Re: Petra's No Big Deal
Posted by chris in suburbia on January 09, 2004 at 03:57:28:

Don actually, there was a 3.7 quake a while ago (but after the 6.5) in the Lompoc area-probably a better match maybe 20 km from Lompoc vs 80 or so km for these. I think Petra's prediction had several areas called, including Lompoc. Given this, the WSW of Simmler would probably not be significant. Even mainstream seismologists would be pretty safe at predicting that there would be M3s in a radius around the San Simeon quake due to static stress loading/unloading. These Simmler quakes I would bet are in an area made weaker (for certain fault orientations) by the M6.5.

Chris


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: Petra's No Big Deal - Petra Challus  18:12:39 - 1/9/2004  (21021)  (1)
        ● Re: Petra's No Big Deal - chris in sububia  05:18:48 - 1/10/2004  (21025)  (2)
           ● Re: Petra's No Big Deal - Petra  06:18:14 - 1/10/2004  (21027)  (1)
              ● Re: Petra's No Big Deal - Roger Hunter  08:40:49 - 1/10/2004  (21029)  (0)
           ● Chris, there's a problem - Roger Hunter  06:04:41 - 1/10/2004  (21026)  (2)
              ● Re: Chris, there's a problem - chris in suburbia  14:04:27 - 1/10/2004  (21041)  (1)
                 ● Re: Chris, there's a problem - Roger Hunter  14:42:08 - 1/10/2004  (21045)  (1)
                    ● Shan's predictions - chris in suburbia  07:10:21 - 1/11/2004  (21056)  (1)
                       ● Re: Shan's predictions - Roger Hunter  07:19:19 - 1/11/2004  (21057)  (0)
              ● Additional information requested - EQF  09:48:42 - 1/10/2004  (21033)  (1)
                 ● Re: Additional information requested - Roger Hunter  10:57:58 - 1/10/2004  (21035)  (1)
                    ● Re: Additional information requested - EQF  13:20:59 - 1/10/2004  (21039)  (1)
                       ● Re: Additional information requested - Roger Hunter  14:02:43 - 1/10/2004  (21040)  (1)
                          ● Ok. That helps (NT) - EQF  14:22:02 - 1/10/2004  (21044)  (0)