コミ垢チェッカー

ランキング	アイコン	お名前	アカウント	ノート数	ランク
449位		SSGEOS	@ssgeos	36	S ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 多くのコミュニティノートが付いており、デマや陰謀論、詐欺といった深刻な問題が指摘されている可能性があります。中には無断転用による不正なインプレッション稼ぎも頻発しているケースも見受けられます。このランクの情報は、大きな誤解を招くリスクが極めて高いです。誤情報や陰謀論の拡散は、社会に深刻な影響を与える可能性があります。詐欺的なコンテンツやスパム行為にも巻き込まれないよう注意が必要です。

449位

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

ノート数: 36

ランク: S

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

多くのコミュニティノートが付いており、デマや陰謀論、詐欺といった深刻な問題が指摘されている可能性があります。中には無断転用による不正なインプレッション稼ぎも頻発しているケースも見受けられます。このランクの情報は、大きな誤解を招くリスクが極めて高いです。誤情報や陰謀論の拡散は、社会に深刻な影響を与える可能性があります。詐欺的なコンテンツやスパム行為にも巻き込まれないよう注意が必要です。

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Atmospheric fluctuations 9 March 2023 https://t.co/fHuAcv1pWB

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from atmospheric activity have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/pre…
nature.com/articles/d4158…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
usgs.gov/faqs/do-solar-…
usgs.gov/faqs/are-earth…
usgs.gov/faqs/there-ear…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Planetary & Seismic Update 8 March 2023
https://t.co/uKtEKujd97

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from planetary alignment have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/pre…
nature.com/articles/d4158…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Atmospheric fluctuation marking estimated parts of Asia. https://t.co/URyTOtyuyt

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from atmospheric phenomena have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/do-solar-…
usgs.gov/faqs/there-ear…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Atmospheric fluctuation once more marking regions in the West Pacific / East Asia. https://t.co/dqzkY8Aekp

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from atmospheric phenomena have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/do-solar-…
usgs.gov/faqs/there-ear…
usgs.gov/faqs/are-earth…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Atmospheric fluctuations 3 March 2023 https://t.co/slUXf3YVeX

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Atmospheric fluctuations on 25 and 27 February seem to mark parts of the West Pacific and East Asia. https://t.co/oYAH3Xkppj

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

EARTHQUAKE WARNING

A convergence of critical planetary geometry around 2 and 5 March may result in large to very large seismic activity, possibly even a mega-thrust earthquake around 3-4 March and/or 6-7 March.
https://t.co/tBZjLek4Qj

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from planetary alignment have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but these specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Some seismic increase may occur around 25-26 February, but probably not much. The first week of March will be critical.
https://t.co/45iNYattOQ

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from planetary alignment have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but these specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Stronger (clustering of) seismic activity may occur from approximately 20 to 22 February, potentially peaking around the 22nd.

https://t.co/MEfCxopvV2

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from planetary alignment have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but these specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Seismic activity M ≥ 5.6 so far. There is an obvious clustering at the planetary peaks. There is still a higher probability of a stronger seismic event. https://t.co/MSGeKphaKq

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from planetary alignment have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but these specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Potential for increased seismic activity in or near the purple bands. This is an estimate. Other regions are not excluded. https://t.co/ywVXJVeFTd

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from planetary alignment have been disproven. There is always a chance for quakes in areas with active faults, but these specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

There is a higher probability of strong to major seismic activity in the coming days.
https://t.co/Bbw5FYMT5A

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction; claims of predictive utility from planetary alignment have been disproven. There is always a chance for earthquakes in places with active faults, but specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Some increased seismic activity may occur in the next few days, possibly low to mid 6 magnitude. From 16 to 18 February there is a high probability of very strong to major seismic activity, potentially reaching low to mid 7 magnitude, maybe larger.
https://t.co/FUDgAF3FuQ

There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction. There is always a chance for earthquakes in places with active faults, but specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested. Claims of predictive utility from planetary alignment have been disproven.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…
snopes.com/fact-check/can…
npr.org/2023/02/07/115…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

Potential for stronger seismic activity in or near the purple band 1-4 days. This is an estimate. Other regions are not excluded. https://t.co/nyPeruMtgP

There is no scientific basis for earthquake predictions. There is always a chance for earthquakes in places with active faults, but specific forecasts perform no better than random when tested. Claims of correlation with planetary alignment have been disproven.

usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-p…
pnsn.org/outreach/faq/e…
scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthqu…
sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/pre…
usgs.gov/faqs/can-posit…

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

FORECAST: Lunar geometry may cause some strong seismic activity in the coming days, especially around 8 February, most likely in the M6 range. There is a slight possibility of a larger seismic event.

Aftershocks will continue in Central Turkey and it could reach higher M 5 to 6.

SSGEOS

@ssgeos

The planetary and lunar geometry that converged on 4-5 February. This was also discussed in the latest forecast video. https://t.co/19lWd4uAKo