RF-Seismograph picked up the M6.5 from Idaho at 23:52 UTC

That wasn't caused by the earthquake,

I was in a grocery store near Boise and I accidently sneezed and the rest of the grocery store patrons were so freaked out by my sneeze that they all pooped their pants and tooted creating such a noise that the entire store shook for half a minute.

Needless to say the great toilet paper pandemic in Idaho also started on that same day near Boise when these same people attempted to clean their pants right there in the store.

 

Some interesting scientific study regarding interaction between radio waves and terrestrial phenomenon. The interaction between radio waves and ground formations is pretty well scientifically documented. Throw in the massive potential of the pizeo electric effect during the stresses right before an earthquake and you have some interesting possibilities for anomalous radio emissions.

One of many articles, further research encouraged:

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2016RS006068

 

"The interaction between radio waves and ground formations is pretty well scientifically documented."
That statement is true.
However, it doesn't change the fact that Alex VE7DXW is peddling pseudoscience.

Pseudoscience often takes a grain of real science and twists it into something that looks like it could be science but actually isn't.

 

Bonnie has it right. The scientific method includes rejecting the null hypothesis, which is always the most probable outcome: that the data in the study, in and of themselves, do not support a causal (not just correlative) link between A and B. It is really hard to do this correctly, which is why people devote careers to science. Being humans, your brain is evolved to find patterns as a survival tool - so without the correct steps in the correct order, it is easy to fall off the path and convince yourself of a result based on incorrect assumptions or interpretations.

The method used is the subject of scrutiny -- not the scientific possibility of earthquake driven ionospheric effects, which have been studied in all major research journals through peer reviewed, refereed articles. (The Kelley et al 2017 article referred to earlier in this thread is thorough and an excellent example of the latter -- AGU journals put one through a wringer with extensive blind peer review.)

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." -- Feynman

 

Let us not throw out the baby with bathwater and proclaim everything related to this phenomena is pseudoscience. There are some very good insights related to these events.

 

KD2LFG said "Let us not throw out the baby with bathwater and proclaim everything related to this phenomena is pseudoscience. There are some very good insights related to these events."

Difficulty with reading comprehension?
Don't know what the Scientific Method is or how it works?
The Scientific Method is the bedrock of science.
You and Alex VE7DXW should both sign up for an online refresher course in Science 101.

Additionally, one should point out that Alex VE7DXW is totally failing peer review

 

Please reread my post above. "The method used is the subject of scrutiny -- not the scientific possibility of earthquake driven ionospheric effects, which have been studied in all major research journals through peer reviewed, refereed articles. (The Kelley et al 2017 article referred to earlier in this thread is thorough and an excellent example of the latter -- AGU journals put one through a wringer with extensive blind peer review.)". No one is throwing out the possibility.

 

My earlier post shows the results of measurements using satellite/ionosonde data , so it is not only theoretical.
Here some background information:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...in_the_Ionosphere_During_Solar_Eclipse_Events

 

Interesting article but please include the DATE with the UTC time on the Title of the article since not alll of us knnow the date it occured.

 

I don't have a problem with reading comprehension, nor identifying an over generalization. Try to turning your snarky volume down a notch.

 

Ask your doctor if mansplaining is right for you.

 

This all sounds terribly scientific and impressive. How long would the carrier lifetime in this naturally occurring material (rock and dirt) have to be for the holes to travel hundreds to thousands of meters to the surface? Carrier lifetime isn't terribly long in our highly purified silicon devices where charge carriers only have to travel a tiny fraction of a millimeter. Come on. Seriously?

http://www.ioffe.ru/SVA/NSM/Semicond/Si/Figs/1322.gif

 

Early in the scientific method totem pole is where hypothesis and 'possible explanations' lives. In that phase. Demanding absolute proof at that point in the process is essentially akin to "thought supression". We are surrounded by all sorts of hypothesis ranging from "Dark Energy, Dark Matter", "God is real" and "Round Pizzas in square boxes is a golden principal".
In fact, those principals underlay how all thought emerges. I say keep an open mind. Rich

 

One more stray emission here and I'll be QRU.

I don't want to go too far out into the ozone here, but earthquakes shift a lot of mass around and I'm sure that the Space/Time Continuum gets a little perturbed by it (gravity=bent space, proven through observation). Bent space can cause light waves as well as electromagnetic field variations, so for a big shaker, I could believe there would be EM effects. Also, this thing called eigenvalues that seem to propagate faster than light across an established EM field, or so I was told in Physics. I say - keep exploring!

 

https://spaceweather.com

[2 may 2020]