Rumble, rumble

A 3.9 near Yellowstone, .2km deep.
Click to expand...
'Tis the season, AFAIAC. There was a 4.4 near Santa Rosa, CA last week and was quite a bit deeper. And the frequency of >3.0 quakes in CA has gone up in the past 3-4 weeks, which is what my model tells me should happen.

So I guess this is as good a place as any to post my "spring earthquake season" predictions for the CA coast... so here is what I think based on watching the numbers over the past few weeks:

Time Window: From 24 May 2006 through 21 June 2006.
Location Extremes: From Point Arena in NorCal to the CA/Mexico border in SoCal.
Magnitude Window: From 5.7 to 7.0

There ya go...we'll see how I do this year! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
RMT
 
Well,

As of this morning my prediction window is closed. So obviously I did not hit the mark again. However, it is quite interesting to see the following story in the news this morning:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/274819_quake22.html

Although he can't say just when, a scientist's new evaluation of slippage along the San Andreas Fault suggests that the southern end of the major California seismic zone has reached levels of stress sufficient for a major earthquake.
Click to expand...
Along with satellite images, Fialko combined data from geological records, GPS readings and seismic instruments to determine that the southern San Andreas is mostly locked and continues to accumulate significant amounts of strain.
Click to expand...

Although it should be pointed out that the reporter used the wrong word. "Strain" is the physical deformation of an object which is under stress. An object does not "accumulate" or "build up" strain... it builds-up stress which eventually manifests as larger amounts of physical deformation (strain).

N/I RMT
 
VERY HIGH RISK for California Quake next 24 hours
Quote

California Earthquake forecast for July 2, 06;
98 % risk of a (>= 5.2) earthquake near San Diego. - VERY HIGH RISK

92 % risk of a (>= 5.2) earthquake near Los Angeles. - VERY HIGH RISK

98 % risk of a (>= 5.2) earthquake near San Francisco. - VERY HIGH RISK

72 % risk of a (>= 5.2) earthquake in California - WARNING; HIGH RISK

Summary; Worldwide risk is at 98 % ... California risk is at 72 % ... A High Risk of a 5.2 or greater is possible in California over the next 24 hours. A Moderate Risk of a 6.3 is also possible in the next 24 hours.

web page
[link to www.quakeprediction.com]
 
Dan,

I love their model. The general chance of a 5.2 earthquake for California is significantly less than the chance predicted for any of the three named cities???

Or are they talking about the cities of San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco in Montana?
 
Darby,
I love their model. The general chance of a 5.2 earthquake for California is significantly less than the chance predicted for any of the three named cities???
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is pretty amusing, isn't it? And some might never even consider that this is a mathematically and statistically inconsistent model.

I guess I should just be glad their model predicts only 92% risk where I am near LA... while those suckas in San D and San Fran are gonna shake mutha-f-er, S H A K E ! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Either way, I guess we'll know by the end of the day tomorrow. But if this model is measured by animal activity, all I can say is I am looking at my golden retriever right how, and he is about as relaxed as he ever is...crashed-out on the tile floor at the front door... Yeah, I'd say he is pretty uptight and agitated tonight!


N/I RMT
 
Rainman,

Even more interesting is that they don't actually present any model at all. There's no indication about how they make the predictions or how they assign a probability to them.

It might look like they are saying that animals like dogs are involved but they aren't. In fact, they say exactly the opposite on their Research page:

The animal behavior reports are often ambiguous and not consistently observed. There is little evidence for animals being able to sense impending earthquakes, although it is likely they can sense the initial, weaker P-waves before people. Seismometers remain much more sensitive than even the animals, however.
Click to expand...

I suppose that it could be counted as a prediction if you sensed the p-wave and yelled "Earthquake enroute. Tell your friends. Call home and warn the kids. Open a website! Post this warning: ETA s-wave 3 seconds!"
 
Gamma ray burst from systems, not far from Earth, may be colliding with Earths suns magnetosphere and causing geological disturbances.

Dogs and cats are very good indicators, of oncoming earthquake.

Cows will lay defensively in a florette pattern, when an indiscernible danger, approaches them.Watch the cows
 
Dogs and cats are very good indicators, of oncoming earthquake.
Click to expand...
If this is true, then I must say that my own earthquake barometer (Chili Dawg, my golden) is saying we don't have anything to worry about today, here in SoCal... except for the odd firecracker that goes off in the neighborhood... those he gets a bit miffed at! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Cows will lay defensively in a florette pattern, when an indiscernible danger, approaches them.Watch the cows
Click to expand...
Ohhhhh.... we're only supposed to WATCH them, Creedo? :oops: Now you tell me! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Hmmm maybe that is why all those cows has been mysteriously disentrailed and mutilated? Do ya think?

N/I RMT
 
July 3rd... so far no big shakers. And I see the "colorwize" earthquake prediction risk is down for today. Maybe we got lucky and just missed "the big one"? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Darby, how about this "non-answer" to a straightforward statistical analysis question (from colorwize ):
Question; How can California say " 7 % Risk " and San Diego have a 54 % risk of an earthquake ? ... Animals will feel the precursors to quakes from the other side of the globe, if they are large enough... So if the California risk is low ... it means the strength of the quake, if it occurs in California, will be of less magnitude. If the California risk is high and the city risk is high, the potential for a larger quake then is possible.
Click to expand...

Never really answers the question of why a larger geographical region can have a statistically lower probability of risk than the risk of a small subset of the overall region. Once again this all begs the question "what is your prediction model math based upon?" It doesn't appear to be based on the "norms" of statistical sampling!


N/I RMT
 
Back
Top