Hi EDG,

I took a close look at your link proposing the compilation of various precursors to potential earthquakes and tornadoes, and have one overriding question. Without any controls (your model allows the general public to report phenomena), how are you planning to weed out the least scientific, but potentially most vocal, reporters?

For instance, seven years ago, when I was on Syzygy, there was a fellow who felt his every physical twinge was a precursor to an iminent quake in LA. (Plus, he has many twinges per day that evidently were debilitating, which I believe, because he posted non-stop all day and night.) I now see that he posts on Earthboppin, and seven years later, it's the same old thing, all day, every day: Non-stop nausea. His toe hurts. He feels dizzy for a few moments. He suffers a pain in his abdomen. He has a blinding headache, etc., ergo, there is going to be a huge earthquake in LA any day now (for the last seven years).

And how are you going to identify and rule out the religious nuts who believe that Armageddon is coming in the guise of an earthquake, and so feel God's wrath for their area, or, more commonly, someone else's area because people there are living in sin?

And how are you going to rule out people who think they can hear piezoseismic noise hundreds (if not thousands) of miles away, but not the actual earthquake if one just happens to arrive on cue (which also happens, occasionally)?

I don't mean to be a spoilsport or rain on anyone's parade, and I see you've put some work into your schematic, but these people are out there in abundance, and I can see them zeroing in on your maps daily, if not hourly, to report their every bodily phenomenon. So how are you planning to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff? Or is that somewhat built into your model, and if so, how?

Cathryn