Hi Chris,

That information is interesting. And it explains a lot such as why you are even willing to consider responding to my posts.

That would ordinarily probably be considered a form of heresy for a member of the geology establishment. I actually believe that many of our more powerful earthquakes can be predicted and am willing to say that in public! Heresy !!!

Heaven help us all!

I will be busy with local matters today but would like to add a few comments at this time.

One thing that I am interested in knowing is if you have a degree in geology. The reason for that is that I have found it almost impossible to get people in that area of science to even consider the possibility that earthquakes could be predicted. There have been a few exceptions to that. But even those people are not too willing to be publicly vocal about the matter.

If you would like to share that information you can post a note about it here or send me an E-mail using one of my Web site E-mail addresses. Or try sending the information to Roger or Canie and ask them if they would forward it. Roger is a computer programmer, not a geologist. So there might still be some hope for him.

If you don’t have any college degrees or have one that is not in geology then it should be easier to discuss earthquake forecasting with you in these postings. You won’t be under the same type of pressure to be a conformist.

MATH

For science work, being comfortable working with basic algebra is probably the most important math type skill. It enables you to do geometry and trigonometry type work and also do computer programming which is virtually all algebra.

Calculus is a higher form of math that is essential for some advanced research projects. However, for average types of research it has been my experience that it is not used very often. And, you can always find a math expert who can help you with solving a calculus problem.

For scientists who do advanced research there are several words that largely don’t exist.

One is “never.” Another is “impossible.” And a third one is “strange.”

The scientific word for research, theories, and beliefs that sound unusual is not “strange” but rather “unconventional” or perhaps even “not politically correct.”

Galileo believed that the Earth was not the center of the universe. And that was an unconventional idea at the time. But I doubt that it would have been considered a “strange” theory by other scientists living at that day and age.

The 2011 Nobel Prize in chemistry was awarded to a scientist whose theories and observations regarding “quasicristals” were so unconventional and so strongly rejected by the “politically correct” scientific community that included, somewhat surprisingly, Linus Pauling, that it caused him so much trouble that if I remember correctly, he either had to leave or was ejected from what I seem to recall was a U.S. government (NBS) supported research group.

These are personal opinions.