| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Massive Earthquake Predicted For Southern California Tomorrow, Maybe |
| 2006-02-02 |
| On Oct. 23, 2005, I predicted "An earthquake of magnitude 6.6 or above in Southern California (<36N) before or on Feb. 3, 2006. Likely, in the circle bigger than or equal to 7" with image 200510211800eCalifCL1.jpg to show the earthquake cloud and the circled area to both the USGS and the India Miditech [1] . On Oct. 24, I posted this prediction to the public. Due to requests, I post this explanation... Not holding my breath. However, to present a responsible opposing viewpoint, let me present the California Aftershock Predictor. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #19 I always have wondered why they don't use animals to predict it. I once remember reading about successful studies in that regard. Clearly, animals are able to predict tsunamis. I have often wondered if "earthquake weather" which is difficult to describe - but can be described as an unusal stillness, might be due to a difference in the normal sounds that birds and other animals make. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-02-02 23:47 |
| #18 Oops - hit "submit" too soon. Oh, well - I expect he can't predict double earthquakes, either. ;-p |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-02-02 23:40 |
#17 Therefore, if this prediction fails, I hope people to understand the problem not due to the earthquake cloud, but due to no support from governments, including the American government to solved those satellite data problems and earthquake data problems.Or possibly it failed because this guy can't predict earthquakes. earthquake. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-02-02 23:39 |
| #16 Here on Guam we've been getting scores, iff not a few hundred, of tremors and light quakes [4.0 or below] for nearly two months now. Although a handful + Alaska/Japan eruptions have been reported in the local news, most are not and wid no explanation from the local Geological office. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-02-02 23:10 |
| #15 there were many days of earthquake weather without the quakes. But when you have quakes - you get that weather. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-02-02 23:08 |
| #14 Recall how accurate / inaccurate those moments were, 2b? |
| Posted by: .com 2006-02-02 23:02 |
| #13 I grew up in SOCAl and we used to say, "this feels like earthquake weather". Maybe it was the clouds. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-02-02 22:58 |
| #12 I know I have bad wind , but I didnt realise the knockon effect would be so severe .. Sorry , I'll lay off the kidney beans for a while |
| Posted by: MacNails 2006-02-02 21:16 |
| #11 It's all Bush's fault. That's why only South Central gets flooded in the tsunami. He wants to turn LA into a vanilla wafer. |
| Posted by: R. Noggin 2006-02-02 21:14 |
| #10 Not that clouds cause earthquakes, clouds can be an indicator. If you read his report here (pdf) on the Bam earthquake predictions, you'll understand his methodology. Here's another recent article on earthquake prediction. |
| Posted by: Rory B. Bellows 2006-02-02 20:54 |
| #9 uh huh... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-02-02 20:04 |
| #8 Anonymoose: It's a fair cop. |
| Posted by: Iblis 2006-02-02 19:46 |
| #7 Iblis: I initially read that as "rubber underwear", before silently saying to myself, "Meh, California." |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-02-02 19:38 |
| #6 Clouds cause earthquakes. That's a new one. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-02-02 19:31 |
| #5 I am shaking at my desk at work in Irvine, CA as I type! |
| Posted by: BigEd 2006-02-02 19:23 |
| #4 I'll be sure to wear a clean pair of underwear tomorrow -- for when they find my body in the rubble... |
| Posted by: Iblis 2006-02-02 19:19 |
| #3 I myself swear by the Soviet/Yakusa Woodpecker Grid, so I'm paying no attention to this quack... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-02-02 17:26 |
| #2 Nope. Nothing on the schedule. Yet. |
| Posted by: Halliburton: Earthquake/Tsunami Division 2006-02-02 17:24 |
| #1 Is this the one that turns LA into an island? |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-02-02 17:15 |