|
Re: water well level |
John, you are in my opinion once again missing the point here. Earthquakes are natural phenomena which scientists can study endlessly with great interest. But they are also often devastating natural disasters. And because of that, important decisions regarding how much money is spent on trying to predict them and how it should be spent should in my opinion be made to some extent by people who are experts in dealing with natural disasters. But as the example I provided shows, this does not appear to be happening. The disaster expert would look at the both the GPS and that inexpensive monitor system and say the following: *** One costs say a billion dollars to develop. The other has complete, independent modules which cost perhaps $10 each. (I myself don’t know the details of how they work.) *** One can be used only in technologically advanced nations where people can afford the satellite technology and ground stations. The other can be effectively used by people in remote, totally isolated villages in even the most impoverished nations. HIS OR HER CONCLUSION: It is obvious that we should at least try to see if that inexpensive, modular approach will work. And if it does then we should see that it is globally deployed. At the same time we can try to get funding for the much more expensive GPS based system. However, this is not happening. No governments or major research groups anywhere that I am aware of are trying to see if it will work in part because there are apparently no people in the decision loops who are sufficiently trained in approaches to disaster mitigation to be able to make those types of decisions. This is not just empty complaining. Once this earthquake triggering work that I am presently focusing on is done my next planned major project is to get a formal organization running which will encourage scientists and governments around the world to make better decisions like that. In fact that organization already exists. But because of the importance of this earthquake research I have just not yet had time to get it actually moving on anything. Follow Ups: ● points are being missed - John Vidale 12:58:33 - 5/10/2003 (18648) (2) ● Shan's method - Roger Hunter 12:52:24 - 5/11/2003 (18662) (2) ● a poor man's strainmeter? - John Vidale 08:58:04 - 5/12/2003 (18671) (2) ● Re: a poor man's strainmeter? - Roger Hunter 13:39:24 - 5/14/2003 (18701) (0) ● Re: a poor man's strainmeter? - EQF 16:46:14 - 5/12/2003 (18680) (0) ● Re: Shan's method - EQF 14:47:15 - 5/11/2003 (18665) (0) ● Re: points are being missed - EQF 14:11:24 - 5/10/2003 (18650) (0) |
|