Re: Asian natural disaster or evolution in action?

From: Seppo Pietikainen (s.pietikainen_at_kolumbus.fi)
Date: 12/29/04 

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 20:39:23 +0200

anonymous person wrote:
> "Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
> news:33g2isF3ktpvnU1@individual.net...
>
>>anonymous person wrote:
>>
>>>"Seppo Pietikainen" <s.pietikainen@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
>>>news:33g1aeF3tro1hU1@individual.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>anonymous person wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>http://newstodaynet.com/27DEC/SS6.HTM
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"William Kimbler" <w.kimbler@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:Ve-dnZSxB96uKk_cRVn-3w@comcast.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Try this on for size maybe; just maybe it was just nature and all the
>>>>>>right factors happening at just the right time to cause such a
>>>>>>disaster. In short terms it just happened because everything just fell
>>>>>>into place at the right time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I guess what I am saying is don't read more into it than what's there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>So?
>>>>
>>>>Your link says that somebody predicted "the" quake.
>>>>
>>>>It specifically points out that the team predicted a "6 to 7" earthquake
>>>>somewhere
>>>>in the area.
>>>>
>>>>Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
>>>>Richter 7 earthquake?
>>>>
>>>>Do you know what is the difference between a Richter 6 earthquake and a
>>>>Richter 9 earthquake?
>>>>
>>>>Do you know how many "6 to 7" earthquakes occur in that particular area
>>>>every year?
>>>>
>>>>Do you know how many Richter 6 earthquakes must be added up to create
>>>>the energy release of a Richter 9 earthquake?
>>>>
>>>>Seppo P.
>>>
>>>
>>>gee, they had the date, pretty damn close to the location, and pretty
>>>much had the time but they missed the magnitude and you say "so?".
>>>
>>>I suppose if they predicted a 20lb meteor was going to hit your house
>>>tomorrow at 11:00am and it turned out to be a 30 lb meteor you'd say they
>>>were wrong, their methods are flawed, and to ignore the man behind the
>>>curtain.
>>
>>Do you know what *magnitude* implies? Apparently not.
>>
>>Seppo P.
>
>
> yes, but that is not what is significant here. What is possible is a method
> to predict the approximate location of an earthquake and when it will
> occur. They are talking about something that will save lives, lots of them.
> Whether the magnitude of the predicted quake is on target, while not
> entirely irrelevant, is not the big issue here.
>
>

That's *exactly* what is significant here.

There is a lot of effort being expended on predicting earthquakes.

There seem to be some improvement and development.

We're (as *not* as Royal "we") not close yet, not even sufficiently close.

Seppo P.

Quantcast