I'm not sure of a good mathematical - non subjective method to rate near misses...

There have been some good discussions about it. As math is not my strong point I have little to offer in the way of formulas but I do like some type of scoring method - maybe they are listed in orange rather than red - with a column for the quake that did occur and where - it seems we don't disagree as to a near miss but we have a problem in giving them some sort of mathematical value.

I don't think its quite the way Roger says it is - that we're succeeding even though we're not - or maybe it does go back to why keep records at all? Why are we even attempting to do this prediction thing at all? The records are a way to keep track of things. It keeps us in line with reality - yes, if I predict 10 quakes and get a hit on one - is that worth anything? Yet if I predict 3 quakes and get close hits on all 3 then maybe I'm on to something and it just needs refinement.

Recently the USGS did say there should be more research into earthquake prediction - maybe the idea is catching on - These questions will all have to be addressed someday, somewhere - if not in our small community then in the larger scientific community at large. Just think - if we hash it out enough we just might be able to help that community down the road!

Canie