At about the same time that I was writing to ppl abt the moon and Saturn conjunctions being realted to earthquakes, I discovered LUKE on Youtube. In the last 13 months he has predicted 5 point quakes, 6 point quakes and 7 point quakes for California that have not happened. The three largest quakes there this year were 5.0, 5.1, 5.2 and 5.8; none of which he 'got'. Yet he claims 75% accuracy. He does this by throwing out all misses.
Consider the Luke Method of Forecast Presentation. We start with a 48 hour warning reading Banning, then after a quake hits in Coso Junction, the next forcasts reads near 'Banning or Coso Junction', which is followed by a report of a quake in Coso Junction. Clever, eh? Or not.
4.5+ earthquake is likely to hit near Banning, California within 48 hours. 6:40 PM Jan 12th from web.
3.5 - 3.2 - 3.2 earthquakes hit the Coso Junction area near Ridgecrest 01/14; about 3 hours ago from web.
4.5+ earthquake is likely to hit near Banning or Coso Junction, California within 24 hours; about 3 hours ago from web.
4th earthquake hits Coso Junction - This one is a ( 3.4 ) @ 5:37 am. about 3 hours ago from web.
And what if your time runs out? No problem, just shift your numbers - "A 5.0+ earthquake is very possible within the next 24 to 48 hours in the Banning area Southern California about 1 hour ago from web" (Jan 14th) You will note that there is a solar eclipse on the 15th, but Luke never mentions astronomy. Here is his method.
Consider these recent postings: "72 Hour WARNING; 4.0+ earthquake is likely in the El Centro area January 11-12, 2010"; "Please be prepared in S CA; A 5.0+ earthquake is very possible in Southern California January 11-14, 2010"; and , "Quakes have been moving north, up the Gulf of CA during the past 6 months, latest a 5.8 SE of Calexico - Be prepared 01/11-01/14 in S. Cali".
"Quakes have been moving north, up the Gulf of CA during the past 6 months". This makes it sound as if there was a quake way south six months ago, and that the quakes have finally reached the US border. The 5.8 Calexico quake occurred on Dec 30th, in the same location as a 5.1 quake had occurred on Sept 19th. His logic of fear doesn't work. If you look at a list of quakes for southern California for 2009, you will see the name Calexico up and down the list.
I have pointed to Luke's forecasts for 13 months here. He has twice deleted all his Youtube movies, then he deleted the whole channel. I like to post his predictions verbatim (meaning with bait or minnows; as in 'make my sandwich verbatim', with minnows). At 5 PM Friday we read,
3.5 to 4.5 earthquake likely within 50 miles of Redlands, CA during the next 48 hours. http://www.quakeprediction.com/
about 5 hours ago from web
http://twitter.com/quakeprediction
Note that he names a magnitude, a place and a time period. If you look at his tweets you will see that he has removed those that predicted a 6.0 quake for days. What follows is my version of an encounter that I had in the GRAHAM HANCOCK MESSAGE BOARDS when I tried to post my ideas and those of Luke side by side. BTW, a 3.9r quake occurred in Ocotillo, CA near the border with Mexico (far south).
[I am typing especially SLOW here, so please don't mess me up by not reading Slowly and Carefully what I write! Quakeprediction = Luke Thomas Lundquist. NOT ME. I am NOT affiliated with Luke. I am his advesary, his rival, the opposite team. Me Not Luke. I have critiqued his work for 13 months now. Please don't confuse my quoting something that Luke sez as a pronouncement from me.]
Once again , this week, Luke has called for a 5.0 quake for California. I point out that there have only been three quakes that made it to 5 points in California this year; those were on Sept 19th and Oct 1 and 3. Those were not times that Luke picked, and his 5 pointer failed to arrive. If you read his tweets, you can see that he was predicting a 6 pointer recently. On his Youtube channel (now deleted for obvious reasons), he had predicted a 7 pointer in the spring. He claims 75% accuracy.
