Hi All. I guess the US isn’t the only place that seems to frown on earthquake prediction.

The following was taken from a Francesco Biagi of the University of Bari, Bari, Italy in a e-mail to Nature Debates in 1999.

Maybe things have changed since then and then again maybe not. Take Care…Don in creepy town

The main problem in using precursors in earthquake prediction is to discover whether in a seismogenetic area these features are totally random or whether there are significant recurrences. In the first case the prediction of earthquakes is a null hypothesis; in the second case the prediction of some earthquakes might be possible.

On the basis of 25 years of field research I believe that a satisfactory solution to this problem is still lacking. More data must be collected and more geophysical and geochemical parameters must be tested. Unfortunately, progress in this research area is connected with the occurrence of earthquakes. Many earthquakes (considered as sources of precursors) are necessary for defining in a meaningful way the relationship linking earthquakes and precursors in a seismogenetic area, but the occurrence of earthquakes cannot be planned. As a result a deadline for the definition of the problem cannot be foreseen and might be tens of years in the future.

In this framework, countries in which research on precursors is still encouraged and funded are very few. Generally this research is prevented so that in Europe any reference to earthquake precursors in a scientific proposal will guarantee that it will not be funded. Therefore, reputable and qualified scientists in this field are boycotted a priori. Is this the right way to conduct science?