John,

Quite simply you have only one set of rules of acceptability for predictions and it is a hard and fast one. Therefore if one wishes to use their own set of rules, their own personal method, it is not going to be accepted. In your thoughts this is the only way it should be because you feel comfortable with that and feel you can ferret out the bad from the good.

I on the other hand like freedom of choice, the ability to step outside of that box and expand one's awareness of other methods which have their own merits, though perhaps not your merits.

I see by regulating earthquake prediction the "government" feels that it will keep the public safe from possibly creating panic if someone predicts an earthquake which seems by your standards not likely to occur. The flip side of that is that the side of science cannot explain everything yet and frequently says they don't understand the earthquake process, therefore, for the most part earthquake prediction in the short-term remains mostly impossible. Do all of the cards have to be on your side of the table? I guess so, huh?

As the future arrives it requires adapability to change, some changes are small and the rest may seem huge and in the midst of what mankind thinks the earth will jiggle and jar, leap, move sideways and the truly unthinkable will happen and no one will understand it when it does. The road to short-term prediction hopefully is going to be shortend dramatically and most likely it will come as a result of a lot of pain.

I understand you perfectly and I appreciate your willingness to be open to discussion, even if I don't always agree with you.

Petra