Now this From Luke: Dangerous amount of heat/risk has built up over California. Prepare for 5.0-6.0 earthquake especially in Central/South California Dec 20-22. You still have 24 hours in which you can finish your preparations, in case your aren't already there.
Last California quake over 6.0r - 2005 June 17; 6.6r off the coast of Northern California. 2005 June 15 (seen below); 7.2r off the coast of northern California. There was also a 4.9r quake on June 16 in Los Angeles. Luke is predicting a 4-6.0r quake between the 14th and the 16th of December. See Concerning the Timing of California Quake Pattern above. Here is what Luke was promoting in November: 4.0 to 6.0 earthquake likely in Southern California Nov. 18-21. Needless to say it dint happen.
June 15, 2005, 7.2r off N. California coast
Before a solstice, as the moon conjoined Jupiter opp. Mars.
I will point out, and I have already told Luke this, that I wrote the Chamber of Commerce on Wrightwood, California and told them that a habitual liar and maniac was posting Youtube videos that were scaring ppl. I offered to write the AG of Florida and California (Luke lives in Jupiter, Fla; just ax him.) Those people didn't even bat an eye, while people on Youtube were posting about how afraid they were. That makes Youtube a partner with Luke.
On Dec 30 Luke has resumed posting his 'risk' maps. http://quakeprediction.com/ Notice where he has the high 'heat' areas marked in blue instead of red? The suggestion of the maps is that the blue areas are hot and at higher risk for earthquakes. You will note that this method hasn't worked for 13 months; and, as I said, it has resulted in predictions for 5, 6 and 7 point quakes that just haven't happened.
The image on the right shows where a magnitude 5.8 quake occurred Dec 30th in just about the same location as the Sept 19th quake. The image on the left is Luke's first new risk map since deleting his Youtube channel. Notice that his map suggests that the greatest 'risk' is in the south/central part of the state. I repeat, if your system fails to pick up signals from a 5.8 quake there is something bad wrong with your system. He had rated far southern California at a 69% for a 3.0 magnitude quake Dec 30.
Take a look at http://quakeprediction.com/ and notice where he lists the highest risk factors in red, then orange, yellow and blue. Now look at his maps, where he goes from deep blue (for high risk), to a lighter blue, THEN red, orange and yellow,THEN green and white? Who in the world do you imagine is advising him? I bet he listens to no one. Now look at the page entitled "California Twitter Earthquake Data" http://twitter.com/quakeprediction and note where he includes reports of worldwide quakes and predictions for Japan there instead of in a more appropriate place - like Japan Predictions and Worldwide Quakes.
Tell me how this works? From Jan 2-8 we have a green and yellow area in the far north, that disappears the next day? So, even though these are labeled for several days, they are only good for ONE day since he posts them every day and they change every day. IN other words, these maps are only 'good' for a few hours - and actually not even then, as was shown above. What is the point of labeling them 'as if' they were good for several days. I know, mental health.
He continues to insist, "4.5 to 5.5 earthquake is likely in Central California January 1-3 ". http://twitter.com/quakeprediction
Dec 31 we see this, "4.5 to 5.5 earthquake is likely in Central California Dec 31 - Jan 3. Most likely to hit within 100 miles of Coalinga, California." (See the Redlands prediction above.)
Late Jan 1 PM we still see, "4.5 to 5.5 earthquake is likely in Central California Jan 1 - Jan 3. Most likely to hit near Coalinga or Coso Junction California".
Jan 2 we see, "4.5 to 5.5 earthquake is likely in California Jan 2 - Jan 3 Most likely near Coalinga, California".
Jan 3 we see, "4.5 to 5.5 earthquake is likely in Central California Jan 3
Most likely to hit near Coalinga or Mammoth Lakes".
4.0 earthquake hits in Baja California - January 3; not 4.5 to 5.5 and not near Coalinga, Coso Junction, Mammoth Lakes or Central California. If they don't happen, then they weren't likely; am I right? It didn't happen on the 31st, so it wasn't likely; ditto on the first. Luke claims 75% accuracy with this 'method'.
