Re: science or prediction posts should not be removed
Posted by glen on November 06, 2005 at 20:45:57:

Chris,

I have read the posts below now. I believe that the prediction should be based on the energy of the seismic event. The larger the energy, the longer time available. If somebody wishes to predict 3,4 or 5 magnitude quakes, they should have a narrow window of time. If the magnitude is much larger, as I did here earlier this year (Alaska 7+), I feel that should be granted more latitude. The larger quakes are rare, and are very hard to predict. Also, the larger the quake, the input for the basis must be greater. I like mr rabbits idea of basis being given... that is fundumental. I also think there should be a "post mortem"
on all quake predictions, irregardless of the authorship. I will give example in next post.

Sincerely,
glen


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: science or prediction posts should not be removed - glen  20:54:55 - 11/6/2005  (30144)  (2)
        ● How did you DO that??? - Roger Hunter  21:27:59 - 11/6/2005  (30147)  (1)
           ● Not What I Meant, Roger - glen  10:55:50 - 11/7/2005  (30158)  (2)
              ● Re: Posting URLs - Canie  16:29:20 - 11/7/2005  (30168)  (1)
                 ● Thanks Canie! nt - glen  21:38:02 - 11/7/2005  (30174)  (0)
              ● Re: Not What I Meant, Roger - marc / berkeley  12:04:32 - 11/7/2005  (30160)  (1)
                 ● Re: Not What I Meant, Roger - glen  14:20:16 - 11/7/2005  (30166)  (1)
                    ● Re: kidding, but Roger may shed some light here - marc / berkeley  09:28:04 - 11/8/2005  (30183)  (1)
                       ● Re: kidding, but Roger may shed some light here - Roger Hunter  12:32:54 - 11/8/2005  (30185)  (0)
        ● Re: science or prediction posts should not be removed - Don in Hollister  21:09:20 - 11/6/2005  (30146)  (2)
           ● Re: science or prediction posts should not be removed - glen  10:43:26 - 11/7/2005  (30156)  (1)
              ● Re: science or prediction posts should not be removed - Michael Tolchard  20:51:45 - 11/8/2005  (30199)  (0)
           ● Re: science or prediction posts should not be removed - marc / berkeley  08:12:49 - 11/7/2005  (30154)  (0)