Hi Canie, thanks for the nice post. In the event that anyone wonders if I am getting upset by the comments that have been made I will say, “not any more than usual.” But when certain words are used in the headings of public notes I think that they can create serious problems. Also, because of recent discoveries, I believe that we now have an opportunity to move the sciences of earthquake forecasting and triggering processes forward at a fairly good clip. And arguments are in my opinion just slowing progress.

Regarding your third point I would say, “not exactly.” As I said in an earlier post, I use EQF with my posts here for the SOLE purpose of keeping heated discussions from spilling over into other areas such as the Newsgroups or the Yahoo EarthWaves bulletin board etc. If I want to know where someone saw a note that I posted somewhere I usually just ask them.

Regarding why I usually do not circulate forecasts in public, I have commented on this innumerable times. But since you were so nice in that note I will do that once again. There are a number of reasons. This is one of the most important ones:

The goal here is to save lives. And to do that you have to take everything into account. In my opinion, the process of successfully forecasting earthquakes is, exaggerating for emphasis, 1% science and 99% politics. And if you do not keep that 99% number in mind then there is a good chance that your efforts to forecast the earthquakes are going to be doomed to failure.

The people who need to know that an earthquake is on the way are our government and disaster mitigation officials. A private party cannot get an entire city evacuated. So, if you want to save the people in the city then you have to let those officials know about the approaching earthquake in a manner which is acceptable to them. And it has been my personal experience that they are generally happy to receive forecasts sent quietly by e-mail. But from reading news reports I would say that they get VERY upset when a forecast is circulated in public and they have area residents and news services calling them day and night demanding that they be told if there is going to be an earthquake.

If you want those officials to respond to your forecast in a positive manner then you have to keep them happy. And confidentiality is one of the keys to their happiness. Earthquakes occur in the same area more than once. You could go public with a forecast and perhaps get away with it once. But the next time, none of the government officials etc. would be willing to talk with you.

Finally, that is not just my opinion. I have actually been told by top international personnel while talking on the telephone that this is how they feel.

I for one regard this as being an unfortunate situation. I would rather circulate forecasts in public beforehand and get some credit for them. But “That’s life” as they say. I AM at times willing to discuss a forecast after I believe the earthquake has occurred. That once again requires time and effort that I would rather not spend on it. But, I feel that it is important that people share information like that. As I have said, if you are trying to forecast earthquakes it is presently up to YOU to let other people know when your efforts are successful or when you are encountering some type of problem.

These are personal opinions.