|
Re: New ways to predict quakes (29 Nov. 2000) |
Roger: You said: "The rockburst should show down; it's an IMplosion." So therefore the event at 19:41 was an earthquake correct (per CNSS)? (They should have been able to discern an IMplosion (showing down) assuming that had a teleseismic array up and runnning). Therefore they had an earthquake at 2 km and a "rockburst" at 1.56 km depth in the same area? "Can't believe everything you read, ya know?" That is soooo true...:-)
Follow Ups: ● Re: New ways to predict quakes (29 Nov. 2000) - Roger Hunter 19:11:38 - 6/11/2002 (16019) (1) ● Re: New ways to predict quakes (29 Nov. 2000) - 2cents 21:07:42 - 6/11/2002 (16020) (0) |
|