Hi Roger,

The debates are an old issue rather, but some interesting statements and/or positions were taken in the process.

However, frankly, I was very disappointed. In the end some of these participants seemed to think there was no good reason to continue pursing the endeavor of trying to predict earthquakes, but foremost, not a single one of them mentioned life saving in the entirety of the documents.

When I took the liberty of taking one of them to task over this issue I was told that as this was a scientific forum, the personal element was not brought into the discussion. I think I felt a minus on the Richter Scale that day.

Actually I've met four of the debaters, Wyss, Knopoff, Michael and Jackson. Most of them are very well versed in these matters, but of course only one of them has a serious interest in prediction; Wyss.

I'd like to see another set of debaters brought together and I could easily make a list of those who I think might make it a little bit more interesting than the original group. But I doubt Nature Magazine would do it again. To bad.

Roger, thanks for bringing it up again. For anyone who has not read them, I would say they should.

I keep reminding myself that we may only be one idea away from the revelation of the century and that provides hope.

Petra