In a message dated 02/09/06, gmvoeth@........... writes:

> Why is it so important to predict EQ. It is much more important to build 
> for
> and avoid the inevitable.

Hi Geoff,

       I agree entirely of the need to plan buildings, bridges, power lines, 
water supplies etc to be earthquake resistant. But there are limits to what 
can be done in practice.   
       Do you knock down much of San Francisco and rebuild it to a higher 
standard and if so, what quake level do you plan for and who pays for it? Do you 
rebuild it somewhere else, where the risks are much less? Do you provide 
earthquake shelters in 'at risk' private dwellings, like the bomb shelters 
distributed during WW II?

> If you know where they are then you can use your smarts to plan in dealing 
> with them instead of wasting valuable resources trying to predict the 
> inevitable.

       However, if we could get even a few minutes warning of really damaging 
quakes and communicate this to people in the areas likely to be effected, a 
great many lives could be saved. While the quakes are no doubt inevitable, 
death and injury from them are not. It is largely falling buildings which kill 
people, not the quakes themselves.
       I am not entirely sure what resources are being 'wasted' at the 
moment? I suspect that the total effort is 'significantly less than might be 
prudent'.

> It (Exact prediction) is sort of a misdirection in the application of 
> valuable resources.

       This assumes that it can't be done. I don't think that seismology has 
yet developed anywhere near to a stage where this can be determined. It may 
also be the case that some but not all quakes will be ~predictable. We might as 
well do what we can, but if we don't at least try, we can't succeed.

> This is true of all dangerous natural phenomena and not just EQs.
> 
       Then how do you view Hurricane and Tornado weather prediction? It 
certainly isn't 100% accurate, but how much worse off would we be without it? The 
catastrophy at New Orleans was at least partially due to political problems. 
The authorities were not even able to fill up the available school buses and 
drive them to safety! Should a bunch of them now be in jail for 'corporate 
manslaughter'?

       Regards,

       Chris Chapman

In a me=
ssage dated 02/09/06, gmvoeth@........... writes:



Why is it so important to predi=
ct EQ. It is much more important to build for

and avoid the inevitable.




Hi Geoff,



       I agree entirely of the need to plan bu=
ildings, bridges, power lines, water supplies etc to be earthquake resistant=
.. But there are limits to what can be done in practice.   

       Do you knock down much of San Francisco=
 and rebuild it to a higher standard and if so, what quake level do you plan=
 for and who pays for it? Do you rebuild it somewhere else, where the risks=20=
are much less? Do you provide earthquake shelters in 'at risk' private dwell=
ings, like the bomb shelters distributed during WW II?



If you know where they are then=
 you can use your smarts to plan in dealing with them instead of wasting val=
uable resources trying to predict the inevitable.




       However, if we could get even a few mi=
nutes warning of really damaging quakes and communicate this to people in th=
e areas likely to be effected, a great many lives could be saved. While the=20=
quakes are no doubt inevitable, death and injury from them are not. It is la=
rgely falling buildings which kill people, not the quakes themselves.

       I am not entirely sure what resources a=
re being 'wasted' at the moment? I suspect that the total effort is 'signifi=
cantly less than might be prudent'.



It (Exact prediction) is sort o=
f a misdirection in the application of valuable resources.




       This assumes that it can't be done. I=20=
don't think that seismology has yet developed anywhere near to a stage where=
 this can be determined. It may also be the case that some but not all quake=
s will be ~predictable. We might as well do what we can, but if we don't at=20=
least try, we can't succeed.



This is true of all dangerous n=
atural phenomena and not just EQs.



       Then how do you view Hurricane and Torn=
ado weather prediction? It certainly isn't 100% accurate, but how much worse=
 off would we be without it? The catastrophy at New Orleans was at least par=
tially due to political problems. The authorities were not even able to fill=
 up the available school buses and drive them to safety! Should a bunch of t=
hem now be in jail for 'corporate manslaughter'?



       Regards,



       Chris Chapman