Fresh Meat
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:36 am
Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:51 pm
Baby steps to earthquake prediction?
http://blogs.agu.org/geospace/2011/12/0 ... thachance/
The first thing that struck me, aside from the dismissiveness of the USGS, was the notion that the geologic processes at work in Cali are distinctly different then those in Virginia.
As odd as this might sound, I think cancer is good comparison to what scientists will end up finding. Cancer, thanks to advances in science, new research results, and fresh minds, is no longer seen as one singular disease (ie. The cure for cancer is a "False Hope") but a loosely organized group of connected diseases that are caused by sometimes vastly different factors, treated by different ways, and "seen/diagnosed" through different methods. I think that it's not too out there to say that some types of earthquakes might even be predictable (or... stoppable? (Now that is a fun macro engineering project. One that I totally trust TPTB to dabble in.
))
Hrmmm, where did I put my link to that NASA report about geo effective electromagnetic storms and EQs?
Addendum:
A little bit on Ouzounov and his work:
http://eospso.gsfc.nasa.gov/directory/g ... eos0002042
http://mineralsciences.si.edu/abstracts/ouzounov.htm
There's also work related to the Japanese EQ.
http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2011/0 ... -revealed/
While geophysicist Dimitar Ouzounov of Chapman University in Orange, Calif., and colleagues have not yet succeeded in predicting earthquakes, they have linked past earthquakes to thermal and electromagnetic changes in the air.
[Malcolm Johnston] and other USGS scientists measured radon levels throughout California for 20 years without finding any clear relationship with earthquakes. He suspects natural weather fluctuations, which can be quite large, could explain the anomalous thermal radiation readings over Virginia.
The first thing that struck me, aside from the dismissiveness of the USGS, was the notion that the geologic processes at work in Cali are distinctly different then those in Virginia.
As odd as this might sound, I think cancer is good comparison to what scientists will end up finding. Cancer, thanks to advances in science, new research results, and fresh minds, is no longer seen as one singular disease (ie. The cure for cancer is a "False Hope") but a loosely organized group of connected diseases that are caused by sometimes vastly different factors, treated by different ways, and "seen/diagnosed" through different methods. I think that it's not too out there to say that some types of earthquakes might even be predictable (or... stoppable? (Now that is a fun macro engineering project. One that I totally trust TPTB to dabble in.
))Hrmmm, where did I put my link to that NASA report about geo effective electromagnetic storms and EQs?
Addendum:
A little bit on Ouzounov and his work:
http://eospso.gsfc.nasa.gov/directory/g ... eos0002042
http://mineralsciences.si.edu/abstracts/ouzounov.htm
There's also work related to the Japanese EQ.
http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2011/0 ... -revealed/
"It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life." Terry Pratchett
(Skeptic. But not of PO.)
(Skeptic. But not of PO.)
