Michael,

That was a good hint. You must be Mike B. who currently attends COC with aspirations of attending Colorado's School of Mines and Geology. Very good and if I'm right about the B., I wish you well in your endeavors.

I've been out to your web page several times concerning SCV geology and resources. Very well done.

Any comments on the geology of Copperhill between Seco Canyon and Haskell Canyon? Thats the general area I'm in. How far is this area from the San Gabriel fault?

Back to the subject of Jim:

Actually, I would think that Jim is predicting a phenomena and not percentages. Syzygy is a time that coincides (for the most part) with earthquakes. Sometimes it doesn't pan out. For the most part, it does and that is what Jim is trying to show. That Syzygy is some sort of triggering mechanism.

What Alan is doing isn't anywhere close to what Jim is doing unless Alan spotted somebody posting for M3.3+ events for all of California on a regular basis.

As to being able to predict an M8 within 10 miles of a location within 6 hours; Currently, there is no accepted method of short term earthquake prediction. Wouldn't you think that we should learn how to walk before we try to run? Say somebody does make a prediction that fits your liking. Can that person do it again? Don't forget that multiple predictions would have to be made in order to achieve statistical significance. Maybe that one prediction was a fluke. Prediction of smaller quakes can also achieve statistical significance although seismologists would want to see the larger quakes predicted as well from time to time. But the key is getting to that statistical significance and staying there.

But then again, maybe a person could devise a methodology that successfully predicts the smaller M5/M6 events, but misses something in the formulae that keeps them from successfully predicting the M7+ events.

Just some things to think about.

Again, if I got the B right, keep up the good work and your goal of attending the Colorado school.

Dennis