• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

American astrologer Predicted Japan Earthquake

ynot said:
What’s not ambiguous about “an earthquake" having “dates”? To be unambiguous AN earthquake prediction needs to have only ONE date.

Simply prove White has made an unambiguous and accurate prediction by answering the following . . .

(1) What day in April?
(2) Where in California?
(3) What magnitude will the quake be?

These questions need to be answered before the "predicted" quake occurs of course.
Click to expand...

Wrong. No it doesn't. Where is it written any earthquake prediction needs to have only one date? That's a question that needs to be answered.

The rest of what you said proves you haven't read his earthquake predictions. This is also the same astrologer who predicted El Nino and La Nina years before anyone else.

Most of you have proven you can't read anything longer than a couple of lines. It proves many of you are not skeptics at all, just being lazy. No wonder real skeptics don't spend time on this forum.

Reading most of your comments you guys can't think for yourselves and never can admit when you are just plain wrong.

Real skeptics can admit these things and change. The false skeptics do not.
 
Last edited:
Astro Teacher said:
In March, look first to Asia for seismic action in the northern hemisphere - China and Japan, then to the Philippines, along to the Aleutian Islands, Alaska, to British Columbia, Canada, then to California in the United States, stretching down to Mexico and into South America.
Click to expand...


We had a series of 11 perceptible earthquakes in the lapse of three days, by mid March. Surely it was part of the prediction ....:eye-poppi
 
You do realize El Nino has been studied since the 1920s and is well understood since the 1960s, right?
 
Beerina said:
To Astro Teacher: This is the "spaghetti" method of prediction -- grab a big handful of spaghetti and throw it at the wall. Some will stick.

The human mind has a tendency to see the one or two hits and attribute significance to it, ignoring the myriad other predictions that did not come true.
Click to expand...

The human ignoramus has a tendency to see the one or two or three consistent hits and attribute no significance at all to it, preferring to ignore the myriad other predictions that did come true.
 
Astro Teacher said:
Wrong. No it doesn't. Where is it written any earthquake prediction needs to have only one date? That's a question that needs to be answered.
Click to expand...

You really have no common sense do you?

In the same lines, where is it written that a prediction has to be made before an event happens, rather than after?

Where is it written that a prediction should be accurate and descriptive, rather than vague and easy to fake?

Nowhere. That's just common sense.
 
Ron_Tomkins said:
You really have no common sense do you?

In the same lines, where is it written that a prediction has to be made before an event happens, rather than after?

Where is it written that a prediction should be accurate and descriptive, rather than vague and easy to fake?

Nowhere. That's just common sense.
Click to expand...

The Japan earthquake prediction was accurate, and dated that I read.

The other predictions of coming earthquakes includes places, specific dates and expected magnitudes of quakes.

How can you fake a prediction before any event? Either it happens or doesn't happen. That's plain common sense.

Where is it written you can ignore a prediction just because you don't believe anything?

Who cares if you don't believe? You wouldn't even comment if you didn't want to believe anything.

So what?

That's just plain common sense.
 
Astro Teacher said:
Wrong. No it doesn't. Where is it written any earthquake prediction needs to have only one date? That's a question that needs to be answered.
Click to expand...
To be accurate and unambiguous a prediction has to be the answer (not a question). An accurate prediction only needs to be confirmed by events not answered by them. You are confusing prediction with retrofitting

Astro Teacher said:
The rest of what you said proves you haven't read his earthquake predictions. This is also the same astrologer who predicted El Nino and La Nina years before anyone else.
Click to expand...
WOW! . . . What's White like with Lotto numbers then?

Let me have a go at NZ lotto (40 numbers) using White's "prediction" methods.

I predict the six numbers will be - 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17, 20, 23, 26, 29, 32, 35, 38 or 40. If these numbers aren't exact I will only be one number off! I will confirm the uncanny accuracy of my prediction by identifying the actual six predicted numbers after the draw.
 
Last edited:
Astro Teacher said:
Can anyone do better other than writing silly comments like "Ha! I can beat that. I told the people at work on Friday that it would rain on Saturday?"
Click to expand...

Ok, try this for specific.

I *guarantee* there will an earthquake of magnitude 4.0 ± 1.0 on March 30th ± 3 days (NZ local time) within 20 km of the city of Christchurch.

You'll note that this prediction is several orders of magnitude more specific than the one you started this nonsensical thread on. It names a specific week, a specific magnitude (within a range) and more importantly, a specific location within 20km - not pretty much the entire Pacific basin.

And just for fun, here is a link to a website so you can check in on those 6 days to see how powerful my predictive powers are. I think you will find it significantly more accurate than your nonsensical woo site.

http://www.geonet.org.nz/earthquake/quakes/recent_quakes.html
 
Astro Teacher said:
"During the entire month of March 2011 we can expect to hear of powerful earthquakes along the 'Ring of Fire.'

In March, look first to Asia for seismic action in the northern hemisphere - China and Japan, then to the Philippines, along to the Aleutian Islands, Alaska, to British Columbia, Canada, then to California in the United States, stretching down to Mexico and into South America.

With the global transits at hand, there are sure to be powerful, large magnitude earthquakes in the months of March and April.

My astrological calculations show a 88.9% rating for significant seismic activity between 6.6 to 7.9+ in magnitude.

