Hi Michael,

Yeah, I've got a thought or four about that. If and when the day arrives that I can understand why the Parkfield A Alerts only provide a 37% chance of occurring and that's the top level, then I'll know what in the world they are doing.

So here are the citizens of tiny Parkfield being told they have a probability in 72 hours of having an earthquake greater than a 4.0 and yet, the chance of it occurring is just above one third.

It rather stands out when one considers that thats only a 1 in 3 chance of happening and yet for other predictions given by any other predictor anywhere else, they expect far higher odds. Does this make sense? Not really.

So let us recall history here. In 1993 Alan Lindh of the USGS and a whole media circus show up at Parkfield hearing the news that an earthquake is in the offing. I mean all of the major networks had on line feed going on. Then of course, nothing happens. But why should it happen if the odds are only 1 in 3?

This program of issuing alerts/predictions for Parkfield I find totally ambiguous. Yet, we have to remember, the alerts/predictions are approved by the State of California, so what does that say? I think it needs to be revised and something more substantial via data needs to be more conclusive, before a warning is issued.

On the other hand, before Loma Prieta it was well known that this earthquake was more than likely going to occur and no warnings of any kind were issued. But even without a warning, the public could have been treated to some video about earthquake safety and sort of bring it to the forefront without ever saying there was a possibility.

Petra