Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,356 Year: 3,613/9,624 Month: 484/974 Week: 97/276 Day: 25/23 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Increase in Natural Disasters? Prophesied?
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2321 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 1 of 157 (256382)
11-02-2005 9:44 PM


This thread is a continuation of Pat Robertson on Natural Disasters in the In the News forum.
Can it be shown that natural disastes are increasing since 1948 and does this fulfill biblical prophesy and suggest the imminent end of this world.
I suggest that an increase in natural disasters must be shown before a claim can be made for the accuracy of biblical prophesy.
AbE: Moved here by AdminBen

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by PaulK, posted 11-03-2005 1:43 AM Asgara has not replied
 Message 3 by coffee_addict, posted 11-03-2005 1:45 AM Asgara has not replied
 Message 4 by Phat, posted 11-03-2005 5:08 AM Asgara has not replied
 Message 7 by Buzsaw, posted 11-03-2005 9:04 AM Asgara has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2321 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 12 of 157 (256488)
11-03-2005 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Buzsaw
11-03-2005 8:53 AM


Re: My Response To NosyNed
but I maintained that the question was whether all disasters in conglomerate were on the increase,
Ok, buz please supply your evidence of an increase in ALL natural disasters. I haven't seen it yet. The only possible support you may have linked to is your news/livescience links that referred to the CRED database. I played around with that database and prior to the 1960s at least, a large portion of data is missing. You can not make a comparison with only partial data in one dataset.
Jar's referral is perfectly acceptable. If an established cycle or cycles is shown than an upsurge in activity is normal and predictable, and not some new phenomenon related to biblical prophesy.
This kind of stuff has a lot to do with the problems which arise with people like Faith and me on this board.
I agree. I don't agree that it is biased moderation. The problem stems from two totally different mindsets and what kind of data someone will accept. One side seems quite willing to accept reports on data from anywhere that reinforces their views and to not dig too deeply into what the actual data says, while the other side is use to using the actual data themselves and not relying on someone else's interpretation. But that is off topic for this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Buzsaw, posted 11-03-2005 8:53 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Buzsaw, posted 11-03-2005 11:16 PM Asgara has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2321 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 45 of 157 (257168)
11-05-2005 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Buzsaw
11-05-2005 8:01 PM


Re: Buzsaw "logic"
Buz, the NOAA site that webpenny is getting its list from does NOT have anything to say about frequency. This is something webpenny threw together with the list from NOAA that does not list all major disaster hurricanes either before OR after 1948.
And you have been given frequency data.... here is a link I gave back in message 258 of the prior thread...
U.S. Hurricane Strikes by Decade (Text)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Buzsaw, posted 11-05-2005 8:01 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Buzsaw, posted 11-05-2005 10:31 PM Asgara has replied
 Message 60 by Buzsaw, posted 11-06-2005 9:59 PM Asgara has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2321 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 51 of 157 (257208)
11-05-2005 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Buzsaw
11-05-2005 10:31 PM


Re: Buzsaw "logic"
Yes buz, I have never denied that webpenny got their data from that NOAA page. What I have a problem with is what webpenny is claiming from that data. The NOAA site NEVER says it is a list of major landfall US hurricanes...only webpenny says that, and in fact three of the hurricanes on that list DID NOT make US landfall. The webpenny site is simply wrong. It took an incomplete list, that did not state the criteria for making that list...and MADE UP the rest.
Please admit that the webpenny site misused the NOAA page it lists as reference.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Buzsaw, posted 11-05-2005 10:31 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Buzsaw, posted 11-06-2005 10:20 PM Asgara has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024