A Gracious Thank You Dennis.

I had in mind forming a time line of where they started, how they developed the equipment, what occurred with the results of the initial predictions and see if over time they improved or remained the same. I also wondered if they improved the equipment they were using. But the most important value in looking at the project is, "what did they learn?" Is there some value in the research they have done that can to added or improved upon. However, if they are not willing to share their information, then its not possible to have a thorough look at the project in total.

With Parkfield every single bit of information about the project is documented somewhere and of course the paper trail is long and vast. There obviously have been some achievements over time, but it has not accomplished what it set out to do in the first place. So its rather a trade off. You gleam information about micro seismic activity, but in the moderate activity they were expecting, its quite disappointing.

What I expect or hope to know a year from now, is, if you look at every prediction project along with those involved, could one take the best of the results and place the instrumentation and those successful people together in a frequent seismic zone and expect better than average results?

In a technologically advanced society I have an expectation, though maybe to high, that if you can put the combination of the right group together, those who have the best skills for each aspect of a prediction project, is there reason to believe what has been hoped to be achieved over time, can be?

What I see now is a fragmentation of the whole. I saw this in the beginning and nothing so far has made me view this any differently. The knowledge base of the global seismology group is quite vast, but perhaps bringing the best of the best together may not have occurred yet. When one views the accomplishments of businesses that thrive, they are housing the best minds in their industry and in earthquake prediction it may not have reached that point just for a lack of a vehicle to take them there.

So who falls into the category of the leading seismologists in earthquake prediction? I have yet to count to ten, but I have four in mind. Over time I'm sure with further research, a dozen or so more interviews I'll discover who they are and why they are outstanding. It should be an interesting adventure in meeting them.

Petra