|
Re: EQF: an alternate solution |
Hi Roger - Eartones are an interesting thing... I hear them occasionally (especially lately). When Lowell was here we tried doing data collection on eartones and I started a table to post that data - I think there is a link from the main forum page here to the eartone logging form. This didn't work because Petra decided she didn't want to post her tones here for EQF to possibly use (even though the data was a blind post so to speak - person's names not posted) - she told all her ear tone buddies also to not post data. So it led to nothing... A possibly good scientific data collection process bit the dust.... I tend to agree with EQF - There can be no progress in the way of eartones as long as there is fighting over the subject. Last year I attended a lecture by Kate Hutton and someone in the audience asked about odd behaviors and eartones and such prior to quakes - Her response was that they would love to know the source - people are hearing something... what are they hearing? Without collecting data and being able to correlate it to other phenomena, it will continue to be an interesting - meaningless bit of trivia.... Canie Follow Ups: ● Re: EQF: an alternate solution - Petra Challus 19:17:15 - 10/17/2003 (19749) (2) ● Re: EQF: an alternate solution - EQF 15:30:35 - 10/18/2003 (19766) (0) ● Re: EQF: an alternate solution - Canie 23:22:58 - 10/17/2003 (19754) (1) ● Re: EQF: an alternate solution - Petra Challus 00:21:05 - 10/18/2003 (19756) (1) ● detail: scientists only secretive to a point - John Vidale 08:04:50 - 10/18/2003 (19762) (1) ● Re: detail: scientists only secretive to a point - Petra Challus 09:33:25 - 10/18/2003 (19764) (2) ● not entirely - John Vidale 13:45:49 - 10/22/2003 (19830) (0) ● another detail: I'd never call the press myself - John Vidale 18:29:18 - 10/18/2003 (19774) (1) ● Re: another detail: I'd never call the press myself - Cathryn 19:55:10 - 10/18/2003 (19779) (0) |
|