Canie, - Two topics (personal opinions):

FIRST: Both this Earthwaves board and the one over at Yahoo evolved from several earlier versions which ran in part in connection with a domain called “QuakeNet.org” run by someone named “Susan.” The “bulletin board” which existed at that time actually involved a group e-mail circulation program. People had to apply for permission to join. And one of the rules stated that notes circulated through the group could not be posted to public locations.

It was an interesting group. And I believe that one of the main reasons that it survived as long as it did and made the present Earthwaves groups possible is because I myself worked closely with Susan to keep the heated discussions in the group from causing it to fracture. And I believe that some of the former group members would probably agree with me on that.

The point is, I believe that this present Earthwaves board would not even exist if it were not for the efforts that I personally made to keep those previous groups from splintering into a million parts. So if someone posting notes here wishes to complain about my notes then to quote a popular saying it might be proposed that they are “biting the hand that fed them.”

When that private e-mail group evolved into a public bulletin board many of the frequent posters including myself stopped posting for a while or permanently. I kept my membership with the Yahoo Earthwaves board active and eventually rejoined this board when my research was sufficiently advanced that I thought that it could be discussed in a public bulletin board. Originally it was mostly just educated guesswork.

SECOND: As I have proposed repeatedly, earthquake forecasting science might be described as 1% science and 99% politics. The following is part of the politics. It explains one of the reasons that my notes get some heated responses.

There are “earthquakes.” And then there are “earthquakes.” Both words look the same to most people. But when you actually get involved with earthquake forecasting work you eventually discover that there are two highly vocal groups which have dramatically different definitions for that word.

It appears to me that most scientists who are interested in studying earthquakes look at them simply as geologic events which can be measured and dissected. A second, relatively small group of people look at them primarily as natural disasters which can destroy cities and decimate the economy of an entire country in a matter or minutes.

I talk all the time with people in both groups. And being extremely polite with how I am saying this I will state as an expert on the subject matter that those two groups frequently have a little difficulty communicating with one another. In fact, thoughts of World War III come to mind!

In any case, I would probably be mostly in that second group. And if you look around the Internet I doubt that you will find anyone else who is a member of that group who is posting notes like this to a public bulletin board. Jim Berkland does not qualify in my opinion. I have never seen him go into detail regarding how his own earthquake forecasting program works. So, with some of the heated discussions in this board what you are seeing is simply a manifestation of the differences between those two groups.

Are these discussions going anywhere? I believe that the answer is “Yes.”

I think that this latest report that I am working on is going to forge a link between the two different groups. It represents information which has to do with both earthquake forecasting and the fundamental nature of earthquakes. I am not expecting that anyone is going to take any great interest in it at first. But I do expect that this science will soon begin to rapidly evolve. And one result of that will be the fact that those two separate earthquake groups are going have to learn to live together and communicate in a peaceful manner. I believe that this will probably be a lot less difficult and painful than the people in either group might think.

Next to last, you do not have to try to imagine what type of information is contained in the report that I am discussing. I already have several other reports containing that type of information stored at my Web site. This latest report “90-03.html” just covers more ground and makes it easy to see how earthquakes and precursors etc. link together over years and decades instead of months.

The report’s GIF chart is 1 computer screen high and about 10 screens wide. And my graphics programs have made it abundantly clear to me that they do not like working with large charts like that one which contain so much technical information (humor intended).

Finally, I DO NOT have time to get into a philosophical discussion about those two earthquakes groups. I need to focus on getting that report finished. Remember, on the average, earthquakes claim one life every hour, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Lost time means lost lives!