EARTHQUAKE CLOUDS AND
SHORT TERM PREDICTION

My 5.2 California Earthquake Prediction Is Correct

- April 23, 2005 -

First of all, I would like to thank California people for their belief in and enthusiasm for my work. They wrote me to congratulations for my successful California earthquake prediction with the data of the USGS that an earthquake of magnitude 5.2 had happened at 35.02N, 119.17W on Apr. 16, 2005.

I checked my predictions, and found two of them suitable for this earthquake. One of them is the cloud on Apr. 4 for an earthquake of magnitude more than or equal to 5, stronger [1], and the other is the geoeruption at C on Mar. 19 for an earthquake of magnitude more than or equal to 4 [2]. Since I could not obtain the data I need[3], [4], [5] I have to wait for 3 months to see which one predicted this earthquake (maybe the cloud) On the other hand, my 5.2 California earthquake prediction is correct by either of them.

I hope California people to convince the American government of giving me an opportunity to set up a new satellite camera system to pinpoint out an impending epicenter independent on a very cold surrounding like the Bam cloud [6], animation [7] and to divide between a large vapor source and a group of moderate vapor sources, so all large earthquakes will be able to predicted exactly. If more work were done to standardize earthquake data and narrow a time window, a successful evacuation would become true.

Some seismologists may think that my method is not unique because of many other methods. If so, I suggest carefully studying both the Nature Debate in 1999, which shows no studied method working for prediction [8], and what's new of your repeat. If you do not have extraordinary idea, you will fail as your older generation. In fact, I successfully denied three predictions: the Parkfield prediction of the USGS by period in 1993, the Los Angeles prediction of JPL by geodetic in 1999 [9], and K-B's prediction by his mathematics in 2004 [10]. I think to repeat those useless methods equal to waste budgets, and to help devastating earthquakes, so I suggest all governments supporting such people who have already predicted earthquakes successfully at first.



References

  1. Image 20050404 4:30 A California- Nevada EQ Cloud, >=5
  2. Image 20050319 18:30 A California-Mexico Geoeruption, >=4, likely near AB
  3. Satellite Data Problems
  4. Earthquake Database Problems
  5. Hope for Complete & Accurate Earthquake Data
  6. Image 20031221 0:00 The 6.8 S Iran EQ Cloud showed at 12:58 a.m. December 25, 2003.
  7. SHOU.zipAnimation of the Bam Cloud
  8. California Earthquake Situation Analysis
  9. About K-B's Prediction
  10. http://www.nature.com/nature/debates/earthquake/index.html Nature Debate: Is there reliable prediction of individual earthquakes a realistic scientific goal?


Home | Introduction | Publication & News | Predictions | New Predictions | Essays | Links | Contact

Sign Our Guestbook Guestbook View Our Guestbook

Updated: April 23, 2005 | Webmaster