Talk:3165: Earthquake Prediction Flowchart - Revision history

76.180.39.133 at 16:44, 14 November 2025

2025-11-14T16:44:33Z

134.134.139.69: Just giving some love to a reference in a previous comment.

2025-11-14T01:58:19Z

Just giving some love to a reference in a previous comment.

User 8496351 at 19:38, 12 November 2025

2025-11-12T19:38:41Z

User 8496351 at 19:36, 12 November 2025

2025-11-12T19:36:28Z

1.132.104.106 at 08:01, 11 November 2025

2025-11-11T08:01:00Z

BunsenH at 04:19, 11 November 2025

2025-11-11T04:19:04Z

2.98.65.8 at 00:04, 11 November 2025

2025-11-11T00:04:33Z

BunsenH at 23:58, 10 November 2025

2025-11-10T23:58:15Z

BunsenH at 23:57, 10 November 2025

2025-11-10T23:57:07Z

2.98.65.8 at 22:26, 10 November 2025

2025-11-10T22:26:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:44, 14 November 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:

	As early as [https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0640051363 1974], there was substantial evidence that earthquakes at least in Southern California were unpredictable. To be more precise, the paper found that if you remove aftershocks, the distribution of earthquakes appeared to follow a Poisson distribution. This is the distribution expected from a "memoryless" process where each event is independent of any earlier event, and where earthquakes have a constant probability of occurring, making them completely impossible to predict.		As early as [https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0640051363 1974], there was substantial evidence that earthquakes at least in Southern California were unpredictable. To be more precise, the paper found that if you remove aftershocks, the distribution of earthquakes appeared to follow a Poisson distribution. This is the distribution expected from a "memoryless" process where each event is independent of any earlier event, and where earthquakes have a constant probability of occurring, making them completely impossible to predict.
		+	: That does not prove they are unpredictable. At best it proves they are unpredictable with a particular type of data and model. A precursor event (be it peepers peeping an octave higher, changes in radon release rates, or type mu-normal earthquakes with hysteresis) could still exist. Two random variables can be separately Poisson but perfectly correlated. [[Special:Contributions/76.180.39.133\|76.180.39.133]] 16:44, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

	It may be that not all earthquakes everywhere really work this way, but in the past 50 years, evidence has accumulated only to support this hypothesis. No progress whatsoever has been made in predicting earthquakes, only in reasons to believe they fundamentally cannot be predicted (at least without a lot of inaccessible information regarding strain deep within the earth). [[User:EebstertheGreat\|EebstertheGreat]] ([[User talk:EebstertheGreat\|talk]]) 05:16, 8 November 2025 (UTC)		It may be that not all earthquakes everywhere really work this way, but in the past 50 years, evidence has accumulated only to support this hypothesis. No progress whatsoever has been made in predicting earthquakes, only in reasons to believe they fundamentally cannot be predicted (at least without a lot of inaccessible information regarding strain deep within the earth). [[User:EebstertheGreat\|EebstertheGreat]] ([[User talk:EebstertheGreat\|talk]]) 05:16, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:58, 14 November 2025
Line 12:		Line 12:

	: There's a difference between being impossible to predict based on past earthquakes, and being impossible to predict based on other measurable indicators, though. [[Special:Contributions/163.116.254.40\|163.116.254.40]] 15:20, 10 November 2025 (UTC)		: There's a difference between being impossible to predict based on past earthquakes, and being impossible to predict based on other measurable indicators, though. [[Special:Contributions/163.116.254.40\|163.116.254.40]] 15:20, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
		+
		+	: That paper you cite has one of the best uses of an abstract that I've ever seen! Title: "Is the sequence of earthquakes in Southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian?" Abstract: "Yes." I mean, it's perfect - concise and easy to understand. [[Special:Contributions/134.134.139.69\|134.134.139.69]] 01:58, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