So what do you do after your time is 'up'? If you are Luke, you just remove the date and keep right on posting. Jan 4 we see, "4.5 to 5.5 earthquake is likely in Central California.
Most likely to hit near Coalinga or Mammoth Lakes". Note that he has gone to single day maps now, for some reason, but he still insists on painting the very high risk areas blue - whazup wid dat? I know, mental health.
Jan 6: Luke sez: "3.5+ earthquake is likely in the San Francisco area on January 8th, 2010".
Jan 7: Luke sez: " 4.0+ earthquake is likely in the San Francisco area on January 8th, 2010". AND "48 Hour WARNING; 4.0+ earthquake is likely in the San Francisco Bay area January 8th, 2010".
Look at the image on the right below and see where a quake hit, then compare to where Luke's map for Jan 7th shows to be the highest risk (dark blue)? What is the point of a map, if you are going to predict quakes outside the high risk area? What good is the next map?
January 7th there was a 4.1 quake south of San Francisco. So what does that do to Luke's 'grade point average'; when you factor in misses I mean? It took him fourteen months of moving his predictions around until he has produced what appears to be a 'hit'. May we ask what 'produced' this quake, what Luke's 'data' is that pointed him to Jan 8th. Because, as he has now got it figured out, we should see some more accurate predictions to follow; and if we don't, then we know he hasn't got a model that predicts anything. That he has been blindly 'pinning the tail on a donkey'.
On Jan 9th we see a magnitude 6.5 quake off shore from Eureka, CA. Luke shows the high risk areas to be, "Jan 09; San Francisco Bay area near San Jose. Jan 10; San Francisco Bay area near San Jose". He has the area where the quake occurred marked as low risk.
LUKE SEZ: "3.8+ earthquake is likely near El Centro in Southern California on January 12th, 2010".
LUKE SEZ: "72 Hour WARNING; 4.0+ earthquake is likely in the El Centro area January 11-12, 2010".
Those were posted about the same time as this quake happened on the 9th:
4.1 2010/01/09 22:35:53 32.404N 115.157W 32.7 13 km ( 8 mi) NNW of Guadalupe Victoria, Baja California, Mexico. That is pretty much the same location where the Sept 19th and Dec 30th quakes occurred.
But guess what Luke? I posted your tweets to the Graham Hancock Message Board verbatim, that is 'word for word' and included your URL, and pointed out that I was critiquing you, and they tole me:
These boards are primarily for the discussion of ideas and information not for a countdown to a potentially hazardous event that constitutes scaremongering. This is the 4th prediction of the same event given in your opening post. We do not require updates of the same prediction every 12 hours or so, so please stop with the repetition. Such repetition comes under hobby horsing or soap boxing in the CoC, and is not permitted.
Do not reply to this note.
Many thanks
Jonny
Many thanks? (giggle) I post this way before the Mod Note, in answer to a question that is in quotes:
Author: bigbytes
Date: 14-Dec-09 22:21
"and there was a 3.3 on 12/10, and a 3.0 yesterday, i fail to see that this proves anything. but in all fairness, i havent been following the earthquake prediction posts entirely."
Does it not appear to indicate that Luke is NOT VERY GOOD at that? I am making a point here. http://dcsymbols.com/future/future.htm
Luke has predicted 6 and 7 point quakes all year.
bigbytes
THAT MEANS that the one possible person/s that could see what I was doing as scaremongering would be those who don't read the contents of all the messages in the thread; that is what moderators ARE SUPPOSED to do, right? Because I point to your page in my thread, and I mention your name in my thread, and other people mention your name in the thread indicating that they get that I am pointing TO YOU NOT ME. LONG BEFORE the MOD NOTE. As you can see, I link to THIS PAGE where people can read THIS. But it is unreasonable to presume that people who won't even read all the messages in a board that they moderate, would take the time to look at any of your background material in an attempt to understand what you write.
