better
Posted by John Vidale on March 21, 2003 at 22:43:51:

E

That's a better approach than your previous posts, fairly clear, although you should mention which web site and which magnitude scale up front.

Hard to do statistics on a post-diction, since you chose the cut-off and longitude range after looking at the data. Did you calculate how unlikely it would be to see this pattern by chance, if it HAD been a prediction? How did the 7+ events come out?

John

John


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: better - EQF  02:16:57 - 3/23/2003  (18323)  (1)
        ● Re: better or worse - Petra Challus  05:37:05 - 3/23/2003  (18324)  (0)