Hi Petra,

When you hear tones (which I hear also), how do you determine location, depth, duration, and magnitude of the predicted quake? I'm just curious.

About six-nine months ago I got a creepy feeling that there was going to be a local felt quake. We live in Aptos, as you know. Later that morning, I had a dizzy spell. Even later, I heard a strong, clear tone, lasting about 10 seconds. Another dizzy spell ensued. The weather was hot, still and muggy, and one of our chihuahuas just would not shut up.

All this empirical data assured me that we'd have a felt quake that day, and we did. (Durn, I wish I'd posted a prediction.) The quake, in the high threes or low fours, was centered around Gilroy, I believe, and lasted about 8 seconds.

Maybe I just haven't been at this long enough to keep the kind of logs one would have to keep to determine distance, direction, depth, magnitude and time. (Am I forgetting anything?)

I definitely believe in the tone theory, but I also ascribe to other less scientific (at least to most scientists) warning signals such as animal behavior and human intuition. (Hi Dib.)

We humans are limited critters on this planet. We have many more than the five Aristotelian senses (such as balance, taste, apprehension, euphoria, and even sub-category senses like the newly recognized taste for meat [Yes, we actually have meat receptors on our taste buds.] ) that it seems foolish to rely on any of them for EQ prediction. Animals seem so better suited, but that's another topic not worth going into tonight.

I also give credence to a lot of scientific theories such as data from instrumentation, area micro quakes or foreshocks presaging a main shock (I wish Martin would come back), angle theories, and geomagnetic eruptions and earthquake clouds alá the work of Zhonghao Shou.

It's a compendium of symptoms I look for, not necessarily one or two things I sense or observe that tells me we're likely to have a quake.

The syzygy theory, were the primary and secondary windows and the areas predicted (Somewhere in the ring of fire...) narrowed greatly, would also be one I'd want to study.

Frank Condon's geomagnetic research (and I assume Dennis's as well) is fascinating, but I'd like to see the anomalies posted before not after the events, and then, only after events of significance.

Don and you will probably disagree with me here, but predicting micro quakes anywhere (unless as a test to try out theories) seems to me a waste of time.

I'm not sure why I'm blathering on like this, but the study of EQ prediction is so fascinating to this novice that I'm just full of questions. Over the years, you more scientific types have been very patient with this lay person's questions, and for that I thank you all.

Apologies for taking up so much bandwidth.

Cathryn