Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,367 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 253,603
Pageviews Today: 406,860Threads Today: 153Posts Today: 2,670
04:23 AM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
Message Subject COSTA RICAN 7.6 connected to EXACT Date & Location of Major Quake Warning for SEPTEMBER 5TH and ALAJUELA! And HITS the 188 LEY LINES
Poster Handle SilentlyKnowing
Post Content
...


With all due respect, are we looking at the same post?

I just gave you 3 examples above.

The New Zealand quake is supposedly one of the original quakes that defined the 188 pattern, but it was only 7.1 in magnitude!

There was a 7.3 in Vanuatu on August 10, just 25 days before! That's 163 days from the Chile quake, Chile's being the first to define the 188-day alleged pattern, and it's MORE than the New Zealand quake!!

And you're also overlooking the Ecuador quake, which was the same magnitude 2 days later!

Am I missing something???
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1485413


further addressed here...

Thread: COSTA RICAN 7.6 connected to EXACT Date & Location of Major Quake Warning for SEPTEMBER 5TH and ALAJUELA! And HITS the 188 LEY LINES (Page 2)

and please don't forget to not only show me a consistent pattern associated with that Vanuatu quake, but how it and others on the pattern KNOCKED THE EARTH OFF ITS AXIS ;/

thanks
 Quoting: MatrixLNIN11


Dude, the 7.1 New Zealand and the Fiji were NOT HISTORIC. WITHOUT THEM, YOU HAVE NO PATTERN. The Chile and Japan ones WERE HISTORIC, yes, but the other 2 were not. There's no difference between the 7.1 New Zealand and the Vanautu 7.1 in intensity. You're showing partiality to the New Zealand one to fit the pattern, don't you see that???? By the laws of reason, YOU CANNOT SELECT THE NEW ZEALAND ONE AND IGNORE THE VANAUTU ONE, nor the FIJI vs. the Ecuador one to establish a pattern!!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 946927


I agree that 1 out of the 4 that OP sites does not seem to be as "news worthy" as the others, but all 3 of your dates were large, yes, but not "as" destructive. As with all "new discoveries/theories" there are bound to be flaws. We still adhere Einstein's theory of relativity although all "new discoveries/theories" have found it to be flawed! If you are so inclined to prove OP as an epic fail, may I suggest that you put as much time, energy, work, heart & passion into proving him as he has to prove himself right? Or even just sit and chill for a bit and wait for his 4th video?
 Quoting: Jusvistn 23335416


clappa
 
Please verify you're human:




Reason for reporting:







GLP