Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 116360	2011-02-28 18:57:00	Ken Ring on Campbell Live last night	Colpol (444)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1182487	2011-03-12 01:47:00	Having concluded I was not going to get any technical argument from this site I went looking elsewhere on the internet and what an enlightening search it was. There seems to be any number of well credentialed people arguing on both sides, and all with quite compelling arguments. In the end, I called it a draw and will settle back and watch developments with interest, knowing there is an abundance of “experts” already on the case. :D Meanwhile, I will just have to remain undecided with an open mind. :)	B.M. (505)
1182488	2011-03-12 01:56:00	For me it takes no great leap of faith to accept that geological formations that are under enormous stress and about to rupture may be influenced to some degree by 'earth tide' stress . No one's saying (at least I hope not) that the moon's gavity has no effect on the timing of an earthquake . (it's conceivable - if you have a basic understanding of highschool science - that a fault that has been building up pressure for a while could be triggered, or influenced in some way, by the pull of the moon) . The question is, can this be used to predict (or give a probability of) an earthquake, and if so, how . If this is even what KR is doing - the other question is (regardless of what method he's using) can KR predict earthquakes (or the weather) . The way this is determined is with science, and statistics . (And critical thinking and skepticism) I don't think anybody can safely state a categorical yes or no, in fact we would be foolish to do so . Or you can study a method and test someone's claims to the point that it would be silly to keep homouring them or taking them seriously . If they continue to peddle their scam after that point then you have the right (and the knowledge) to say (categorically) "No . "* * By which we mean: "We've tested this and 1 . it doesn't make any sense based on what we know about the universe and 2 . it failed all the tests so far . "	vIQleS (16261)
1182489	2011-03-12 01:58:00	My mind remains open on the matter . ;) You may be using the term "Open minded" correctly here, but I suspect that a few here are not . You can dismiss something as nonsense and still be open minded . If I told you that I had an invisible pink unicorn in my garage, would you have an 'open' mind about my claim? What you came over to have a look and found that not only is it invisible, but can't be felt, smelled, or sensed in any way (but I KNOW it's there - I really beleive, therefore it must be true) We started with an open mind about Ken Ring; then we listened to him talk, read his claims, did a bit of research, tested his predictions and then came to a conclusion . The next time someone approaches with a weird claim, we'll start with an open mind . But being open minded does not mean that we unquestioningly believe everything that everybody says . You may still not have decided weather (:p) KR is a nutjob or not, but some of us have . Doesn't make us close-minded, just means we've done the research / have the necessary knowledge .	vIQleS (16261)
1182490	2011-03-12 02:15:00	Well KR is a nut job just like Mao tse Tung was a commie	prefect (6291)
1182491	2011-03-12 02:15:00	Good post vIQleS I also love how if you think he's a nutjob then you're considered to have be close-minded. Well the way I see it, if you believe his rubbish then you are close-minded.	--Wolf-- (128)
1182492	2011-03-12 02:17:00	Agree vIQleS. I spent a number of hours reading Ken Rings and others before him beliefs. The problem is the historical Earthquake "data" over many decades, as in when tremors are recorded, are no bigger or frequent around a Super moon or other astronomical events. I "get" why some people believe it, its just proven wrong in the data and there is no way a "open mind" gets around that fact.	Battleneter2 (9361)
1182493	2011-03-12 02:23:00	Oh - I meant to add (sorry about the flood): KR (like most other believers) is the very definition of closed-minded: when presented with evidence that seems to disprove his ideas, he sticks his fingers in his ears and goes "LALALALALA, you're all nazi jackbooted, bully boys, leave me alone!" Ref: auckland.skepticsinthepub.net.nz	vIQleS (16261)
1182494	2011-03-12 02:25:00	When somebody actually “fingers” the error in his propositions I’ll be happy enough to accept that . Oh good - that's easy . . . . com/ring . htm" target="_blank">sillybeliefs . com That might take you a while to read, so we'll expect you back to let us know you've changed your mind in, say, 24 hours?	vIQleS (16261)
1182495	2011-03-12 02:35:00	You may be using the term "Open minded" correctly here, but I suspect that a few here are not . You can dismiss something as nonsense and still be open minded . If I told you that I had an invisible pink unicorn in my garage, would you have an 'open' mind about my claim? What you came over to have a look and found that not only is it invisible, but can't be felt, smelled, or sensed in any way (but I KNOW it's there - I really beleive, therefore it must be true) We started with an open mind about Ken Ring; then we listened to him talk, read his claims, did a bit of research, tested his predictions and then came to a conclusion . The next time someone approaches with a weird claim, we'll start with an open mind . But being open minded does not mean that we unquestioningly believe everything that everybody says . You may still not have decided weather (:p) KR is a nutjob or not, but some of us have . Doesn't make us close-minded, just means we've done the research / have the necessary knowledge . As I’ve already said, I’m not interested in Ken Rings state of mind . But I am interested in the possible relationship of Sun, Moon and Planets to Earthquakes . Is there, or is there not, is the question . It seems a definitive answer is not available when one surfs the internet as there are any amount of well credentialed people with opposing views . (Not unlike the Global Warming argument but we won’t go there or we’ll get a LRT “Land Rolling Tax”) ;) If we could have established that there was a relationship between the position of the Sun, Moon, Planets and Earthquakes we could then address the possibility of prediction . Here we enter quite a different minefield, because if we look at the money that has been spent on Meteorology, and the rather mixed results achieved, one could be forgiven for doubting that any meaningful predictions could made regarding earthquakes without knowing which plate was at a tipping point and only needed a little persuasion . However, given a definitive answer as to the first question seems unavailable; it is a fruitless exercise moving onto the possibility of prediction .	B.M. (505)
1182496	2011-03-12 02:37:00	OK - last one for today (promise) ...but in the meantime his opponents have put up not a scrap of evidence to suggest he is completely wrong. So, until that evidence is provided my mind will remain open. :) www.limestonehills.co.nz sciblogs.co.nz sciblogs.co.nz http://kenringmoonmanwrong.blogspot.com/ www.nbr.co.nz	vIQleS (16261)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25