Posted on 03/17/2011 6:56:17 PM PDT by Chattering Class of 58
A former United States Geological Survey scientist says a major quake on the West Coast is imminent.
Jim Berkland predicts earthquakes…accurately.
Never heard of him? Perhaps you should—especially if you live on or near the West Coast of the United States, or know someone that does.
Anyone with an average 80 percent success rate predicting earthquakes should command attention, and lately Berkland has been in the limelight of the national media.
"The people that say you cannot predict earthquakes, they don't know what they are talking about," Berkland told the Santa Cruz Sentinel during a 2009 interview.
Appearing on late night radio shows for many years, since the great quake and tsunami that struck northeastern Japan the retired geologist has been finding his booking calendar full. His unpronounceable and difficult-to-spell website, syzygyjob.com, has crashed several times after his latest appearances on FOXNews with Neil Cavuto and the popular talk radio host Michael Savage's show.
While Berkland has scored many direct hits with earthquake predictions—they fall within his self-described "seismec window"—his greatest claim to fame was his accurate prediction of the powerful 1989 temblor that rocked San Fransisco four days before it occurred.
Now the earthquake prognosticator admits he's worried about the prospects of a strong quake hitting the West Coast of the US sometime during March 2011, particularly around March 19th.
The "ring of fire" that encircles the Pacific rim includes the region from Alaska south to South America. During the past several years earthquake and volcanic activity has been on the upswing all along the rim except on the northeastern perimeter.
(Excerpt) Read more at setyoufreenews.com ...
The severity-frequency data is used by insurance companies but it doesn’t mean you will have a 5.0 quake every 300 years. That’s a common misunderstanding, just like flood frequency-severity data.
As for chaos theory, most definitely applicable in an engineering analysis. We know where many of the cracks are in the structure, relative movement of some of the pieces, and even an idea of how much energy may be stored, but we don’t know how much stress the structure can take and how much of a force bump it will take before it fails.
I just find it fascinating!
There is an interesting article at the Canadian Geophysics website that states that there is an 85 kilometer daily wobble in the movement of the magnetic North Pole across Canada. They state that the size of the wobble is affected by the sun’s activity.
Please note that the CME activity was at a 4 yr high just prior to the Japan quake.
The other four predictions are for various gigantic areas of the west coast with a wide magnitude range; the seismological equivalent of predicting for a week in May that "there will be a tornado in Oklahoma."
Overall, basically he's going to get a "hit" on one or more of his predictions by dumb luck over 50% of the time.
BTW, if he's so great, why didn't he predict the Japan earthquake? Or Northridge?
The fallacy is best summed up by David Deming of the University of Oklahoma:
Berkland has been predicting earthquakes since 1974. He was bound to get one or more predictions right, just by chance. This is known as the Texas Sharpshooter's Fallacy. The Texas Sharpshooter randomly shoots holes in the side of a barn. He then walks up to the barn and paints a bullseye around one hole and proclaims himself a sharpshooter.
I am often asked about prediction. Since my first attachment to seismology, I have had a horror of predictions and of predictors. Journalists and the general public rush to any suggestion of earthquake prediction like hogs toward a full trough. It is a parallel to the obsession with a cure for cancer, or with the question of life on other worlds. There is nothing wrong with aiming toward prediction, if that is done with common sense, proper use of correct information, and an understanding of the inherent difficulties. Otherwise, the subject provides a happy hunting ground for amateurs, cranks, and outright publicity seeking fakers. The vaporings of such people are from time to time seized upon by the news media, who then encroach on the time of men who are occupied in serious research.
-Charles Richter
PERHAPS you could elaborate on how your unique use of words . . . of “so vague they are mathematically almost guaranteed to come true”
fits the following:
From his website:
re June 2010
80% confidence level . . .
