5 ms·

"there is much resistance within the scientific community" is the usual euphemism used by pseudo-scientists to justify their claim. There’s absolutely no eviden

by hk__2 3y ago

"there is much resistance within the scientific community" is the usual euphemism used by pseudo-scientists to justify their claim. There’s absolutely no evidence that you can predict earthquakes by looking at the positions of the planets, and this "researcher" is known for his very vague "predictions" that sometimes appear to be true, sometimes not. It’s the scientific equivalent of a broken clock.

DoreenMichele 3y ago
I know exactly nothing about this guy. I'm the person who asked for a name. I was just quoting his own Twitter feed where he himself indicates this is not scientifically proven. He apparently calls it research. I'm personally fine with that and followed him before it was said here he predicts this based on planetary influences (and hadn't noticed it myself).
- hk__2 3y ago
  > I know exactly nothing about this guy. I'm the person who asked for a name. I know that and I’m just commenting his claim; I’m not attacking you in any way.
  - DoreenMichele 3y ago
    Okay, for the record, you are officially an antibeleiver who thinks simply asking the question and investigating it and trying to answer it makes one a nutter. For the record, I hate this out-of-hand dismissal of anyone who asks "What if..." about anything outside the current Overton Window.
    - Apocryphon 3y ago
      We are hardly living in incredulous times.
    - Capricorn2481 3y ago
      He just said he wasn't attacking you personally, but the fact that it's flying over your head implies that you actually do believe this stuff. What in the world is an "antibeliever?" I find it kind of telling you chose this phrase instead of anti science.
      - DoreenMichele 3y ago
        Antibeliever is someone who firmly believes the opposite though it's not actually scientifically proven. For example, people who say Bigfoot or aliens are absolutely not real and anyone who believes in such is clearly a loon rather than saying "It's unproven and seems extremely unlikely."
        ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
        > Antibeliever is someone who firmly believes... maybe they should be called a firm believer, then? like, in science? the opposite here is the default until you prove your thing true and the default false
    - cjaybo 3y ago
      You seem to be reading into and responding somewhat defensively to subtext that doesn’t appear to exist
      - DoreenMichele 3y ago
        You appear to be making this personal for no reason whatsoever.
kranke155 3y ago
This could have been said before every major scientific discovery. The scientific community must be wrong by definition if science is to learn something new. It’s more than proven that things most scientists find absurd and impossible end up being doable and proven. I’d give this person more leeway. He’s not reading astrology, he’s working patterns and clearly has not determined whether his research is accurate yet or not. He himself says there’s not enough data in some regards. So what is your resistance based off outside of reflexive skepticism ?
- hk__2 3y ago
  > So what is your resistance based off outside of reflexive skepticism ? This has been debunked over and over [1][2][3][4] and is by no mean different from fortune telling. He has not published a single paper nor has detailed its method, which is summarized by various sources as making a lot of predictions about earthquakes in regions that are known to often have earthquakes. Most of these predictions end up wrong, but we only talk about the "right" ones. [1]: https://www.newarab.com/news/arab-osint-platform-debunks-dutch-earthquake-forecaster https://www.newarab.com/news/arab-osint-platform-debunks-dut... [2]: https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2023/02/did-earthquake-guru-frank-hoogerbeets-really-foresee-the-disaster-in-turkey-and-syria/ https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2023/02/did-earthquake-guru-frank... [3]: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6469019/Top-Australian-academic-debunks-researchers-bizarre-prophecy-planets-cause-monster-quake.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6469019/Top-Austral... [4]: https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/03/01/dutch-earthquake-enthusiast-claims-to-predict-major-tremor/ https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/03/01/dutch-earthquake-enth...
  - kranke155 3y ago
    Ok so this is far more substantial. Thanks for sharing.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  "It’s more than proven that things most scientists find absurd and impossible end up being doable and proven" Are there many examples besides quantum physics? And eventually and in quite short time, they made their way into the mainstream science, because they modelled the world better. So if this guy can show that his approach can reliable help with predication of earthquakes, he will win. Simple as that. So far I am not convinced, but sure, the moon and the planets are a real force.

