POLL: Is Ken Ring credible?

Filed in:

Last night's Campbell Live interview with Ken Ring has caused widespread anger across social networking sites, including a blog written by media commentator Brian Edwards who said Campbell was a "disgrace to the interviewer's trade".

Edwards is well known for being critical of interviewers in New Zealand however this time he has the support of many in the public - at least, he has support from the vocal people on Twitter.

But, interview skills aside, was Campbell simply reflecting a mood throughout Christchurch and New Zealand that Ring's predictions have no scientific base and therefore are doing more harm than good?

Whether you liked or hated the interview is irrelevant - we want to ask you this question - Do you believe Ken Ring is a credible source for earthquake predictions?


Does Ken Ring have any

Does Ken Ring have any scientific qualifications??

jesus chris look how manny

jesus chris look how manny people are stupid and bealive him he thinks he can read cats paws if you bealive him you are an idiot

What is wrong with Ken Rings forecast charts?

Have a look at this Youtube video and see if you still think Mr Ring is credible:


He uses "+/- 4 days" either side of each event (full moon, new moon, king tides, perigee and apogee. This video explains what is wrong with his charts.



to me, this is the best indication of whether Kens theories have any substance.
Study the graph and make your own decision.

Get ya boots

Anyone got extra toilet paper

just some additional information - for those who choose to read



would totally say that it is not about ken ring or not ken ring but the bulk of information out there. for myself I'm just preparing a bit more than I had done the past months.
on another level - as far as evolution of humanity is concerned - it is more important than ever to stay in your heart, know that we are all connected and that being 're-active' with fear (or any other fear-related negative emotion) creates a unfavourable energy field.
there's another site - your safe place to be - which could also be looked at.
if you intuitively feel that home where you are safest, then that's probably right.
and - 'bitching' about somebody who dares to speak his truth is a very poor representation of a humanity that is on its way out.
kia kaha
just a guest here


Gosh, after viewing, reading so many comments and links...my head actually hurts! My maiden name in Bakker...funny that, considering the link to debunking Ken Ring is run by a Bakker? I contacted this person not to long ago to see if we were actually related. Perhaps? Long distantly.

Back to the comment in question: from what I have read etc (correct me if I am wrong), Ken Ring doesn't actually state that THERE IS GOING TO BE AN EARTHQUAKE OF A CERTAIN MAGNATITUDE AT A PARTICULAR LOCATION ON A CERTAIN DAY/DATE. If one can read and think outside the box and in between the lines; he is saying that there is probable cause that there COULD BE a quake 3 days either side of the 20th.

Really! Ken ring is simply stating his beliefs and methods/theory. He states that we should make up our own minds. He states that we should be PLANNING AND BE PREPARED. He states that we should be RATIONAL AND LEVEL HEADED.

So one could say, that Ken Ring is not scaremongering etc. IT IS EVERYONE ELSE THAT IS CAUSING MASS HYSTERIA!

Whether or not you are believers or non believers, for the sake of New Zealand, just give it a rest! Everyone has a voice and opinion, but it is about the way you produce your voice and opinion whether or not you get my RESPECT!

I am neither for or against Ken Ring, I have respect for him, as he has his believes etc. He doesn't actually tell people what to do or how to do it. I am in the middle, so to speak. I have taken his information and used it to suit me and my family, that is PLANNING AND PREPARING!

Instead of wasting so much time and negative energy on this, people should be putting this towards educating (knowledge is power) children/family and planning/preparing.

Gosh people get a brain!

Nina, I totally agree with

Nina, I totally agree with you. Reading the scientist vs doomsayers blogs you realise they have missed the point a bit....no one can say without-a-doubt one thing or another because Mother Nature will have her way whatever their opinions are!! Preparedness is key either way.

Thanks Nina.

My sentiments exactly,Thankyou,Nina.At long last--someone with a level head and a positive ,caring attitude.

debunking Ken Ring

i run a Debunking web page designed to show flaws in Ken's Theory

check it out.


