Conference hydra::dejavu

    Note: The earthquake that hit Nicaragua was 7.0 on the Richter scale
    
    Wednesday, September 2nd, 1992 Earthquake rumbles S.Western Utah, 5.5
    	on the Richter scaler

    
    Wednesday, September 2, 1992 - 6.0 Earthquake - Java, Indonesia.
    
    
    
    IMO, I believe we are witnessing the early stages of the earth changes.
    I realize that natural disasters have occurred throughout time,
    however, the earth changes encompass a number of different types of
    events and it is the combination of these that makes them significant.
    
    I recently subscribed to a newsletter out of New Hampshire that I find
    to be a very well done and reponsible publication.  It is based on the 
    predictions of a man named George Michael Scallion.  I'll post the details 
    tomorrow on how to subscribe, for those interested.
    
    Carole

    Re: .1
    
    Excellent article Marcos. Thanks for posting that. It is interesting to
    note that the latest reported earthquake in Utah (see .2) is on the
    side of the state which boarders Nevada (and also being close to Las
    Vegas). Maybe another nuclear test?
    
    The article you posted is very believable and valuable information.
    This is one more reason (and maybe the most important reason) that Bush
    has got to go. Imagine, knowing that the whole planet is being affected
    by these tests and still approving them?! The man is maniacal!

    Re: .3
    
    Yes Carole, please post what information you have on this. Thanks.

    The news broadcast last night showed another earthquake in I believe
    it was Utah.  This happened yesterday.
    
    WAC
    

There is a school of thought that such "UNnatural" disasters are a result
of mass karmic energies manifiesting themselves through the Earth.

To quote a favorite author:


	"The sudden cataclysms that occur in nature, creating havoc
	and mass injury are not "acts of God". Such disasters result
	from the thoughts and actions of man. Wherever the world's
	vibratory balance of good and evil is disturbed by an 
	accumulation of harmful vibrations, the result of man's
	wrong thinking and wrong doing, you will see devastation..."

					- Paramahansa Yogananda
					"Autobiography of a Yogi"

Also, while we are raping the planet with strip mining, rain forest
destruction, nuclear device testing, global warming, ozone destruction,
and massive pollution, you can't blame "Mother Nature" for fighting
back!

kj

  Re .1 (Marcos)

  [Thanks for posting that!]

>Whiteford speculated that although the reverberations may fade within fifteen
>miles of a test they are merely the first ripple of a wave that travels through
>the planet's crust and spreads around the globe.   

  This brings to mind the report of a volcanic eruption that "made the planet
  ring".  I'll try to dig out the article tonight but (from memory) there were
  a series of 'echoes' or resonant waves after one particularly sudden eruption
  [not the most powerful one though] that was likened to the effect of giving a
  gong a sharp tap with a metal hammer.

  Frank

    Friday, September 4th, 1992
    
    NPR reported on the morning news that possibly the worst drought in
    this century is causing wide-spread famine from Zambia to S.Africa.

From the Burlington Free Press, Friday, September 4th, 1992

"WORLD

KABUL, Afghanistan

FLASH FLOODING KILLS HUNDREDS

A churning wall of water, mud and rock swept through the fertile valleys of the
Hindu Kush Mountains, leaving hundreds of people dead or missing, a British-based
charity said Thursday.

Rescue workers were starting to dig bodies out of 6-foot deposits of mud, the
Halo Trust charity said and estimated the toll could rise to 3,000.

Flash floods wiped out entire villages in the Salang, Dhorband and Shaltuh
valleys, destroying orchards, irrigation canals and up to 1,000 homes, said
Guy Willoughby, head of Halo Trust.

Willoughby said at least 450 people were killed and another 500 were missing in
two areas where his organization has been working. Officials believe the 33-foot
wall of water swept through the area early Wednesday.

    
    Hi all,
    
    Here's the address and phone number for the publication I mentioned
    in .3:
    
    	The Earth Changes Report
    	Matrix Institute
    	RR1 Box 391
        Westmoreland, NH  03467
    
        603-399-4916
    
    
    Carole

    Saturday, September 5th, 1992
    
    NPR this morning reported that Mt. Minatubo in the Phillipines has
    killed over 50 people due to mud and rock slides. More people are
    evacuating.

    re: .3
    
    small nit - it's Gordon-Michael Scallion, not George. 
    
    re: .12
    
    This is a monthly publication. Subscription rate is $49.95 US or $59.95
    for Foreign subscribers. Also available is a 6 month subscription for
    $29.94/$34.95. All numbers are US funds. 
    
