Thx again Lowell:

In view of your discussion and data shown above, what criterion do you think those nukes guys were using to establish whether or not a link exists between the nuke blasts and (any) quakes ?

Where they tentative (juries out) or conclusive about their findings ? Did they write up a memo or paper on this ?

Are there annual seismicty effects that are in play here for that area ? (re: background pre-test...)

What post nuke effects are a "seismic sink"...that is would tend to reduce the background seismicity post-test? Maybe just a Nuke pressure wave in the area is enough to suppress the post-nuke seismicity...allowing the post-nuke seismicity to drop for a period of time ...which seems logical...

re:---------------------
For example a Mb 6.0
and Mb 5.8 occurred in the Andreanoff Islands about 50-100 km west of the
test on November 22 and 23, 1965; similar Mb 6.0 events at nearly the same
Andreanoff Isl. epicenter occurred on October 21, 1969 and a Mb 6.3 on
October 31, 1969, in both cases a large earthquake occurred about 3 weeks
after the test in the same epicenter to the west of the test.
To the east of the test in the Near Islands region, there were also two large
succeeding earthquakes. In 1969 it was a Mb 5.5 occurring 16 days after the
test and in 1971 it was a Mb 6.0 also at Near Island and also occurring 16 days
after the test. The distance in these cases is about 300 km from the test site.
---------------------------------
==> This type of symmetry in distance and time suggests a linkage is present.

Yes..it is a small sample problem (or is it upon examination of other tests?).

Sure looks like somebody "done opened up a can of worms" here....