I see Ken Ring has posted his

I see Ken Ring has posted his theory on the moon and earthquakes
but I look at the table
and I see regression analysis line going from top right to bottom left angle for the earthquakes
which is an opposite line to the moon groupings (i.e the moon groupings migrate)

and so of course you are going to get dissection of those 2 lines at some stage
does not prove anything as far as I can see

Ken Ring

Nowhere in the John Campbell Ken Ring interview did ken Ring suggest that he had any scientific qualifications for his OPINIONS!. Because that is exactly what they are. He says there is a probability only AROUND the 20th of March. I had to admire the man's patience. I would have called John Campbell a B&**#y idiot (or worse) and just walked out, but he didn't. He had the manners to try and conduct the interview in a seemly manner. Whether I believe in the man or not is immaterial, he is entitled to his opinion


You all have alot to say and have your own opinions.Lets just wait
and see what happens then aye, better hope hes wrong.................

Ken Ring

Gosh New zealanders are so slow... farmers have been using Ken Rings astrological predictions for years, he is really admired as his weather predictions which is based around science have been spot on. Things that city folk probably don't understand. Such as the best time to make hay before it rains, when to harvest etc. Ken Ring is a great academic and people who are so lame to lambast him should study what he say's and then I'm sure if people have the intelligence to be able to conclude given all the information that Ken Ring is spot on!!

If farmers have been using

If farmers have been using Ken Rings predictions for years the average farmers IQ must be pretty low.

It is all moronic psuedo-science, Ken ring is a scaremonger, a fraud and a complete disgrace.


I can't say your very helpful either, WHEN IS THE NEXT EARTHQUAKE then wiseguy. Shall I stay here in Christchurch or move towns. What have you got to offer. I took annual leave before valentines day and thank KEN RING I did because my house has been red stickered, I have no place of employment and both of my neighbours are still missing. Your the fraud and the bloody disgrace.

Totally agree with you,well

Totally agree with you,well said :)

Mr Ring

I quote Dr Mark Quigley:

(From drquigs.com)

"No one has predicted the recent earthquakes in Canterbury. Vague quotes about dates of 'increased' activity plus or minus several days, without magnitudes, locations, and exact times do not constitute prediction. Consider this: Ken Ring's probability of getting a prediction correct based on perigee/apogee new moon/full moon for 2010 was 63%. That's 230 out of 365 days that fall on some day that he would argue influences earthquake activity. For days that combine several factors of new moon/perigee etc. he missed out on several predictions and NOTHING unusual happened on those days. (i.e. Jan 30th, Feb 14th, Feb 27th, Mar 29, June 14th, Jul 12, Aug 10, and so on for his liberal interpretation of the aftershock sequence). This does not constitute 'prediction'. It is opportunistic and meaningless self promotion during a time of national crisis."

spot on my foot his weather

spot on my foot
his weather predictions over the last 6 months for the auckland area have been way off the mark and no better than tossing a coin

sometimes he is going to be right, sometimes he is going to be wrong
works out about 50% easch way (i.e no better than tossing a coin)

he is just using averages from past weather patterns
sometimes the patterns will fall into similar patterns that have occured before
for a while
and then he will be right
other times the pattern changes and is alot different to the average pattern or the pattern from 19 years ago, etc
and so you can rely on something that works sometimes but not other times

if you want to know what the average weather pattern is going to be for a month in the future then you can use past average conditions as a guide
that is what he will often do, i.e by making predicitons that it will be the coldest part of winter in the last week or july...that will be most likley be true because that is the average...thats how he works...he is a mathmatitican who uses statisticis to come up with answers and solutions based on averages that will on average (50/50) work out
good as a guide
but I would not rely on it
anyone with the time to look back and work out the averages could do that
good on him for taking the time to do that

Utter nonsense. All sorts of

Utter nonsense. All sorts of post-analyses have been done on his predictions, and he's not even as good as random guessing, often much worse. Anyone who takes the trouble to look at his charts on that simple cyclic system can soon see that the outcomes bear no resemblance to them - and it wouldn't matter if he took 19 years, 18 years, any number at all.. it's just not that simple. Anyone who challenges the meaning of the phrase "driest January in 100 years" just to try and wriggle out of making an incorrect statement needs his head read.

People have studied what he's

People have studied what he's been saying. Not only does he get the science wrong, he also gets his predictions woefully wrong. A comparison of his almanac predictions to actual weather data over a year gave him an accuracy of 25%, which is far too low to actually call a prediction.


People have studied what he's

What was Met Services success rate?