    They also feature a Earth Healing Section written by his wife, Cynthia
    Keyes. The subtitle for the ECR is "The Survival Guide for the
    Nineties".
    
    	- Bill

    Wisconsin had a tornado yesterday.  
    
    Mary
    
    (Also, this doesn't count as a disaster, but the last shaker of the
    last "pure" shaker village died yesterday.)

    I can't remember the details.. but I read about steam rising and ground
    temperatures of 300 degrees ... some where in South America I think...
    it was a place 3,900 (approximately) above sea level... no volcanoes or
    volcanic activity identified yet but... when this blows it will
    probably effect the world's climate for quite awhile.

Re: .-1 (Mary)

If you could find the article you read this in and post it, that would be much
appreciated by all! Please do. Muchos gracias!

Re: .-1 (Marcos)

Thanks Marcos for the reference, there are many such references available for
past ocurrances, however, this information is not what I am looking for here,
as the information I am looking for needs to be current.

However, if you have information relating to recent occurances, please post them,
those are most welcome.

Sergei

    I read it in the newspaper but I can't remember which one.. I'll cut it
    out next time, Sergei.

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster
Subject: Strongest central African earthquake ever recorded hits Zaire
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 3:46:12 PDT
 
	WASHINGTON (UPI) -- The U.S. Geological Survey said the strongest
earthquake ever recorded in central Africa hit Zaire early Friday, with
injuries likely.
	The USGS National Earthquake Information Center in Golden, Colo.,
said a temblor measuring 6.5 on the Richter Scale hit Zaire at 5:57 a.m.
local time (11:57 p.m. EDT Thursday night).
	Seismologists put the quake's center near Kabalo, a town of 23,000
people on the Congo River, some 800 miles south of Kinshasa, Zaire's
capital.
	``We have no early reports of injuries or damage, but some certainly
can be expected from an earthquake this size,'' USGS spokeswoman Pat
Jorgenson said.
	In London, British seismologist David Redmayne said scientists
consider earthquakes very unusual in the Kabalo region, ``because it's a
stable continental area.''
	Redmayne said Zaire's only other recorded quake occurred in 1957,
when a magnitude 6.3 temblor struck.

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (ANWAR IQBAL)
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.news.gov.international
Subject: Heavy rains in Pakistan leave an estimated 300 dead
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 10:42:14 PDT
 
	ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (UPI) -- The government warned millions of people
living in the river-bottom region of Punjab to move to high ground
Thursday night after a two-day torrential downpour triggered landslides
in the mountains, caused flooding on the plains and killed an estimated
300 people.
	While authorities estimated at least 300 people had been killed in
the two-day downpour, reports continued to filter in from remote regions
of northern Pakistan where some of the world's highest mountains meet.
Officials said rescue workers so far had recovered at least 250 bodies.
	Many of the dead were buried alive in landslides triggered by the
rainfall in mountainous northern Pakistan. Official Pakistan television,
describing the losses as ``collosal,'' said flooding swept away 300
villages on the flatlands near Jhelum town on the Jhelum River southeast
of the capital.
	Radio Pakistan broadcast warnings Thursday night urging millions of
people in Punjab to leave their homes along the five major rivers that
flow through the region and seek higher ground because of the flooding.
About 120 million people live in the densely populated state.
	``The flood control centers in Punjab have recorded very high
flooding in all its five rivers,'' the radio said. ``Please move to
safer and higher places away from the rivers.''
	The government has declared an emergency in the rain-swamped areas.
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif ordered army troops to take charge of the
rescue operations because the civilian administration laked the
resources to cope with the disaster.
	Flooding has caused all the rivers in Azad Kashmir and Punjab to
overflow their banks, submerging hundreds of acres of land. Monitoring
centers said the flow in both the Jhelum and Chenab rivers had doubled
since Wednesday afternoon.
	Authorities fear the Jhelum River may sweep away an entire 25-mile
strip of land in Azad Kashmir that has been under water since Wednesday
morning.
	Troops were attempting to evacuate thousands of people from Afzalpur
town in Azad Kashmir. Water inundated the town, forcing residents to
flee to the rooftops, where they were waiting to be rescued.
	The government has opened more than 50 relief camps for the flood
victims. The prime minister has appealed for ``the rich to join the
rescue operation as the government did not have enough resources to do
it alone.''
    