Note especially that is apparently OK for people to post at the GHMB that earthquakes (categorically) WILL BE ON THE INCREASE LEADING UP TO 2012; and that doesn't appear to pose a risk to the excite-able people? And check out this webpage, and notice the date 2012 twice. "Tipping Point ?" "Science or Superstition?" What the hell is that about? Pints of beer? No, it is "a countdown to a potentially hazardous event that constitutes scaremongering", right? Or does that only go for ppl mocking predictors?
I ask you again. Have you heard of anyone pointing to 2012 and suggesting that it will bring pints of beer? Probably not. So what do YOU think of when YOU hear that number as a date. Well hype about disaster, of course. So it is OK for the GRAHAM HANCOCK MESSAGE BOARD to do a commercial hype but I can't do guerilla theater there about Luke's foolishness. I mean MORONS will actually pay money to read and talk abt that.
OK, Luke; I have introduced the subject of my posting your stuff, so take a look at
the posts on that subject and see what you think about them. And when I say them, I mean the posts here, not the moderators. Now take a look at where I post my own stuff, and you will see people line up to call me stupid. http://www.grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?f=5&i=30642&t=30642,
http://www.grahamhancock.com/phorum/read.php?f=5&i=26863&t=26863; and I am posting videos about the days that quakes happen in advance. That doesn't impress the ppl there (GHMB), what impresses them is the 'subject line" (not the contents) of a msg!!
See the 'research' page at Quake Prediction Dot Com, and notice that Luke's method of statistical analysis entails throwing out all his misses and listing only apparent hits. If Luke's readers didn't go beyond the eighth grade, maybe some of them will believe his lies. You lie Luke. You are absolutely in-authentic.
The Resident Genius in the GRAHAM HANCOCK MESSAGE BOARDS is a person using the name of carol. She is so freakishly intelligent that she skipped grades in school; ask her, she'll tell you - she skipped grades. Ask Her. When you go to the GHMB, look at the Science section, and see what passes for science there. Then do a search for bigbytes as the author, and look at what I have been allowed to post in that section in the past. Now look at the post abt sunspot 1035. Carol writes, "What's so special about that?" Now, if you have even thought about sunspots in the last two years, you probably know (even not being a certified genius yourself) that we are 'in' an historic, extended sunspot minimum; but Carol doesn't know that. After Jonny supplies some more information, her answer is muffled because her nose is so far up his hind-end, but what she says is that Jonny is a fountain of information (after someone else posts something).
You will want to note that Carol is the one who suggested that my posts about planets and earthquakes didn't 'belong' in the Science section, "since science didn't have anything to do with predictions", and that Jonny is the one that moved them there. As to sunspots, if you do a search of Jonny's posts you will find one where he puts his foot down and stands up (as tall as he can) and proclaims in a loud voice (remember, he has a plastic cyber-gun and a tin badge that reads GHMB MONITOR) that as it was being a sunspot minimum in 2008 that the next maximum WOULD BE in 2012. I wrote to suggest that I wouldn't bet on that; meaning, I betcha a zillion dollars you are wrong. Now we are still in a sunspot minimum, and NASA's last PREDICTION was for a maximum in 2013.
SO, I ax you, what is the diff between Jonny and NASA looking at past sunspot records and making projections into the future, and my attempting the same thing with with earthquakes? To begin with, I have been right. Look down the page and you will see embedded Youtube videos of mine posted before earthquake events that I name dates for; but those don't count as Science in the GRAHAM HANCOCK MESSAGE BOARDS. Check out the post in my thread about Luke's predictions where someone posts "1 hour ago 6.5 Earthquake hit Spain, Portugal and Morocco ". Luke had reported it as being 6.0r and occurring in Lisbon. When the dust finally settled, the quake had occurred in the ocean and measured 5.4. This is the kind of reporting that goes on there.
Intermission.
It hurts your feelings to be able to forecast events months ahead of time, and not to be able to post it as Science. Take another look at my predictions for the first week of the year that I did a long time ago, and compare to what we see happening.
