Hi All. Dr. Tom Jordan's lecture was very informative and straightforward. It lasted about an hour and half and he took questions at the end of his lecture.

Jordan expressed that an earthquake prediction evaluation program has been long overdue. It's not so much that various groups should join forces, but that all of the various methods of earthquake prediction should be looked at.

He outlined what a good prediction would be as opposed to a bad prediction. If a quake was predicted for a certain area at a certain time with a magnitude range and the quake occurred outside any of the specified parameters it would be a miss. If all parameters where met it would be a hit. Depending on the type of method used a quake not predicted would be considered a false alarm.

One example which was used for demonstration purposes was one that belong to Keilis- Borok. He produced an earthquake prediction with a specified location, which was not a circle or a square or site specific. Two earthquakes occurred just outside of this predicted area and it was noted that had he included that extra distance he would have had a hit, but it had to be considered a miss, however, the program he has developed is still considered viable.

Some of the other areas discussed were the butterfly pattern, a prediction a day of the 2.5 magnitude range as a class project for his students, b-value, and many other modeling and data-set ideas. And he was generous in noting Ross Stein's success with the Izmit earthquake forecast.

He also stated that they are resurrecting the National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council. As to when it will be up and running again is not known.

In addition to considerable material presented today, he also expressed his interest in water well readings, though I'm not sure what he's looking for..Take Care…Don in creepy town