Re: A company to predict quakes surfaces
Posted by EQF on February 17, 2003 at 20:47:24:

That forecasting service appears to me to be the product of an effort by Dr. Mike Kozuch and Dr. Lowell Whiteside who posted quite a few notes to this board in the past.

https://secure.geoforecaster.com/pr/pr001.asp

I believe that it can be regarded as being serious. Whether or not it will be successful remains to be seen. I personally hope that it will be and wish them luck.

Follow Ups:
     ● serious but probably not well-founded - John Vidale  21:20:44 - 2/17/2003  (18048)  (1)
        ● Re: Let Us Have A Positive Thought - Petra Challus  22:49:11 - 2/17/2003  (18050)  (1)
           ● Claimed to be ready for prime time - John Vidale  06:44:29 - 2/18/2003  (18053)  (2)
              ● Re: My Oh My - Aren't We Open Minded - Petra Challus  19:08:56 - 2/18/2003  (18061)  (1)
                 ● cold facts aren't always friendly - John Vidale  19:49:19 - 2/18/2003  (18062)  (2)
                    ● Re: cold facts aren't always friendly - Petra Challus  20:34:13 - 2/18/2003  (18064)  (1)
                       ● different approaches - John Vidale  21:25:09 - 2/18/2003  (18067)  (1)
                          ● Re: different approaches - Petra Challus  22:38:35 - 2/18/2003  (18068)  (1)
                             ● practicality - John Vidale  23:18:14 - 2/18/2003  (18069)  (1)
                                ● Re: practicality - Canie  12:04:37 - 2/19/2003  (18080)  (1)
                                   ● Geoforecaster - chris in suburbia  13:44:56 - 2/20/2003  (18088)  (1)
                                      ● correlations - John Vidale  14:48:32 - 2/20/2003  (18089)  (2)
                                         ● Re: Scoring - Canie  23:00:41 - 2/20/2003  (18092)  (1)
                                            ● automatic hits from loose scoring - John Vidale  06:38:58 - 2/21/2003  (18096)  (0)
                                         ● I meant only geoF, not Don's work - John Vidale  15:11:31 - 2/20/2003  (18090)  (1)
                                            ● Re: I meant only geoF, not Don's work - EQF  22:40:17 - 2/20/2003  (18091)  (0)
                    ● Re: cold facts aren't always friendly - Don in Hollister  19:56:53 - 2/18/2003  (18063)  (1)
                       ● facts are useful - John Vidale  20:40:41 - 2/18/2003  (18065)  (0)
              ● Re: Claimed to be ready for prime time - chris in suburbia  06:57:18 - 2/18/2003  (18055)  (1)
                 ● must be Don, not me - John Vidale  07:11:12 - 2/18/2003  (18056)  (2)
                    ● Re: must be Don, not me - chris in suburbia  11:48:41 - 2/18/2003  (18060)  (0)
                    ● Re: must be Don, not me - Canie  10:49:59 - 2/18/2003  (18059)  (1)
                       ● Re: must be Don, not me - Mary C.  09:18:55 - 2/19/2003  (18073)  (0)