EQF;

> We just saw an Italian court sentence about a half dozen people to 6 years in prison for the type of behavior I believe you are supporting. Do you want that to start happening here in the U.S.?

The latest version I've heard is that they told people a quake would NOT happen so were guilty of spreading false information.

> Those civilians in Italy went to court because of the earthquake was destructive and they felt that there are people who deserved some blame. And the court agreed with them. Otherwise they might never have considered doing anything like that.

They were correct if that's what the scientists said. They should have said a quake was unlikely but possible.

> We DO know that there will be destructive earthquakes in the future here in the U.S. So, are you saying that you want people in the U.S. to start taking legal action against U.S. scientists and government officials? Remember, I myself considered something like that to be so likely that I had a special meeting with my legal counsel early in 2012 to see what the legal liability of U.S. scientists who keep insisting that “Earthquakes can’t be predicted” might be.

But that's true; quakes can't be predicted. All we can do is state the odds.

> Also as I have said in past notes, governments in my opinion really want one main thing above all else from people in the geology community. And that is some way of forecasting earthquakes. But all they ever hear from the geology community is,

> “Earthquakes can’t be predicted!“ “Earthquakes can’t be predicted!“ “Earthquakes can’t be predicted!“ “Earthquakes can’t be predicted!“ “Earthquakes can’t be predicted!“

Correct; they can't.

> None of those people saying “Earthquakes can’t be predicted” to my knowledge have ever even checked to see if Pavel’s earthquake forecasting methods, or Shan’s or Amit Dave’s or my method, or anyone else’s forecasting methods might even work. And Shan’s and mine at least are free for people to use.

I have and you know it. None of them are worth a second look. You haven't made enough to tell but I'm betting against it.

> I believe that partly as a consequence of the fact that all they ever hear from the geology community is “Earthquakes can’t be predicted”, the U.S. government is intent on cutting the 2013 budget of the USGS. And I would expect that there could be additional cuts in 2014, 2015 and on and on. In fact, after the election, U.S. officials could conceivably decide to completely eliminate the USGS and disburse its present functions to other agencies and the private sector, and just eliminate some of it functions completely.

Especially if Romney wins.

> So, if the types of comments you are making are causing jobs to be gradually lost at the USGS, do you think that those people are really happy with what you are saying? I would hope that by now with the budget cuts they are reportedly getting those people recognize the fact that their jobs could be on the line. And there might be a very obvious reason for their jobs being on the line.

If that was the case I'd have heard from them by now. They know who I am and where I live.

Roger