







* * 2009/06/12
5.1M. 14:32:56 * * *-17.355 * * * * *167.7 Vanuatu
4.1M. 11:42:52 * * * 53.090 * * * * *172.6 Near Islands
6.0M. 09:44:20 * * *-17.611 * * * * *167.8 Vanuatu
5.0M. 09:24:45 * * *-17.540 * * * * *167.7 Vanuatu
5.0M. 08:47:43 * * *-17.491 * * * * *167.7 Vanuatu

Having removed everything below 4M. (blasted Alaskan 4.1!!!) we have 4
medium sized quakes showing up consecutively at one place.

I haven't checked the Atlantic sea level charts but I have no doubt
that there were a sequence of parallel occlusions accompanying one or
two Lows predicted before the Vauatuans occurred.

A pair indicates that the meteorological storms are ended. That is,
there will be no more tornadoes; and three indicates that the storms
extant are ended but that another is due to scale up. 4 of them, on
the other hand, is something quite rare.

Now the USGS has redrawn the minimum datum line. Instead of cropping
the list at 4.0 M. for the minimal list, they are using that magic
number 5. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...quakes_big.php

It makes more sense but without a backdrop to gauge the number of
lesser quakes, it feels a little naked. But I think it will save me a
bit of time in the long run.

Meanwhile there is still this list http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/...akes_all.html- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They never have listed all the earthquakes of 4-4.9M. There are an
estimated 13,000 of these a year - and average of 40 per day - and
only a selection have ever been published on the USGS site that you
refer to.

You've been using a completely flawed dataset ever since you started
and you never actually noticed.