|
I'm Sorry, You're Under-appreciated. |
John, I wish apologize for being rude to you earlier. You cannot be held accountable for your colleagues. Their bad manners and behavior is not under your control or your supervision. Honestly, I think it is a workplace problem. They have been around men so long, they forgot what it is like to be around women. They also have little contact with the public so they forget to be extra sensitive in what they say and do in their presence. From my point of view, there should be no stone unturned in finding the answer to this prediction problem and believe me, it requires real time precursors, like the one Tony described earlier. Quite similar to pre-Northridge. I haven't spent all of my years doing my research to reach a dead end and it will be quite the opposite. There are people who live in California who deserve earthquake warnings and despite all the road blocks that are up, they are going to have them one way or another. I'm rooting for the people of this state all the way. It's down to whatever it takes. It is the race for the cure. If Jordan chooses to stay with the same old program, then we can't expect anything new to develop. I'm not sure what KB is up to these days. He could try again and I hope he does, but he needs to trim down that mileage and find a shorter window. There are a few new items on the agenda today, the research I've been doing, Friedman Freund's and a few others out there which I won't comment on as I am not well versed on their work. I hold no hope for SAFOD. They need 10 more years at the minimum to expect another 6.0 and that is of a far less urgent order than what will likely happen in both Southern and Northern, California within two years and most likely much sooner. I feel much better knowing you will be out of LA soon. Your building doesn't look very earthquake safe. Wishing you the best always, Petra Follow Ups: ● Re: I'm Sorry, You're Under-appreciated. - John Vidale 06:58:46 - 2/20/2006 (33936) (1) ● Suppression of Information - Petra 12:06:17 - 2/20/2006 (33947) (1) ● difference of opinion - John Vidale 13:31:56 - 2/20/2006 (33966) (2) ● Re: difference of opinion - Russell 14:29:57 - 2/20/2006 (33973) (1) ● Re: difference of opinion - Don in Hollister 15:14:02 - 2/20/2006 (33980) (0) ● Re: difference of opinion - Jim W. 14:07:07 - 2/20/2006 (33972) (0) |
|