posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 10:59 PM
Originally posted by tmiddlebrook36
I have repeatedly encouraged the constant scrutiny of the information I am sharing, and remain in that opinion. It has become increasingly obvious to
me that the only way I can add to any possible credibility is to share specific information and some of the science. I assure you I am no relation to
“jalosangeles” in any form. I have no idea who that is nor have I ever read their posts.
What I’m about to share with you is 100% fact checkable and I encourage, again, everyone to do just that. The inception of research began in 1992
(less than one year after I began my career), after the 7.3 Landers, CA earthquake and subsequent 6.5 Big Bear, CA earthquake that occurred only three
hours later. This single, heavily studied, event changed the way geologist research event sequences to this very day, and not because the two
earthquakes were initially thought to be two separate events, than eventually connected via cause, but because of the research that surrounded them.
Most people are not aware that the landers quake was predicted internally by the USGS, approximately 30 days ahead of time, and notices circulated
internally, 7 hours prior to its rupture. (I can post the notice that we received shortly). Although we had been studying the area since a 6.1
earthquake occurred a few months earlier near Joshua Tree, CA, an earthquake in Sierra Madre, CA that registered 5.8 in 1991 steered the research for
the Landers/Big Bear sequence. The Sierra Madre fault system seemed to be capable of a much larger earthquake, however we hadn’t had opportunity to
do extensive excavation or radiocarbon dating on the fault system as the entire region had been becoming increasingly active. That said, we had very
new research that indicated the possibility of an impending sequence of larger earthquakes in the region, possibly on the Sierra Madre fault. (The
fault has since been confirmed to be capable of producing an earthquake of up to 7.9, tied with a “multiple fault rupture” sequence). This all
leads to the present day when programs between the USGS and NASA such as SESWG, GESS, InSARS, and LIDAR have provided a plethora of information that
has changed the landscape of geology. No one in the geology community will ever commit to terming a forecast as a “prediction” however in short;
this is what we are now able to do with a precision unmatched in modern science. As recently as five years ago, the prevailing thought was that we
were only able to forecast long-term events, and at best, provide “possible” or “plausible” magnitudes. However, over the last five years,
this has changed. Looking back at the Landers/Big Bear sequence, coupled with what we now know the Sierra Madre quake is capable of, what was once
only a 7-hour prediction has now developed into a more precise short-term plausibility based on the advent of space geodesy, (deformation measuring),
which has enabled major advances in understanding the deforming crust and, more precisely, atmospheric monitoring. Please research this technology
and know, although I cannot give you any specific current data, these are the programs we are using now and the data is shockingly convincing.
As I’ve mentioned to look for increasingly obvious programing and PSA’s over the next month, I’ve provided a benchmark for my credibility.
Tomorrow nigh KLCS is running and entire program, live, entitled “TOTALLY UNPREPARED”. Please watch it as this is what I’m referring to. I’m
not sure how to be more vulnerable here to make my point. Obviously, I cannot reveal my true identity and I would ask those of you who are trying to
expose me to redirect your attention to spreading the word.
Ok, WC, I'll jump on. This is TM's last post. I will be back tomorrow.....
Also, some info on Sierra Madre Fault zone www.data.scec.org...
edit on 10-9-2012 by Doodle19815 because: (no
And one more on Landers/Big Bear.
edit on 10-9-2012 by Doodle19815 because: (no reason given)