	Any examples of people claiming to predict earthquakes? --[[User:1234231587678\|1234231587678]] ([[User talk:1234231587678\|talk]]) 05:25, 8 November 2025 (UTC)		Any examples of people claiming to predict earthquakes? --[[User:1234231587678\|1234231587678]] ([[User talk:1234231587678\|talk]]) 05:25, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:38, 12 November 2025
Line 40:		Line 40:
	Should 1943: Universal Dreams be mentioned? That comic also has earthquake predictions. [[Special:Contributions/1.132.104.106\|1.132.104.106]] 08:01, 11 November 2025 (UTC)		Should 1943: Universal Dreams be mentioned? That comic also has earthquake predictions. [[Special:Contributions/1.132.104.106\|1.132.104.106]] 08:01, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

−	Predicting apocalypses would be a lot easier, if they happen more than one time. "Yeah, i'm 1000000 years old, and i lived in galactic cluster where worlds end every second and untold septillions die every nanosecond on every square ~~meter~~ of the planet. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Having survived that non-stop grimdark mess, i assume - by precise calculations - that this world will end ''again'' in precisely 7 seconds. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Damn, i warned you. The next end of this world will be in 10 second. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Exactly." --[[User:User 8496351\|User 8496351]] ([[User talk:User 8496351\|talk]]) 19:36, 12 November 2025 (UTC)	+	Predicting apocalypses would be a lot easier, if they happen more than one time. "Yeah, i'm 1000000 years old, and i lived in galactic cluster where worlds end every second and untold septillions die every nanosecond on every square millimeter of the planet. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Having survived that non-stop grimdark mess, i assume - by precise calculations - that this world will end ''again'' in precisely 7 seconds. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Damn, i warned you. The next end of this world will be in 10 second. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Exactly." --[[User:User 8496351\|User 8496351]] ([[User talk:User 8496351\|talk]]) 19:36, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:36, 12 November 2025
Line 39:		Line 39:

	Should 1943: Universal Dreams be mentioned? That comic also has earthquake predictions. [[Special:Contributions/1.132.104.106\|1.132.104.106]] 08:01, 11 November 2025 (UTC)		Should 1943: Universal Dreams be mentioned? That comic also has earthquake predictions. [[Special:Contributions/1.132.104.106\|1.132.104.106]] 08:01, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
		+
		+	Predicting apocalypses would be a lot easier, if they happen more than one time. "Yeah, i'm 1000000 years old, and i lived in galactic cluster where worlds end every second and untold septillions die every nanosecond on every square meter of the planet. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Having survived that non-stop grimdark mess, i assume - by precise calculations - that this world will end ''again'' in precisely 7 seconds. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Damn, i warned you. The next end of this world will be in 10 second. '''''FOOOOM!!!!''''' Exactly." --[[User:User 8496351\|User 8496351]] ([[User talk:User 8496351\|talk]]) 19:36, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:01, 11 November 2025
Line 37:		Line 37:
	:No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. [[Special:Contributions/2.98.65.8\|2.98.65.8]] 00:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)		:No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. [[Special:Contributions/2.98.65.8\|2.98.65.8]] 00:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
	::I make no claims for the Epsilon Eridani system. [[User:BunsenH\|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH\|talk]]) 04:19, 11 November 2025 (UTC)		::I make no claims for the Epsilon Eridani system. [[User:BunsenH\|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH\|talk]]) 04:19, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
		+
		+	Should 1943: Universal Dreams be mentioned? That comic also has earthquake predictions. [[Special:Contributions/1.132.104.106\|1.132.104.106]] 08:01, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:19, 11 November 2025
Line 36:		Line 36:
	I predict that there will be no Apocalypse tomorrow. At least, not on Earth. (It's a fairly safe prediction, because if I'm wrong, very few people will bother to take me to task over it. Though as long as the internet persists, there will be a few.) [[User:BunsenH\|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH\|talk]]) 23:57, 10 November 2025 (UTC)		I predict that there will be no Apocalypse tomorrow. At least, not on Earth. (It's a fairly safe prediction, because if I'm wrong, very few people will bother to take me to task over it. Though as long as the internet persists, there will be a few.) [[User:BunsenH\|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH\|talk]]) 23:57, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
	:No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. [[Special:Contributions/2.98.65.8\|2.98.65.8]] 00:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)		:No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. [[Special:Contributions/2.98.65.8\|2.98.65.8]] 00:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
		+	::I make no claims for the Epsilon Eridani system. [[User:BunsenH\|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH\|talk]]) 04:19, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:04, 11 November 2025
Line 35:		Line 35:

	I predict that there will be no Apocalypse tomorrow. At least, not on Earth. (It's a fairly safe prediction, because if I'm wrong, very few people will bother to take me to task over it. Though as long as the internet persists, there will be a few.) [[User:BunsenH\|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH\|talk]]) 23:57, 10 November 2025 (UTC)		I predict that there will be no Apocalypse tomorrow. At least, not on Earth. (It's a fairly safe prediction, because if I'm wrong, very few people will bother to take me to task over it. Though as long as the internet persists, there will be a few.) [[User:BunsenH\|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH\|talk]]) 23:57, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
		+	:No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. [[Special:Contributions/2.98.65.8\|2.98.65.8]] 00:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 :Don't leave me hanging... It's bad enough that I didn't even get told that it was going to happen, in advance, but at least you could let me know if it ''did''! [[Special:Contributions/2.98.65.8|2.98.65.8]] 11:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
 ::Well if it DID happen, then pretty few people must have been raptured... which would mean that pretty few people were actually "good" people, which seems about right though :-/--[[Special:Contributions/93.241.210.5|93.241.210.5]] 10:16, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
-:My theory is that the Rapture ''did'' happen, but that all of the people who were taken were retroactively removed from existence.  All evidence and memory of them disappeared.  All of the terrible accidents that resulted from the sudden disappearances of vehicle drivers, equipment operators, generator managers, etc., were erased.  Just like in ''Doctor Who'' after yet another alien invasion, afterwards, nobody believes that it happened. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 23:57, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
+:My theory is that the Rapture ''did'' happen, but that all of the people who were taken were retroactively removed from existence.  All evidence and memory of them disappeared.  All of the terrible accidents that resulted from the sudden disappearances of vehicle drivers, equipment operators, generator managers, etc., were erased.  Just like in modern-era ''Doctor Who'' after yet another alien invasion, afterwards, nobody believes that it happened. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 23:57, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
 There ''is'' a perfect way of predicting future earthquakes to the exact second, but it requires a time machine. ("Past performance is no guarantee of future results." "That would be true if I were giving you information from ''our'' past." - Gunther Thurl and Kevyn Andreyasn, ''Schlock Mercenary'') [[Special:Contributions/207.253.24.188|207.253.24.188]] 16:00, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 Religious apocali (apocalypses is probably fine, but doesn’t sound quite as cool) tend to only happen once, sure, but there’s also the whole “massive flood wiping out 99.99% of life” thing that happened in Christianity. It would be difficult to argue such an event wouldn’t be considered apocalyptic were it to happen today. Also, in some syncretic interpretations, the Norse Ragnarok happened prior to the events of Genesis (after the universe creation part, of course) which is about as apocalypse as it gets. Of course, there the question is less “why didn’t you predict that one” and more “another apocalypse? So what, we’ve already had 2 and it was fine.” [[User:KelOfTheStars!|KelOfTheStars!]] ([[User talk:KelOfTheStars!|talk]]) 04:01, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
 : Not to mention some 'cyclical history'-type theologies, where an apocalyptic event may not just have occurred more than once, but an infinite number of times. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 09:32, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
 Is it possible that there are still unknown types of Earthquakes that *are* predictable? Or quakes on bodies other than the Earth? Maybe someone couldn't predict 100% of quakes, but maybe quakes of a specific type. Particularly if someone whips out his handy dandy Quake Inducer 3000™ and says "I will cause an Earthquake on this spot tomorrow." [[Special:Contributions/191.101.157.124|191.101.157.124]] 18:13, 10 November 2025 (UTC)