John,

For the ease of the readership here, I'm bringing the last part of your last post up here to the top because an important issue should be discussed.

Your comment: "If your logic is that you hear something different than I hear (and my hearing is unusually good across the spectrum), and scientists tell you something different than they tell you (and I spend most of my working hours with scientists, and they've told me some very strange ideas), then the usual scientific method of gathering some evidence and discussing isn't going to work very well."

Historically all through time there has been one camp, government or society which would have been the ruling party and set the thought process of what was acceptable in lines of thinking and anyone who thought outside of that premise could have a number of things happen to them. Today, it is no different than it was then.

From everything you've said to date on this message board it seems to me you do not support the idea that earthquakes can be predicted. I can't imagine inside of your building anyone approaching you with a new idea because they already know you think it is impossible or perhaps you don't even support the idea of having it no matter which way it gets delivered. Now, I'll grant you that I could be mistaken about what you actually think, but your words here convey a lack of support for this life saving warning.

Years ago when I took "you know's" earthquake prediction plan to Tom McEvilly he said it was short on the predictive end. It took me a little while to see what he meant and why he said that, but I did finally see the light. It is much like the time you and I were discussing natural geysers and geothermal fields.

If someone is really seeking the answer to earthquake prediction you have to see it like a single beam of light, straight and true. But when all of this other stuff comes to mind it diffuses the light and so you can't see it clearly anymore. Every person I spoke to for a number of years I asked them the negative question so I could understand the opposite. So I would ask, "tell me why earthquakes cannot be predicted." They never understood what I was looking for behind the question and you may not either. That should be something for you to ponder or you won't understand it.

It is the same as asking, "what does the seeker seek?" Most people will answer and say, "the seeker seeks knowledge." That's the wrong answer. The seeker seeks the teacher and the teacher imparts the knowledge. Who was Obi-Wan Kenobi?

Petra