|
not a lawyer, but |
the State of California has taken responsibility for regulating the practise of geology. They consider issuing earthquake predictions to be practising geology. It is apparently ok to conduct research, and to mention the results, but not to sell predictions. The technical issue is whether someone has a license to practise geology, but the underlying issue is apparently whether the citizens of California are getting good advice, whose foundation can withstand close scrutiny. KB's predictions, for example, led to a 1-day workshop where he presented many details to a state commission, whose members asked many questions. At least one independent group reproduced his algorithms to make sure they were correctly done as stated. Just recently, the State decided the one KB prediction followed by the public obeyed their laws. Follow Ups: ● Re: not a lawyer, but - Skywise 14:54:29 - 3/21/2006 (35023) (3) ● my impression - John Vidale 22:01:28 - 3/21/2006 (35040) (1) ● Re: my impression - Skywise 23:47:01 - 3/21/2006 (35044) (1) ● Re: my impression - Cathryn 16:33:41 - 3/22/2006 (35076) (0) ● Berkland Doesn't Profit From His Predictions - Petra 18:54:12 - 3/21/2006 (35033) (1) ● Re: Berkland Does Profit From His Predictions - Skywise 19:50:23 - 3/21/2006 (35037) (1) ● Re: Berkland Does Profit From His Predictions - Petra 20:50:42 - 3/21/2006 (35038) (2) ● Re: Berkland Does Profit From His Predictions - Canie 10:07:48 - 3/22/2006 (35049) (1) ● Re: Berkland Does Profit From His Predictions - Roger Hunter 06:52:27 - 3/23/2006 (35082) (1) ● Re: Berkland Does Profit From His Predictions - glen 20:22:08 - 3/24/2006 (35108) (0) ● Re: Berkland Does Profit From His Predictions - Skywise 23:43:04 - 3/21/2006 (35043) (0) ● I want to know, too. - Cathryn 15:32:40 - 3/21/2006 (35024) (0) |
|