ok so lets assume one quake hits 4 days before the 188, and the next one hits 4 days after the 188.. thats 192 days. Would you accept it as being inside the cycle range? And the other way, with a quake hitting 4 days after and the next 4 days before, it would be 180 days
So in fact you are talking about a cycle with a 12 days window! Lots of days for a significant quake to hit
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22459462 You're still missing the first point....
your 4-day window premise s irrelevant due to 6 major quakes IN A ROW that have validated this current cycle which evidence proves goes far beyond the type of coincidence most skeptics try to argue.
so there is NO 12 day window that the cycle uses or is based upon.
the CONSISTENCY of the cycle/pattern has only certain types of quakes associated with it that CONSISTENTLY REPEATS with a CONSISTENT TIMEFRAME or WINDOW in the majority of cases. THATS CALLED a PATTERN... and the quakes associated DO NOT HAPPEN ALL THE TIME. So what you're suggesting has no bearing on this cycle or the merit of it.
And your premise about "lots of days for a significant quake to hit" is totally out of context. the term SIGNIFICANT IS VAGUE, and you offer no specific stats or evidence to support it nor does anything your'e saying address any of the specifics or evidence I've been presenting in the past 4 video's that shows why your point is irrelevant. But then, contrary to your inference, being within 4 days for a MAJOR QUAKE to hit, is VERY ACCURATE!
