comment about Jason's study
Posted by LUCIAN {luciankoto[011AT22]aol[11DOT220]com} on November 22, 1999 at 08:33:17:

hi all,

i have been reading with somewhat amusement, but also with sadness, the points and counter points about Jason's study of this and other prediction boards. here are my conclusions.

this is not a contest. i honestly believe that 99% of the people that post predictions here believe what they are saying and have good intentions.

earthquake predicting is very chancy. it is certainly not an exact science. different people have diferent techniques. who are any of us to say what is right or wrong. at least some are trying and i expect they are because they care about their fellow man.

there are alot of variables. for instance, sometimes someone may get the time and the location of an EQ, but miss the size so bad that it looks like a miss. or they could have the size and location, but miss the date for some reason. i recently predicted an EQ for the los angeles area that i was, and am still sure will hit, but the window i saw must have been wrong.

last but not least, why do this study at all. this is a open predictions forum. everyone here could have told you the results of your study without going through all the hard research that you did.
anyone with an honest heart will tell you that 90% of these and other types of predictions don't come true. BUT WHAT OF THE ONE TIME THAT IT DOES. WHAT IF THOUSANDS OF LIVES ARE SAVED????? would it be worth it? i think so.

i don't think anyone here is out to scare people. we just try to warn them to take precautions. i would never tell everyone in an area to just pack up and leave there job or house for two weeks. but i would warn them enough to be prepared.

i feel like almost everyone on this board has good intentions. i would hate to see people stop using this board for what it is intended to be. an open forum for EQ " predictions ".

May GOD's LIGHT and LOVE be with you all,

LUC