Thanks John.

 

I for one thought the article sounded very interesting and intriguing, so I
encourage all to continue to bring it forth and share it with PSN. It's
appreciated!

 

Kareem Lanier 

(now moved to Elk Grove, too far from the seismic activity L )

 

From: psn-l-request@.............. [mailto:psn-l-request@............... On
Behalf Of John Cole
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 4:48 AM
To: psn-l@..............
Subject: Re: SOLAR ACTIVITY VS. EARTHQUAKES

 

Al, Damn lies and statistics are pretty strong words .Yes, it has not been
empirically proven as you and other gentlemen would say however, do not let
strong statements discourage you from bringing information forward for all
to see . Time will tell one way or the other. If we ever get a clue as to  a
possible cause of earthquakes it will come forward just like you presented
it . Now just suppose it does turn out to have merit? The person who brought
it to the attention of the fraternity will soon be forgotten and a new
individual known to us will quickly take credit for the discovery because he
had known  it all along 
 
Honest John PS, A prophet is without honor in his own country ( Jesus
Christ)

 

  _____  

From: "AHrubetz@......." 
To: psn-l@..............
Sent: Wed, June 16, 2010 6:48:59 PM
Subject: SOLAR ACTIVITY VS. EARTHQUAKES




A friend sent me a portion of a newsletter form the Space and Science
Research Center, apparently a private concern out of Florida.  The report
dealt primarily with prediction of agricultural production vs sunspot
activity.  But what caught my eye was the statement: "After studying
300-plus years of data, an SSRC study also found decreased solar activity
had an 80.6% correlation with increased volcanic activity, and 100%
correlation with essentially all of the largest U. S. earthquakes."

I had never heard of such an analogy.  Is this make believe?

 

Al Hrubetz















Thanks John.

 

I for one thought the article sounded very interesting =
and
intriguing, so I encourage all to continue to bring it forth and share =
it with
PSN. It’s appreciated!

 

Kareem Lanier 

(now moved to Elk Grove, too far from the seismic =
activity L )


 





From:=

psn-l-request@.............. [mailto:psn-l-request@............... On =
Behalf
Of John Cole

Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 4:48 AM

To: psn-l@..............

Subject: Re: SOLAR ACTIVITY VS. EARTHQUAKES





 







Al, Damn lies and statistics are pretty strong =
words .Yes,
it has not been empirically proven as you and other gentlemen would say
however, do not let strong statements discourage you from bringing =
information
forward for all to see . Time will tell one way or the other. If we ever =
get a
clue as to  a possible cause of earthquakes it will come forward =
just like
you presented it . Now just suppose it does turn out to have merit? The =
person
who brought it to the attention of the fraternity will soon be forgotten =
and a
new individual known to us will quickly take credit for the =
discovery
because he had known  it all along 

            &=
nbsp;           &n=
bsp;           &nb=
sp;           &nbs=
p;            =
;            =
            &=
nbsp;           &n=
bsp;   
Honest John PS, A prophet is without honor in his own country ( Jesus =
Christ)





 









From:=

"AHrubetz@......." <AHrubetz@.......>

To: psn-l@..............

Sent: Wed, June 16, 2010 6:48:59 PM

Subject: SOLAR ACTIVITY VS. EARTHQUAKES





<=
o:p>



A friend sent me a portion of a newsletter form the Space =
and
Science Research Center, apparently a private concern out of =
Florida.  The
report dealt primarily with prediction of agricultural production vs =
sunspot
activity.  But what caught my eye was the statement: =
&=
quot;After
studying 300-plus years of data, an SSRC study also found decreased =
solar
activity had an 80.6% correlation with increased volcanic activity, and =
100%
correlation with essentially all of the largest U. S. =
earthquakes."<=
o:p>





I had never heard of such an analogy.  Is this make =
believe?<=
o:p>





 





Al Hrubetz