John Campbell/ Ken Ring interview last night

I watched with disgust John Campbell supposedly interviewing Ken Ring last night and to put it mildly was disgusted with John..... he hardly gave the man the courtesy to reply to any of his questions.....John Campbell did nothing but shoot him down, I thought John Campbell just loves the sound of his own voice, ....used to like him, now I think he is just full of his own importance....... thank god we have the option to change channels whenever Campbell is interviewing.

campbell live

if this is the same ken that has been predicting the whale strandings followed by the big ones in c/church then john really needs to sit upand give this man some credit instead of shooting him down .
mybe just mybe mr ring can save a third c/church from claming so meny lives

I think "interview skills

I think "interview skills aside" is an important part of the question. John Campbell merely did what all journalists before him should have done, do a bit of research, ask the hard questions and insist you get a straight answer. I can imagine interviewing Ken Ring would be very frustrating in this respect. I guess it's no surprise that I don't find Ken Ring credible, but people should look past the interview style and focus on whether what Ken Ring says has any scientific credibility. I think the fact that real scientists don't think it does is a good starting point unless you want to go into tin foil hat conspiracy theories.

Ken Ring

I think the guy (Ken) may have a screw loose, not sure. John Cambells interview however was an absolute disgrace. I can't believe his arrogance and his lack of regard for the general public to be able to form their own opinions. If John carries on like this no one will want to be interviewed by him.

anybody who is still watching t.v. has a screw loose, except if

it's to watch the rugby or in the case of the ladies - netball!

....you have the alternative news source - use it and scuttle the MSM who are not interested in the truth, and are only interested in turning you all into a group of compliant zombies!

If all you can do is spend your time watching some creep like monkey ramming his liberal dribble down your neck, then you don't deserve any sympathy from me!

Good on yer, Ken!

For, In spite of this appalling insult to the intelligence,of the viewers of this charade, for that is what it truly was, you remained rational, cool, calm and collected. We may not all understand where you come from or fully understand or agree with your methods, but you definitely have a right to be heard, and guess what?.

Some people actually want to hear what you have to say! 8 - ]

I have no strong opinion one

I have no strong opinion one way or another on Ken Ring's credibility, but I think that, as in any field, it's always good to have someone who challenges the norm and questions accepted beliefs or offers new theories. If we've learned anything about the world we live in it should be that we understand only a fraction of what is going on and that there is always something new to be discovered - or to be re-discovered, because we got it wrong the first time. I think Mr Ring has every right to his beliefs, just as we have every right to either agree with them or dismiss them as lunacy. I don't see people attacking astrologers with the same sort of vehemence, yet they too predict outcomes based on the planets, and we are welcome to take or dismiss their advice at will.

I thought...

I thought that the interview, if one can call it that, was disgusting. I also find it tragic that because he doesn't have a recognised degree from a tertiary institution, he's not credible.

Many of the world's most successful people throughout history dared think diferrently and many of those did not have degrees, just a keen interest.

What I find ironic is that he is dismissed as nonsensical yet, if you look up the moon Io (orbiting Jupiter) - the most geologically active entity in our solar system - you will read,(from scientists!) that it is due to the immense gravitational pull from Jupiter itself.

I'd rather hear from someone who has an idea and make up my mind than be denied it because someone else thinks it is better for me.

I'm also disappointed in Weather Watch's previous posting that anything that is non-scientific in origin will not be published. Discussing such theories will not cause a mass hysteria. As you can see, people take it or leave it. He's been publicised so people will be looking him up regardless....



The Io/Jupiter and Moon/Earth

The Io/Jupiter and Moon/Earth relationships are comparable in that they are both moons and planets, but the massive difference in relative masses, orbital distances and other variables makes for an apples and oranges comparison. They are conceptually similar, but very very different realities.

For a topic to be discussed seriously it must first have actual merit. i.e. be worth discussing. Ring's theories have no base in solid repeatable or demonstrable science, and no credibility when examined properly and objectively. The danger in discussing them on a reputable weather site is that merely by appearing here they gain credibility that is un-warranted, and risk being taken seriously by people who through no fault of their own cannot tell the difference between good and bad science.

Do you mean like Global

Do you mean like Global Warming that failed miserably so they renamed it to "Climate Change"? A "theory" that is based purely on the fact that we are ruining the planet - that has no historical factual and accurate data other than the last 200-300 years?
A problem that, ironically costs us money - lots of taxes and guilt trips.

