reply to post by oldgoat
Hello oldgoat -- and all the other members who have joined this thread in the past few months! Great to have your input!
For my side of things I
must apologize for not visiting this thread for such a long time; various other matters have distracted me. However, just this morning (my time) I
felt a sudden urge to check back in on this thread and I found that PuterMan had made some comments back in April on the quakewatch thread and issued
an open invitation for members who wanted to talk about symptoms (meaning possible quake indicators) to come over here.
I'll email kattrax (the thread's OP) and let her know that we are getting some action here once again. I'm sure she'll also be glad for your
involvement and will doubtless have some good comments to make.
As this thread is about alternative methods of earthquake prediction and is being run to gather data and observations of all kinds, pretty well
anything that you feel, observe or even intuit is most welcome. And, as I said way back in this thread, the main thing is to gather data; making
deductions about the validity or otherwise of various observations is something we can only effectively do when we have a fair amount of information
to work with. In the meantime, at the very least we can get some idea of what sort of indicators seem to give a fair "hit rate".
Generally speaking, the scientific community that is actually involved in quake research is rather reluctant (to say the least) to even consider that
quake prediction is possible. True, sites like USGS have pages that give data about quake potential
in various regions, but this is purely
statistical and runs along the lines of "in the [X] region, there is a 50% chance of a magnitude 7-plus quake within the next 30 years and a 20%
chance of one in the next ten years." This is not
quake prediction, but simply an analysis of data of past events combined with (necessarily
incomplete) knowledge of the fault systems and characteristics of the region concerned. While this is useful for city planners when it comes to
designing infrastructure and buildings that ought to resist these potential seismic events, it is totally useless in terms of saying what might happen
in the very near future.
The primary goal of our efforts is to try and establish if there are any methods of prediction that offer a reasonable degree of accuracy in regards
to location, time, and of course magnitude. Although the results so far look very promising, we do not yet have enough data to convince any
hard-headed scientists that our successful predictions are not simply the result of pure chance. Granted, in some cases the odds were pretty slim --
and I recall giving data about this for a few events I predicted here -- but the more data we can accrue, the better. This is why you'll find posts
where I've declared some of my predictions as "non hits", because this data is just as important as the actual "hits".
While many of the predictions in this thread relate to smaller-magnitude quakes, our ultimate objective is to be able to predict the larger magnitude
events that are most likely to cause loss of life and/or severe property damage. That's what we hope to achieve. And when I say "we", I don't just
mean those of us on this thread or even on ATS, but the people around the world who are engaged in achieving the same objective.
Okay, now I've got that long blurb out of the way (sorry about that!), I'd like to comment on oldgoat's post and that link to another site that has a
prediction of a major California quake. The site referred to says:
EARTHQUAKE WARNING; 6.2 to 7.7 earthquake is likely in Southern California. October 6-8 (Most likely October 7)
and a little further on:
NOTE; The strong peak on September 30th produced a 4.4 earthquake in SE California (and over 150 aftershocks) but the 6.2 to 7.7 quake should
happen on the next peak of October 7th. A similar situation happened before the Mexicali 7.2 earthquake. There was a strong peak on March 28th and
then the earthquake actually occurred on the peak following the strong one on April 4th.
That site also has a table showing the percentage likelihood of a quake in the stated range in L.A. and San Fran Cisco. The San Fran risks are low
(except for Oct 10, at 75%), but the L.A. risks are worth a look:
Source for all the above quotes
RISK IN LOS ANGELES;
Oct 12: 05%
Oct 11: 06% - MAP
Oct 10: 25% - MAP
Oct 09: 65% - MAP
Oct 08: 91% - MAP
Oct 07: 98% - MAP
Oct 06: 74% - MAP
Oct 05: 52% - MAP
Considering that the figure for Oct 7 (ie tomorrow at the time of this post) is almost 100%, we need to take note and see what the follow-up will be
on that site if the quake occurs, and also if it does not
I have to say that at the present time I do not have any indications at all for a major quake in the above-stated region within the next few days. In
other words, I don't think it will happen. For sure, I could well be wrong but all the same I prefer to state my own opinion on the matter. Frankly I
don't expect anything much over a mid-4 magnitude quake in that region is likely within the next week, but one of that magnitude is not very unusual
and would not cause any problems for the locals. If you've read back through the thread you'll know that typically, I don't make predictions with a
"time window" of more than 7 days, and very often it's more like 3 to 5 days. So while I have no indications for the time frame stated in those quotes
above, that has no bearing on what might happen this time next week, after that time has passed.
Best regards and apologies for the lonnng post,
Mod edit: quote tags changed to external source tags.
edit on 6/10/2010 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)