Chris,

You and your colleagues in geology are making an extraordinarily serious and dangerous mistake regarding the science of earthquake forecasting. Actually, there is an entire range of mistakes being made. And those mistakes are costing innumerable lives and helping to keep this science in a state of virtual paralysis.

The main mistake that I am referring to has to do with what you know regarding this science. In fact it is a matter or what you don’t know.

Many geologists appear to assume that because earthquakes occur in fault zones, and they are the people who know the most about fault zones, they automatically know everything that there is to know about the science of earthquake forecasting. And they also automatically assume that if some other geologist says something about this science, he or she must be correct.

Earthquake forecasting is a completely separate or distinct science. Of course it has to do with how rock layers works. But it is a science of making measurements rather than one involving only rock layer behavior.

In fact, in my opinion, very few geologists know anything about this science. And as a consequence, anything that they say about it is frequently just a lot of inaccurate hot air.

Also as a consequence, I can’t argue with you about this. You don’t appear to know the first thing about the many forecasting procedures that have been developed in different countries. You don’t even appear to know anything about the method I myself have developed in spite of the facts that I have been discussing it here for years, there is a considerable amount of information regarding it at my Web sites, and that those explanations were presented so that someone who has a good high school level background in physics should be able to understand them.

Back in 2009 there was an international earthquake forecasting conference in Japan called Vesto. I was invited to attend and present papers myself but could not arrange the necessary scheduling to either attend or present a paper.

http://www-es.s.chiba-u.ac.jp/geoph/ulf/vesto/VESTO_program_090324_DO.pdfThere were a bewildering number of forecasting methods discussed at that conference. If you download that pdf file it will provide you with some information on some of the methods that have been developed over the years. Some of them are so unusual that even though I have seen detailed discussions of how they work I still don’t understand the calculations.

This science is so unusual that many people around the world appear to consider me to be an international authority on it. And relatively speaking, that it true. But it is not because I know that much about it, I don’t, but rather that most other people know even less than I do. How is that for a really strange situation?

On the other hand, even though I am not a geologist, one of my specialty areas in science is making measurements of different types. In that area I believe that I am actually an authority.

It is almost impossible for me to argue with you about this science because you appear to know so little about it. I don’t have time and can’t even guess where I would start. Nor do any of your colleagues in geology know anything about the science in spite of what they might insist. Nor does Roger in my opinion.

If I remember correctly, Dr. Whiteside used to work for NOAA. And he was the only scientist working for the U.S. who had the task of collecting information regarding forecasting methods being developed around the world. But even he had only a limited knowledge of all of the different methods that are out there. His government work in that area was eliminated during one of those periodic budget reductions.

The best thing that I can recommend for you is to just watch what is being discussed and ask some questions now and then if you wish.

These are personal opinions.