User talk:Wikinaut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] earthquake prediction

This discussion is referring to User:Wikinaut/Moon-Earthquake-Theory, 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, 2005_Sumatran_Earthquake and Earthquake prediction.

Wikinaut, please don't add User:Wikinaut/Moon-Earthquake-Theory material to 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake or Earthquake prediction. There is no scientific consensus that astrology based methods can predict earthquakes. Furthermore, regarding the alleged prediction by Indian scientists, there is no mention of this in the general news media, apart from the one article in an Indian newspaper ([1]). There needs to be confirmation that such a prediction actually took place; so far there is none. -- Curps 03:59, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

There are more references, see my permanently updated page and please study the older scientific papers in the second, more generally reference section -print them and study them, please. --Wikinaut 07:40, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wikinaut, you need to provide proof that these guys actually made the prediction they claim to have made. You need to provide a reference to some magazine article or newspaper or Usenet newsgroup posting or something that constitutes a clear public publication of their prediction and proof that this prediction was made before the event and not after it. Anyone can pretend to have made a successful prediction, we need to see proof that they actually did so.

If this can't be provided, the whole claim of prediction is unsupported. Please don't try to add the material back unless you can provide a footnoted reference or link to where this alleged prediction was published.

I have looked at the links you posted, and there is no satisfactory proof of any kind. Supposedly a report was presented on December 22 to the "Department of Science and Technology, New Delhi"... this is very vague. Was this the department of some university, and if so, why is no university named?

-- Curps 08:19, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Why have the big reputable Indian newspapers not picked up on this story? Say the Times of India for instance. Does the University of Madras geology department endorse or support these guys (I don't know, the university website seems to be down)?

I think the story about an alleged prediction is simply not credible. -- Curps 08:26, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have also found this http://www.12thharmonic.com/wordpress/index.php?p=577 about their publication in the 12hharmony blog, which was copied by someone not me from http://astroturf . uni. cc/ (read this too) to that blog. I am not a blogger, so I did not know, how to use or trakc these blogs - I found the 12hharmony posting by a google search yesterday. --Wikinaut 08:28, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I agree with you, that we need some proof, that they really have sent to USGS and NASA and the others. But the published article "Planetary constellation.." was published in spring of 2004. --Wikinaut 08:30, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Wikinaut,
Sorry for not replying sooner. You say you have a copy of the letter that those guys claim to have sent to the USGS and NASA and others. But with no acknowledgement from USGS and NASA that they received such a letter, there is a big problem with knowing if it is genuine or not. -- Curps 08:53, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I support you Wikinaut !

Knowing Curps and his protective nature on his site, I fully empathise with you as Curps has been unkind to me too. kenkam 04:32, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Rb

Template:Rb has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Kimchi.sg 12:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Gb

Template:Gb has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Kimchi.sg 12:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)