Michael, thanks for responding. Sorry, I did not mean to give the impression that I have any useful evaluation of these events. I based my post on your previous response. Since you mentioned that they would not likey be aftershocks, I presumed they were foreshocks. Both in a relative small area and the second bigger than the first. From my personal experience, there were never larger aftershocks to the actual temblor. If you don't think they were foreshocks or aftershocks, do you think they were just earthquakes? Given their relative location to each other, I thought they would be related. Maybe the first was just a foreshock to the second?

During our series of aftershocks in Taiwan, we had the odd large event. Typically, they would report them as new earthquakes or aftershocks.

How do you determine that only 5% of the events in California are foreshocks? Couldn't they all be considered either a foreshock or aftershocks until something big comes along?