Hi Don,

I thank you as well for posting that story. I sent the link to K.B. and told him that was exactly what I said to him in December. It didn't matter that he was right, the real importance occurred when at long last earthquake prediction hit the public news in a big way. The door that had been closed tight and locked was no more. Let us hope it stays open for a good long time.

Though some may disagree with me, I do think of these as exciting times in geophysics. I cannot begin to imagine what lies ahead. Not only is the earthquake (storm) door open on the west coast, we have all of these terrifically gifted people ready to try their hand at prediction. It just doesn't get any better than this, except of course, when it gets unraveled and it works most of the time, just like weather forecasting.

Maybe next year the AGU or some other org will open sessions where many can discuss their prediction efforts and let us know how difficult it can be and what happens when success lands on their doorstep. I've seen one such excited scientist and there is no way to hold back the enthusiasm.

However, I think I can speak with a learned point of view when I say that there are only two scientists who are known to me who are interested in predicting earthquakes for reasons other than solving a math problem and those two are Berkland and Whiteside. While other scientists may be able to judge their performance from statistical analysis, they can do nothing in weighing their humanitarian approach to this sometimes dreadful situation. I am proud to say that I know both of them and I do applaud their efforts.

For those who wish to put a competitive edge on prediction, they had better know that though they could be considered on the top of the heap today, there indeed will be a dozen who will make a concerted effort to bring them down tomorrow. One little slip and you're history. Who is the world would want to jump into ring with those considerations? Geophysics is a very competitive place overall. There's always the opportunity to label the other guy, disagree with him and try to get the upper hand in any way possible. I think the position of predictor requires a suit of armor and deaf ears. Did anyone notice I used the male gender in these remarks? You should, because today there are only 3 leading women in geophysics and I am positive none of them would ever consider prediction unless they were quite old and gray. Fifty years from now, that will change, but it will indeed take 50 years. Boy, that's along time in coming.

And I will say that six years ago when I read the Nature Debates six week program which brought forward the best of the best in geophysics, on the topic of earthquake prediction, when those gentlemen came forward to express their expert opinions, not one of them said they thought the lofty goal of earthquake prediction should continue for humanitarian reasons. I was outraged and appauled. I wanted to see the faces of those people and try to understand what was missing. The answer is a simple one as explained by one of the debaters: It was a science based program and no one wished to express their emotions on the issue. That's an unfortunate decision, because there is no better reason.

One day a large earthquake is going to rock my world and you know what, more than two people will tell me it's time, but not one of them will be a mainstream scientist. That's ok, because I'm ready, be it today, next year or the year after. The question is, are they?

Petra