by hk__2 3y ago

DoreenMichele 3y ago

I know exactly nothing about this guy. I'm the person who asked for a name. I was just quoting his own Twitter feed where he himself indicates this is not scientifically proven. He apparently calls it research. I'm personally fine with that and followed him before it was said here he predicts this based on planetary influences (and hadn't noticed it myself).

hk__2 3y ago
> I know exactly nothing about this guy. I'm the person who asked for a name. I know that and I’m just commenting his claim; I’m not attacking you in any way.
- DoreenMichele 3y ago
  Okay, for the record, you are officially an antibeleiver who thinks simply asking the question and investigating it and trying to answer it makes one a nutter. For the record, I hate this out-of-hand dismissal of anyone who asks "What if..." about anything outside the current Overton Window.
  - Apocryphon 3y ago
    We are hardly living in incredulous times.
  - Capricorn2481 3y ago
    He just said he wasn't attacking you personally, but the fact that it's flying over your head implies that you actually do believe this stuff. What in the world is an "antibeliever?" I find it kind of telling you chose this phrase instead of anti science.
    - DoreenMichele 3y ago
      Antibeliever is someone who firmly believes the opposite though it's not actually scientifically proven. For example, people who say Bigfoot or aliens are absolutely not real and anyone who believes in such is clearly a loon rather than saying "It's unproven and seems extremely unlikely."
      - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
        > Antibeliever is someone who firmly believes... maybe they should be called a firm believer, then? like, in science? the opposite here is the default until you prove your thing true and the default false
  - cjaybo 3y ago
    You seem to be reading into and responding somewhat defensively to subtext that doesn’t appear to exist
    - DoreenMichele 3y ago
      You appear to be making this personal for no reason whatsoever.

kranke155 3y ago

This could have been said before every major scientific discovery. The scientific community must be wrong by definition if science is to learn something new. It’s more than proven that things most scientists find absurd and impossible end up being doable and proven. I’d give this person more leeway. He’s not reading astrology, he’s working patterns and clearly has not determined whether his research is accurate yet or not. He himself says there’s not enough data in some regards. So what is your resistance based off outside of reflexive skepticism ?

hk__2 3y ago
> So what is your resistance based off outside of reflexive skepticism ? This has been debunked over and over [1][2][3][4] and is by no mean different from fortune telling. He has not published a single paper nor has detailed its method, which is summarized by various sources as making a lot of predictions about earthquakes in regions that are known to often have earthquakes. Most of these predictions end up wrong, but we only talk about the "right" ones. [1]: https://www.newarab.com/news/arab-osint-platform-debunks-dutch-earthquake-forecaster https://www.newarab.com/news/arab-osint-platform-debunks-dut... [2]: https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2023/02/did-earthquake-guru-frank-hoogerbeets-really-foresee-the-disaster-in-turkey-and-syria/ https://www.skeptic.org.uk/2023/02/did-earthquake-guru-frank... [3]: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6469019/Top-Australian-academic-debunks-researchers-bizarre-prophecy-planets-cause-monster-quake.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6469019/Top-Austral... [4]: https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/03/01/dutch-earthquake-enthusiast-claims-to-predict-major-tremor/ https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/03/01/dutch-earthquake-enth...
- kranke155 3y ago
  Ok so this is far more substantial. Thanks for sharing.
hutzlibu 3y ago
"It’s more than proven that things most scientists find absurd and impossible end up being doable and proven" Are there many examples besides quantum physics? And eventually and in quite short time, they made their way into the mainstream science, because they modelled the world better. So if this guy can show that his approach can reliable help with predication of earthquakes, he will win. Simple as that. So far I am not convinced, but sure, the moon and the planets are a real force.