You are declining to elaborate?!

So the purpose of citing that article was to discuss the first half of the first sentence?

To borrow a phrase from Glen, that does not quite "cut it".

Petra, you said ""Ok. This article is quite interesting and well worth the read regardless [of your disagreeemen with the first sentence]" but you did not take the trouble to say what was interesting and worthwhile about it.

Hint: you could have written a post starting "In this post I explain why I thought this article was interesting and what I learned that was worthwhile".

In your own previous posts you have criticized others' responses to articles as "pitiful" (without explaining why you thought so) leading to an unfortunate misunderstanding.

I would characterize your own response to this article as "woefully incomplete."

• Aftershock triggering by complete Coulumb stress changes