RF-Seismograph: White Island Eruption causes worldwide Radio Blackout

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by VE7DXW, Dec 9, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-2
  1. W0AEW

    W0AEW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Would there have been less controversy in these QRZ threads if the OP had simply stated that they've found a correlation between eruptions and blackouts or between earthquakes and eruptions?
  2. W4HM

    W4HM XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Unfortunately to many Americans have become science ignorant. It's a sad fact.:eek:

    The earth is flat. My proof is looking out of the window in my radio shack.:D
  3. N4UP

    N4UP Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Well, I cannot disagree with any of that except that I don't believe the peer-review process is entirely flawed. It is not perfect, I believe everyone is biased to some extent, and I have witnessed some poorly managed peer-review processes. But if managed properly, they work, and work well. For much of my career I did just that, selecting reviewers, evaluating reviews, and making sure ( to the best of my ability ) that the reviews were fair and not compromised. I often had reviewers reviewing reviews, to be sure. In a good peer review process, the reviewers are also evaluated and graded. Without such checks and balances you can get flawed results. And yes, there were times that I funded work that was controversial, that had poor reviews, simply because I felt it had potential and the reviews were simply biased by what "most" people believed.

    My post was simply to make a distinction between assertion and fact. Yes, they may be doing legitimate research. In which case they can say what they believe, but in my opinion it is wrong to make undemonstrated or unproven assertions. To do so suggests a lack of objectivity and undermines their credibility. If it had been me, I would have said this is what we believe based on our observations.
  4. KA0HCP

    KA0HCP XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    It is not necessary to duplicate centuries of science every week to disprove crackpots of all colors. ;)

    To reiterate:
    The OP"s claims are extravagant, based on completely flawed logic and wholey lacking in scientific method and statistical basis. We have provided him with lists of actions he needs to even begin a methodical gathering and study of his data. He has done none of these actions.
    N0TZU likes this.
  5. KK4NSF

    KK4NSF Ham Member QRZ Page

    understood, and I don't disagree. What you are really saying is that they are not presenting their findings in an unbiased manner.... and that does appear to be the case. However, my point is that just because their presentation skills are not up to par does not invalidate the possibility that they may have a legitimate theory.
  6. KK4NSF

    KK4NSF Ham Member QRZ Page

    thank you for proving my comment about posting mere rhetoric. ;)
  7. AG6QR

    AG6QR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Only if there had been some evidence of a correlation.

    A correlation doesn't mean, "When I hear news of an event, I look for an anomaly in the data I collected before the event and I find something."

    At a minimum, it would mean finding something that is not as likely to be present when no event happened. Furthermore, the type of anomaly that is found and the type of event with which it is correlated should be defined precisely enough so that an impartial observer can determine whether or not these things happened.

    If a demonstrable correlation could be found, it would be earth-shaking, so to speak. I would encourage those with access to the data to search for one. The search might begin with noticing something "funny" in the data, but it doesn't end there.
    N0TZU, KX4O and KK4NSF like this.
  8. KK4NSF

    KK4NSF Ham Member QRZ Page

    excellent point.... but wouldn't multiple instances of time-related events indicate a possible correlation? It would not prove a cause/ effect relationship, but could serve as an indicator that there may be a common root cause somewhere down the line.

    A case in point is the observed barking of dogs and flights of birds just prior to earthquakes. For decades the phenomenon was labeled as an "old wives tale".... until the P and S waves were delineated. Then it became evident what was spooking the dogs.

    I agree wholeheartedly.
    KX4O likes this.
  9. AG6QR

    AG6QR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    The term correlation has a specific meaning in science and math. It's not just a series of anecdotes. Demonstrating correlation means demonstrating that event A is more likely to happen when event B happens, and less likely to happen when event B does not happen.

    You can't demonstrate correlation by looking only at days and times around significant earthquakes, no matter how many such days and times you consider. You've got to also consider days and times when no significant earthquakes happened, and show that there is some significant difference between the two.

    Furthermore, since there are about a million earthquakes of magnitude 2 or greater per year worldwide, you probably need to define what you mean by a significant earthquake, with some geographical limits and/or magnitude limits. And there needs to be some sort of defined time limit, as well

    Without these limits, you'll end up observing that traffic accidents happen on the same days as earthquakes, and think you've found a correlation, when you've really found that both events happen multiple times every single day, even though most individuals don't personally experience them nearly so often.
    N0TZU likes this.
  10. W4HM

    W4HM XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    K6CLS likes this.

Share This Page

ad: vanity