Heh. MEM, MEM, MEM. Still stuck on your Yellowstone hypothesis, eh? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif Methinks you are allowing yourself to be more persuaded by your wish for a connection to JT than you are by geologic science!
I've suggested before we make some wagers of whose earthquake predictions/locations are more likely, yours or mine. If I had a way of knowing you were "good" for the bet, and I had a way to ensure I could collect, I'd even put my money where my mouth is.
Let's get real here: You should know as well as I that the highest probabilities of quakes are along plate tectonic boundaries. For example, take a look at the location of the Dec 2004 earthquake in Indonesia in
this animated GIF of that event. And then compare it to the plate tectonic boundaries drawn on
this page. You can clearly see that this quake happened right on the boundary of the Australian and Eurasian plates.
Do you honestly believe that an earthquake at Yellowstone is going to happen BEFORE a large magnitude earthquake here in California (at the confluence of the Pacific and N American plates)? I'd make the following bet with you, if you are willing: I will bet you that a large (>6.5 MAG) quake will occur in California BEFORE any activity at Yellowstone, and I further bet that this CA earthquake will NOT induce the Yellowstone caldera to blow.
I'm fairly confident about this because I have developed my own little stress/tectonic earthquake model in MATLAB. It is what I have used to make my recent predictions... and yes, I am still waiting for a bigger one between now and the first week of July. I may have to tweak my model after the recent Chile quake, as it is apparant that the Nazca plate is being pinched by the heavy activity all around the Pacific plate.
So... you up for the bet, MEM? SoCal before Yellowstone AND SoCal will not induce Yellowstone.
RMT