|
Re: Petra's No Big Deal |
Don actually, there was a 3.7 quake a while ago (but after the 6.5) in the Lompoc area-probably a better match maybe 20 km from Lompoc vs 80 or so km for these. I think Petra's prediction had several areas called, including Lompoc. Given this, the WSW of Simmler would probably not be significant. Even mainstream seismologists would be pretty safe at predicting that there would be M3s in a radius around the San Simeon quake due to static stress loading/unloading. These Simmler quakes I would bet are in an area made weaker (for certain fault orientations) by the M6.5. Chris Follow Ups: ● Re: Petra's No Big Deal - Petra Challus 18:12:39 - 1/9/2004 (21021) (1) ● Re: Petra's No Big Deal - chris in sububia 05:18:48 - 1/10/2004 (21025) (2) ● Re: Petra's No Big Deal - Petra 06:18:14 - 1/10/2004 (21027) (1) ● Re: Petra's No Big Deal - Roger Hunter 08:40:49 - 1/10/2004 (21029) (0) ● Chris, there's a problem - Roger Hunter 06:04:41 - 1/10/2004 (21026) (2) ● Re: Chris, there's a problem - chris in suburbia 14:04:27 - 1/10/2004 (21041) (1) ● Re: Chris, there's a problem - Roger Hunter 14:42:08 - 1/10/2004 (21045) (1) ● Shan's predictions - chris in suburbia 07:10:21 - 1/11/2004 (21056) (1) ● Re: Shan's predictions - Roger Hunter 07:19:19 - 1/11/2004 (21057) (0) ● Additional information requested - EQF 09:48:42 - 1/10/2004 (21033) (1) ● Re: Additional information requested - Roger Hunter 10:57:58 - 1/10/2004 (21035) (1) ● Re: Additional information requested - EQF 13:20:59 - 1/10/2004 (21039) (1) ● Re: Additional information requested - Roger Hunter 14:02:43 - 1/10/2004 (21040) (1) ● Ok. That helps (NT) - EQF 14:22:02 - 1/10/2004 (21044) (0) |
|