Even though Climate Change is a hotly debated and contentious issue, Weather Watch still post articles on it. Even scientists are in disagreement over it. Then there was the whole leaked email saga...

Yet that "theory" (in my view is not fact the way we are told) is considered mainstream, factual, scientific and accurate. It is not repeatable nor demonstrable like you suggest. Not to the point that we human can be labelled the cause or even the major participants.

This person can tell between good and bad science - and Climate Change: Cause and Effect by Humans, is bad science, marketing and just scaremongering.

In light of that, I don't see what is so wrong with Ken Ring's theories being explored. At worst, we learn something we didn't know (us plebs). At best, we crack on to something that might actually prove beneficial...


the moment that the quote "the science is settled"came out...it was all over for me...I understand that even there has been an increase in temperature even on Mars....Global warming or global cooling or climate change is the world's latest "chicken little's the sky's falling in" antics....I see it as a cult

Off the earthquake issue.

Off the earthquake issue. However, since you've just parrotted several bits of well-known and discredited climate-denier rubbish, let me skewer just one of them: "They" did NOT rename "it" to "climate change". The latter is the original term. It is a standard tactic of "sceptics" to keep circulating downright falsehoods, even after they have been constantly rebutted. If you actually want to learn something about the subject, I recommend Climate Progress or Hot Topic.

RW is parroting on

with his usual AGW rubbish again, I see 8 - D

Ken Ring & Campbell

Thing is...John already had his subjective opinion, so therefore knew how that interview was going to pan out, if he felt it wasn't a suitable topic for the public then why did he even have him on the show.

A very astute

observation.....wise lady 8 - ]

Ken Ring - Incredibly Incredible

Hi everybody.

This site explains precisely why I have always thought he is NOT credible.




And all the Camerons I have known

are not credible....so what's your silly point?

Wow David I can clearly see

Wow David I can clearly see all the "basis" on which you made that point. KR's theories have been repeatedly proven to be more often a mile off the mark than not(even random chance will get things right occasionally) and definitely not the strike rate he claims.

Here's a graph of his predictions vs what really happened

(Featured in a blog by David Winter)

You have missed the point

if you don't mind me saying so...my 'boggle' is not with Ken Ring's theory, but with his right to freely express it, and let people decide for themselves - which the liberals who infest this site seem hellbent on denying him!

I would do the poll but

With knowing nothing about this guy (never heard of him before) and hoping to get some insight from the mentioned interview, how can I answer he wasn't able to say anything

Now that's what

I call logic! 8 - D

if the earthquakes are

if the earthquakes are predictable, then how come he did not predict the september one or the boxing day one?

Since Ken Ring has come to my

Since Ken Ring has come to my attention
I've been checking out his website.He may not have 'predicted' September and December out loud as he was still a stranger to us at that point but if you read his data and how he works by sun,moon etc you see that the signs he speaks of were all there for those dates..or very,very near.Spooky stuff but I know from where I'm sitting at the very least I am now much better prepared for any natural crisis than I was before.Hes got me listening...

He wasn't a stranger at that

He wasn't a stranger at that point, and he's very good at making predictions after the fact. He also predicted about half the days of the year as earthquake risks... with that many predictions, he had a 50/50 chance of getting it right.

People who have looked at his weather predictions over a year have put his accuracy at 25-35%. Not particularly impressive when you can get better weather forecasting by flipping a coin.


You can see the interview

You can see the interview here

Campbell a disgrace

What is there to see - if it is just a repetition of Campbell shouting Ken Ring down? I had to switch channels - it was appalling! Campbell is supposed to interview so that the public can form their own opinions, not inflict his opinions on everyone by undermining the man.

Ken Ring has repeatedly

Ken Ring has repeatedly backed down from his "claims", saying that they are just "opinion" whenever he is called upon to justify them. He is an opportunistic quack who DESERVED to be shouted down. We have a duty to expose fraud, and where fraud is so disgustingly blatant we owe no supposed duty of "manners" in doing so.

Fraud eh, so why doesnt he

Fraud eh, so why doesnt he attack to Catholic church ;)
Greatest fraud in history!

ou need to qualify that statement, but

before you do, find out what the Catholic Church actually teaches at http://www.catholic2007.blogspot.com