Quite right Roger. I think I got the story backward. As I recall it (having heard it
second-hand from a well-known seismic discriminator) there was some concern
that a group might avoid detection of explosions by preparing the explosive
in an area where seismicity was common, then WAITING for an earthquake
and during the earthquake exploding their device.

I realize this is one of your fields of expertise, Roger, and one thing I am
very uncomfortable doing is arguing with someone who knows much more
about subject than I do. BUT, here is my question:

If discrimination of blasts from earthquakes is as simple as you, Canie and
apparently Kate Hutton believe, then why did the international community spend
decades and billions of dollars trying to determine whether it was possible?
And, secondly why is it that up to 30% of events in local catalogs in which blasts are supposedly removed appear to be quarry blasts upon statistical examination of these
catalogs (specifically I am referring to the TEIC - New Madrid catalog).

By the way a lot of that money to determine whether it was possible to discriminate
blasts from earthquakes went to Archembeau's group right here in Boulder, and
my next door neighbor is still making a fair living off examination of seismographs
for blasts.

removed appear to be