[gallo]

Quote by: Technosoul A lot of people here in the science forum has objected to some of my theory making that came to me from 'out of the blue'.

Completely justified objections, since you didn't make any theories.

Because I did not provide a test that would effect a result that can be confirmed.

Then you didn't understand what was explained to you about what science is and how it works? I suspected as much.

And so over in the Religion and Philosophy forum I posted a formula. Belief + faith = expected result. (wihin limitations so noted in that OP).

That seems to be totally meaningless. What does it mean, since faith is belief (without supporting evidence). Moreover, that isn't a formula.

I tested this by reporting and predicting that above average earthquakes will occur within the time limitations of the following 30 day period. (future). That was on July 19, 07. I predicted not just one but that two major earthquakes would happen.

What was it that you tested? Your bogus "formula?" How is your "prediction" a test of anything but your ability to state the obvious? Why is it that you think that this is any more scientific than any of your other blue daydreaming?

Most people feel that normally no one can predict when a earthquake will happen.

That's right. And you still haven't. As has been pointed out to you by Zeebadee, you haven't actually predicted anything. In fact, scientific predictions are much more specific than a statement of what is already known as a statistical fact. I predict that in the next 30 days that somewhere in the U.S. at there will be two occasions in which a locality will receive an inch or more of rain in a 24 hour period. How's that for a prediction? Nonsense, right? At least as risky as your prediction.

The following day (Sat. July 21) a 6 point earthquake shook South America. Then on Sunday July 22 two more 6 point magnitude earthquakes occured in China and in Western Iran. According to the news reports. Damage reports still pending. Those happening during the first three days of the total window of 30 days. The China quake left about 2000 people homeless.

So what. You didn't predict either of these earthquakes. You didn't actually give us any sort of meaningful time and you didn't predict a specific location. It is meaningless to claim that you are predicting anything when all you claim is that there will be an earthquake somewhere on earth in the next 30 days. It is as meaningless as my prediction of rain.

The predictions founded on my belief and faith in the 'knowing' that came to me from out of the blue. In total so far since that prediction of a few days ago the world has experienced 4 quakes of (or more then) a 6 point magnitude. And a couple of 5 point (or greater) impacts elsewhere. ( one of those being a 5.9 quake ).

You forgot to mention that you were predicting a sure thing. In other words, your weren't predicting anything - only stating the obvious.

The details are all documented with needed links under the heading "The Belief Theory potential' in the Religion and philosphy forum. Well, that should shake things up. (opinon).

Doesn't seem so.

During the "volconvo peer review" one recomendation was suggested to further test and confirm the fomula as outlined and it's proposed concluding facts.

There is no such thing as peer review at volconvo. You don't seem to know what the term means. But that still doesn't make it science. Your "formula" doesn't suggest anything that can be tested through prediction and experiment.

The suggested additional test would be designed to debunk any claim that it was just a lucky chance that the odds favored the projections I indicated in the prediction.

In other words, you are well aware that you "prediction" is essentially meaningless.

In spite of the idea that it could have been a lucky guess or whatever the fact still remans that the earthquakes happened as predicted.

No it didn't, since you didn't predict it. You didn't tell us where it was going to happen or when to any meaningful extent.

A future event was predicted in advance based on faith in my belief that I knew it would happen due to data from "out of the blue" , and has been documented and not 'faked'.

That's nonsense. You didn't predict a specific event. You only "predicted" that events that happen constantly would happen somewhere at some time.