PREDICTIONS FOR THE JUNE WINDOW
As previously mentioned, the Seismic Window of June 12-19, 2010 will include the new Moon syzygy of June 12th. Perigee will follow in three days and the combination will produce 8.1-ft. tides at the Golden Gate every day from June 13 to 15, the greatest tidal ranges in three months. With 80% confidence, expect the following quakes:
(1) 3.5-6.5M within 2-degrees of Mt. Diablo (Lat 37.9N; Lon. 121.9W)
(2) 3.5-6.5M within 2-degrees of Los Angeles (34.0N; 118.0W)
(3) 3.5-6.5M with an epicentral address of Washington or Oregon.
(4) 7.0+M major quake globally, most likely in the Pacific Ring of Fire.
(8)
Plenty plausible.
Has anyone graphed his predictions and the realities thereafter?
Thx Thx.
There was a comment in FR’s actually that made this observation and there seems to be something to it. The last earthquake was preceeded by a huge CME burst I don’t have the posting handy but about 4 days or so later whoosh comes the big tsu.
You’re impressed with a prediction of a 3.5 within 2 degrees of Los Angeles in a week? Or somewhere in Oregon-Washington? That happens just about EVERY week.
It’s just you. You are probably “remembering” the moon being somewhere other than really where it was in the sky, and when you see it, it’s not where you “remembered”. Too, the moon’s rising happens at notably different times over the course of the month, so when you go out at (presumably) the same time every night, the moon is closer to the eastern horizon every time, as well as going through its phases and thus appearing to change its shape, making it harder to “place” it relative to other objects in your field of view (like trees etc).
Yes, in theory, but the actual change in the gravitational effect the moon has on us has been extremely gradual as it comes up on the perigee, so circumstances would really have to line up “just right”.
Isn’t Richter dead? I personally do not discount modern science’s ability to at some point to be able to predict practically anything ... eventually. ;-)
The link was a “nut” noticing and posting to youtube two days before the big quake in Japan that something big was up - pretty sure he’s using a program called EQ3D - Earthquake 3D.
There were others I meant to ping but dinner was served ... so I include them here.
My only point is that you cannot discount out of hand a new perspective that “luckily” predicted an otherwise unknown future event. Except for a whole lot of “climate scientists” and despite the failure of education in general I believe there are sharp people out there utilizing all our modern tools to try to get ahead of events.
If Palmdale started bulging a foot a day what might you surmise? Me? I’d duck and I’m in Florida! Night. ;-)
It wasn't a huge CME, but a decent CME.
And hundreds of these more powerful have struck earth and not resulted in any earthquake at all.
Huh. For some reason, I didn't even notice she was wearing a necklace.
Thx.
I understand. I think.
It's Walmart attire.
First off, notice he puts it in degrees to make it LOOK like a smaller area; people don't understand that a degree is huge: Berkland's area is something along the lines of 200 miles wide by 268 miles tall, extending WELL beyond the San Francisco Bay Area.
Consulting an earthquake database for quakes 3.5-6.5 in this area from 2000 to 2010; you find 224; this means that in any given week, there's a 40% chance that Berkland is right by dumb luck.
(2) 3.5-6.5M within 2-degrees of Los Angeles (34.0N; 118.0W)
Same search procedure results in 322 such earthquakes in the last 10 years; this means he's going to get a hit 62% of the time by sheer dumb luck.
So, a 40% chance of being right by dumb luck for prediction 1; 61% chance of being right by dumb luck for prediction 2; His 3rd prediction covers a gigantic magnitude range over TWO states, and his 4th prediction 30% chance of being right by dumb luck.
In sum, this virtually GUARANTEES he'll be right one ONE of the predictions every week, usually two, and every once in a while 3 of the 4(no doubt resulting in showers of praise from his sychophantic, yet utterly clueless fans).
Basically, Berkland is exploiting public ignorance of just how many small-medium earthquakes there are.
The Emperor has no clothes.
Much appreciate your clear elaboration.
Thx Thx.
December 23. They say the end is 12/21/12
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.