There are additional planetary configuration signals I've interpreted that show even stronger quakes by scale - 8.9 to 9.2 in magnitude. Some people will not believe me, but transits are well within astrological red-zone warning range.

Significant Dates

*March 10,11
*March 18,19,20,21
March 28
April 1,2,3
*April 4
*April 6,7
*April 9,10
*April 15
*April 16,17,18
April 24
Click to expand...
The "accurate prediction" is there in red for anyone to plainly see. I'm having trouble with the "California" prediction though. Could you please colour the date and magnitude blue for me Astro Teacher? - thanks.
 
Last edited:
The next major earthquake took place in Burma, on 24th March. Oddly enough, the astrologer's long list of locations did not include Burma; and the 24th was not one of the dates listed as significant.

Hmmm.
 
Astro Teacher, on 1 September 2006 on this Board I made a specific sports prediction relating to Cricket. I predicted that Australia would win the World Championship ICC Cup (by beating 7 other teams), to be held later that year, I also predicted that Australia would beat England that Summer and regain the "Ashes" Cricket Trophy, and that they would then go on and beat 11 other teams to win the World Cup to be held in the West Indies in 2007, giving them these three wins in a row and making Cricket history.

Those were my results, and the results can be found on any Cricket Sports Webpage. My predictions turned out to be 100% accurate, and were made six months in advance of the last of the three events.

I also predicted on another Board that Geelong would win the Australian Football League Premiership in 2007 and that Melbourne Storm would win the National Rugby Premiership the same year. Both these predictions also came true.

That is a testifiable, verifiable set of predictions, the results can be easily ascertained, and that makes me a better Psychic than you. I was 100% right in every detail, not just guessing random dates when earthquakes are likely to happen.

You need to bow down before my genuine and awsome power, as you can only state generalities and not specific instances of events. I, on the other hand, am specific.

Do you want the links, or are you happy to concede that I am better than you or your nutty blogger who is incapable of being specific, and takes misses to be hits?

Norm
 
Last edited:
fromdownunder said:
Astro Teacher, on 1 September 2006 on this Board I made a specific sports prediction relating to Cricket. I predicted that Australia would win the World Championship ICC Cup (by beating 7 other teams), to be held later that year, I also predicted that Australia would beat England that Summer and regain the "Ashes" Cricket Trophy, and that they would then go on and beat 11 other teams to win the World Cup to be held in the West Indies in 2007, giving them these three wins in a row and making Cricket history.

Those were my results, and the results can be found on any Cricket Sports Webpage. My predictions turned out to be 100% accurate, and were made six months in advance of the last of the three events.

I also predicted on another Board that Geelong would win the Australian Football League Premiership in 2007 and that Melbourne Storm would win the National Rugby Premiership the same year. Both these predictions also came true.

That is a testifiable, verifiable set of predictions, the results can be easily ascertained, and that makes me a better Psychic than you. I was 100% right in every detail, not just guessing random dates when earthquakes are likely to happen.

You need to bow down before my genuine and awsome power, as you can only state generalities and not specific instances of events. I, on the other hand, am specific.

Do you want the links, or are you happy to concede that I am better than you or your nutty blogger who is incapable of being specific, and takes misses to be hits?

Norm
Click to expand...
I BELIEVE!!!! . . . Now give me the Lotto numbers for the next draw - Thanks ;)
 
RebeccaBradley said:
The next major earthquake took place in Burma, on 24th March. Oddly enough, the astrologer's long list of locations did not include Burma; and the 24th was not one of the dates listed as significant.

Hmmm.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly. Didn't you know that astrologer's predictions only count if they are correct (or can be bent to fit), and can be made after the event due to quantum entanglement and you are worse than Mussolini for believing otherwise??
 
BTMO said:
Don't be silly. Didn't you know that astrologer's predictions only count if they are correct (or can be bent to fit), and can be made after the event due to quantum entanglement and you are worse than Mussolini for believing otherwise??
Click to expand...

Oh, right. Silly moi.
 
Astro Teacher said:
The Japan earthquake prediction was accurate, and dated that I read.
Click to expand...

It was not accurate. The guy threw a bunch of random dates and he luckily got one right. That's not accuracy. That's what we call guessing. If he had only said the one date where the earthquake was to happen and then got it right, that would have been accurate.

Astro Teacher said:
How can you fake a prediction before any event? Either it happens or doesn't happen. That's plain common sense.
Click to expand...

By broadening your prediction to many possibilities and seeing which one of them becomes a hit, and then ignoring all the misses.

Astro Teacher said:
Where is it written you can ignore a prediction just because you don't believe anything?
Click to expand...

It's not about believing anything. It's about having enough criteria and common sense to differentiate between an accurate guess and just throwing a bunch of random options to see which one becomes a hit.

Astro Teacher said:
You wouldn't even comment if you didn't want to believe anything.
Click to expand...

Why not? I can comment on something I have no reason to believe, and also state the reasons why I don't think it's credible.

And it's not about "wanting" to believe, although I'm pretty sure you really want to believe that this is true and this is why you don't see how it is obviously fake. Myself, I'm not attached to believing it or not believing in it. I'll believe in it when I see a convincing case of accurate prediction of a natural disaster, by specifying the day, the time and the exact place and nothing else. No other options of other possible dates and possible times and possible places.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom