Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,749 Year: 4,006/9,624 Month: 877/974 Week: 204/286 Day: 11/109 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Increase in Natural Disasters? Prophesied?
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5845 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 26 of 157 (256771)
11-04-2005 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by jar
11-04-2005 9:41 AM


Re: Increasing compared to...
What is the timeframe?
I think buz has made his point that an increase can be within the timeframe of everything after 1948. That is to say since beginning to watch in 1948 there has been an increase in disasters.
Whether this is true, or whether it can be shown as part of a greater cycle if one looks beyond 1948 is irrelevant. If he's simply looking for an increase since a certain date, all he has to start from is that date.
Obviously I don't agree with his assessment that anything unusual is happening, and your points regarding the prophecies have thus far been dead on.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 11-04-2005 9:41 AM jar has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5845 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 34 of 157 (256999)
11-05-2005 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by NosyNed
11-04-2005 11:33 PM


Re: Determining if something is increasing
What you said is true if you are trying to determine a general increase in something. As long as Buz is simply claiming that there will be an increase in disasters after 1948, which means that 1949 will have more than 1948, etc etc etc up till now, that is fine.
There are of course many questions which would come from this, including why a prophecy about disasters coming at the end of the world (if it existed) would be so narrow that the increase still does not match frequency of disasters naturally occuring at other times (and so the increase is not exectly apocalyptic).
Originally I agreed with Jar on this, but Buz narrowed the focus in one of his last replies and technically it makes him correct.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by NosyNed, posted 11-04-2005 11:33 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5845 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 52 of 157 (257230)
11-06-2005 4:13 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Buzsaw
11-05-2005 10:42 PM


Re: Questions buz needs to answer.
The timeframe, as I've been stating all along is from 1948
If you use only data from 1948 onward, you are free to try and make your case with evidence.
I assume that historically, it's been relatively stable over the centuries from the information we have.
If this is the case you want to make, then you must use data from before 1948, and jar has been correct all along in his criticisms. If you mean an increase after 1948 relative to frequency throughout the centuries you need much more data.
By the way, you'd also be wrong. I'm not sure where you ever got a meteorologist saying that weather and climate have been stable over the centuries, especially up until 1948. Good luck with that.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Buzsaw, posted 11-05-2005 10:42 PM Buzsaw 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