Hi John,

I missed the post regarding your submission to Nature, but surely I'd like to read it one day.

I would imagine you, not unlike me, would not discuss your work with anyone you did not know or at least had some sense of credibility. While I surely am not a well known person, I am known to some degree and at least one other person on this board currently has seen me in the flesh and can verify that I am a real person, a woman, and my appearance does match the one on my web page.

Being credible is a very important issue especially in regard to persons issuing earthquake predictions. While I could contact a newspaper and tell them that I think a major earthquake will occur, most likely it would never be printed, however, if I am a geologist or a person of some standing in geo-sciences there would be little doubt that it would. As to why people like Gordon Michael Scallion and Sean Morton's predictions are published, I am not really sure. Maybe sensationalism?

Frankly, I think if I decided to send out notices to government officials, scientists and others of note providing earthquake warnings which were not specific I would fully expect them to be deleted and future warnings totally ignored, especially if I added to that no verification of who I am and my CV as well. I have a really difficult time taking anything anyone says with any degree of seriousness if I don't know who they are and if they are known by more than one name or moniker. That alone is enough to want to make me keep my distance. We've gone round on this board no less than a dozen times in the past four years with a plethora of posts on credibility. How can anyone hand research data over to a person you don't know, have no idea what their background might be or that they are credible?

I am very certain the individuals you may speak to about any given matter would be someone you would trust and feel quite certain your discussions would go no further, or only be shared with your permission with others who are of equal standing. However, if you thought you had the discovery of a lifetime, I doubt you would share it with but a very few close associates.

In researching earthquake predictors a good number of them are not scientists. It does not mean that they don't have anything credible to provide about prediction, but if they worked with a scientist who would support their work it would probably in the long run prove to be more beneficial than going it alone. Of course, this requires that the work is credible in the first place, has merits and can be tested by anyone using the method provided.

I would like to thank you for your time spent on EW's as well as others who have a scientific background. Your insights are important to keep what looks like smoke and mirrors identified and other matters with more substance looked into with an open mind and the skills necessary to ferret out truth from speculation.

Our board member Don Eck from Hollister may seem to many to be just a country bumpkin because he is rather mild mannered and rather has a relaxed style of writing. However, it is only a perception, he is a person who has a vast background in international security and has the skills necessary to analyze theory, data and other material. His research methods are unbelievable good. If you want to find someone or know about their background, if it is available, he'll find it. He is highly trustworthy and very credible. Thus, though he doesn't possess a scientific degree, those who do have them are rather surprised to learn he doesn't have that kind of background.

Yesterday was the 14th anniversary of the Loma Prieta earthquake. Unfortunately, it was overlooked by everyone here. I took some time to speak with my co-workers to remind them of an event all of us experienced and to reinforce thoughts about earthquake safety. Each and every one of them have been supportive of my work on the water heater issue and have given me the drive to keep pushing when things looked rather dim. There were a lot of high 5's on the day the Governor signed the legislation. It means a lot to me to have that support and also on my new project.

Earthquake prediction when seen in hind sight some years from now will probably be seen as twisted as the ground becomes after an earthquake. But one day, there will be some type of warnings which are of value and will not scare the public. We should not be to quick in expectation of this time, but go along the path and make sure what is there is firm, truly above random chance and for the benefit of all, always.

Petra