EARTHQUAKE CLOUDS AND
SHORT TERM PREDICTION

Explanation of My S California Quake Prediction (New)

- October 30, 2005 -

On Oct. 23, 2005, I predicted "An earthquake of magnitude 6.6 or above in Southern California (<36N) before or on Feb. 3, 2006. Likely, in the circle bigger than or equal to 7" with image 200510211800eCalifCL1.jpg to show the earthquake cloud and the circled area to both the USGS and the India Miditech [1] . On Oct. 24, I posted this prediction to the public. Due to requests, I post this explanation.

Series 20051021[2] reveals all 9 infrared images from Satellite Goes East, offered by Dundee Univ. UK, within 36 hours from 15:00 of 20051020 (Oct. 20) to 3:00 of 1022. At about 3:00 of 1021, a cloud, mark by "1", emerged suddenly. It moved toward southwest and became smaller, noted by "2" in the next image at 6:00. Due to a wind from west to east, the subsequent cloud was forced to move from southwest to northeast, marked with "3" in the image at 9:00. It became stronger at 12:00, marked by "4". Meanwhile, a weather cloud moved from east to west, marked by "A" against the earthquake cloud. At 15:00 of 1021, it was hard to see due to the weather cloud, marked with "B" at 18:00. It became clear to see, marked by "5". Because of wind from east to west, the earthquake cloud became smaller at 21:00, and disappeared at about 3:00 of 1022. The above explanation is showed by the following animation [3]

Its sudden appearance, and linear, even width shape support that it should be an earthquake cloud. On the other hand, the images are not half-hourly, so some important details might lose. Moreover, the surrounding was not very cold like the Bam cloud to make 100% sure, so my misunderstanding is possible.

The cloud from Number 1 to Number 2 reveals the vapor from the land to the ocean, which is why I think the location in Southern California. Moreover, Series 20051026 [4] implies low, warm cloud from Southern California to the ocean, marked by arrows in Image 20051026 06:00. 09:00 and 21:00. These are new data for the location.

The 6.8 Bam cloud [5], and its relevant earthquake [6], the 4.3 San Fernando cloud [7], and its relevant earthquake [8] etc prove that earthquake clouds can pinpoint impending epicenters. Our Bam Earthquake Prediction & Space Technology (Bam paper) [9] has established a theory to explain how an large earthquake forms, and how to predict it. The paper also explain that the above clouds could pinpoint the epicenters due to cold environments, while many others could not due to lacking cold environments, and a possible method to let them pinpoint impending epicenters. The UN published our Bam paper into Seminars of the United Nations Programme on Space Applications (16)[10], and sent the Seminars to all of its member states. However, no government has listened to us to solve those satellite data problems, which makes a big impediment of our work, including this prediction.

Some people sent me images of NOAA. In fact, I have them. Their big advantage is with a high frequency, half-hourly. Their big disadvantage is in a low quality. When I was in Pasadena, I observed many wave-shaped clouds, but NOAA's images did not show them. On the other hand, Japanese images showed this kind of cloud. Here is an example [11] .

Considering among the clouds [2], [4], my experience on earthquake prediction (accuracy about 70%, see Bam paper) and those satellite data problems, I estimate a possibility of about 80% for the location in Southern California.

Its magnitude can be estimated by comparing its length with my preliminary experience: for a linear cloud, a length of 300 km and 350 km predicts a magnitude of 6 and 7 respectively. The length of this cloud can be calculated by comparing the ratio between the length of the cloud, about 14 mm, in the image 20051021 18:00, and the length, about 39 mm, between two points: one at 30N, 120W and the other at 40N, 110W, with the real length of the above two points, 1434 km. It is about 1434 x 14/39 = 514 km.

Our Bam paper proposed that a group of moderate earthquakes may confuse with a large earthquake. Because no government has solved this problem, a group of moderate earthquakes may happen, instead. However, I estimate the possibility for a large one to be bigger than that for a group because I found about 90% linear clouds having predicted single earthquakes.

Besides the above satellite data problem, earthquake data problems twice affect predicting magnitude, and it is hard to predict how much error of earthquake data will be because their systematic error has not been adjusted, yet. Combining all above reasons that affect predicting magnitude, I estimate a possibility of about 80% for magnitude 6.6 or above to occur.

The time is before or on Feb. 3, 2006 according to the longest delay between a cloud and its subsequent event from over 500 data. Thus, I estimate a possibility of 95% for time to be correct.

Our Bam paper showed a set of my 50 independent earthquake predictions, signed by the USGS, 68% of which were correct in time, location, and magnitude by American "Peer On". The paper also analyzed all mistakes, which were not due to earthquake cloud itself, but due to satellite data problems, my experience problems for time windows, and earthquake data problems. Even if under those problems, a random guess to simulate this set gets a chance of 1 in 16,000 to be successful. Therefore, if this prediction fails, I hope people to understand the problem not due to the earthquake cloud, but due to no support from governments, including the American government to solved those satellite data problems and earthquake data problems. They would rather waste multimillion dollars to support those hopeless studies. For example, JPL predicted "Next major quake" in "Los Angeles" by "Geodetic", satellites, and GPS ( Global Positioning System) on Aug. 3, 1999. However, I disproved it on Aug. 10 [12], and the 7.0 Hector Mine, Southern Earthquake on Oct. 16 claims that I am right [13]. That prediction wasted multimillion dollars [14].

For American people, especially for California people, I suggest the American government prior supporting those studies that have already made many reliable predictions, and will bring a big benefit to people in America and also in the World.



References

  1. Image 200510211800eCalifCL1.jpg
  2. Series 20051021 S California EQ Cloud
  3. 20051020SCaliAni.gifAnimation
  4. Series 20051021 S California low EQ Cloud
  5. Image 20031221 0:00 The 6.8 Bam, Iran earthquake cloud
  6. Map 20031226 the 6.8 Bam, Iran earthquake by the USGS
  7. Image 20010103 05:00 The 4.3 San Fernando, Southern California Earthquake Cloud, exactly
  8. Map 20010114 the 4.3 San Fernando, Southern California earthquake by the USGS
  9. Bam Earthquake Prediction & Space Technology
  10. Darrell Harrington & Zhonghao Shou. Bam Earthquake Prediction & Space Technology. Seminars of the United Nations Programme on Space Applications 16, 39-63 (2005)
  11. Image 20001204 08:00 A Japanese Wave-shaped earthquake cloud
  12. California Earthquake Situation Analysis
  13. The 7.0 Hector Mine, Southern California Earthquake Shows That I Am Right (Rewrite)
  14. Clarke, Tom. Water thrown on earthquake prediction. Nature News 20010823


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

Sign Our Guestbook Guestbook View Our Guestbook

Updated: October 10, 2005 | Webmaster