I've had geology courses in high school and college before among other science classes, so I actual do know a bit, but thanks for trying to insult me. Your first link is another general news article dated yesterday, again with a single wishy-washy still-not-evidence sentence "Scientists speculated that low-atmospheric pressure from Hurricane Hector could re-start major eruptions..." Your second link doesn't discuss the claim at all, but is a great overview of volcanology for anyone who isn't familiar. The third link briefly touches on a single event from 1991 at the very end and anecdotal evidence that, as written, looks like it implies more about what happened to the eruptive column as the typhoon passed over rather than the typhoon triggering the eruption in the first place.
I made very clear from the get-go I found the claim to be scientifically dubious. It's called being skeptical. There's a reason I've said "extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence" several times now. It's written into the DNA of scientific inquiry. You're locked onto accepting a claim you saw in an article on the internet, I've not gone about it the best way I admit but I'm trying to get you to see why you shouldn't.
= new reply since forum marked as read
