Cathryn & Canie...nicely said.

Sometime ago I questioned just how much does one need to know to properly issue scientific predictions. I took my geology class so I could get a little basic education and learned more than I expected, especially about Sonoma County.

But like all fields, earthquake prediction is really in a class by itself. There is a given list of what you need to know to qualify a valid prediction method(s), but it doesn't in the big picture mean one has to take 8 years of college courses that include other area's to work on this one single aspect. Though I give all of our seismologists, geologists and geophysists a lot of credit to hang in their and get their degrees.

But I think Martin deserves a bit of credit here. Despite his somewhat less than formal education, he is obviously well read and a good communicator and has been able to separate the wheat from the chaff and does a respectable job in finding those weak area's. Thusly, we have to ask, if a scientist has 8 years of college and 20 years of field experience, why wouldn't one be a true expert at prediction and have the same or better results? Or do they in private and we don't know about it? I wonder....

Petra