    
Subject: Death toll in Pakistan floods tops 500
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 6:26:47 PDT
 
	PESHAWAR, Pakistan (UPI) -- Authorities in Pakistan's North West
Frontier Province said Friday the death toll in this week's flooding has
topped 500 and an independent national newspaper, The Muslim, said the
total may go beyond 1000.
	So far authorities have recovered 300 bodies from the Hazara district
of the province, 200 from Punjab and 60 from Kashmir.
	The minister for agriculture, Majeed Malik, said rain and flooding
have destroyed 50 percent of the total crop of cotton in the country.
The cotton, Pakistan's main cash crop, was ready for harvest.
	Torrential rains for more than 36 hours caused widespread damage.
Although the rain stopped thursday, Pakistan television said Friday
floodwaters have submerged a belt of 1,200 square miles in lower Punjab.
	Radio Pakistan broadcast another warning Friday, urging people in
lower Punjab and North West Frontier Province to move to higher ground.
	Press reports estimated 500,000 people had been made homeless by the
flooding. Many were living in scores of emergency relief camps opened by
the government, political parties and private citizens.
	Radio Pakistan said water in all rivers in Punjab had already crossed
the danger level and was still rising.

Re: .-1,.-2 (Carole)

Thanks for entering those. I had heard a very brief (probably 10 second)
announcement of this on NPR which I didn't catch completely and wanted to know
more, so I called NPR and of course the couldn't give me any information and
haven't called me back, so I am thankful for you providing this.

To note, those who haven't heard, there is another big hurricane, probably near
the magnitude of Andrew, that is about to hit Hawaii. We will get the reports
after it hits, I'm sure. Any information on this is also appreciated.

Regards,

Sergei

    ... the super storms...
    
    It's Saturday now and there was hardly anything about it in the
    newspaper... hope everyone is ok...

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.news.weather
Subject: Hurricane Iniki hits Hawaii
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 22:52:59 PDT
 
	LIHUE, Hawaii (UPI) -- Hurricane Iniki raced across the outer Hawaiian
Island of Kauai Friday with sustained winds of 130 mph and gusts to 160,
weakening as it struck land, but still as powerful as the devastating
Hurricane Andrew.
	Most communications with Kauai, an island of about 100,000 people
about 110 miles west-northwest of Honolulu, were down, leaving the
outside world to only guess at the damage.
	``We do not have much to report, but I imagine things are rather
severe,'' said Jack Beven, a meteorologist for the National Hurricane
Center in Miami, who said the eye of the storm hit land late Friday
afternoon, local time.
	``It was slowly weakening before it hit land, but it is still a very
potent hurricane,'' Beven said of the storm described as the worst to
hit the 50th state this century.
	The mayor of Kauai told a local radio station in a monitored
broadcast that the roof of the island's state office building had been
torn off and debris was everywhere.
	At 8 p.m. local time (2 a.m. EDT) the center of the hurricane was
reported 120 miles north of of Kauai near latitude 23.8 degrees north,
159.5 degrees west and moving north at 30 miles per hour.
	Strongest sustained winds were estimated at 115 mph with gusts as
high as 145 mph near the center.
	Torrential rains and flooding were reported on Kauai and Niihau
conditions favorable for tornadoes and waterspouts.
	Tens of thousands of people had fled for higher ground, power lines
were down and palm trees were bent double in the wind. Torrential rains
drenched the area.
	Oahu, the most populous of the Hawaiian Islands with its 1 million
residents, tourists and military personnel and the site of Honolulu,
Pearl Harbor and Waikiki Beach, was spared the worst of the storm and
its hurricane warning was downgraded to a tropical storm warning.
	The Navy put eight surface ships and five submarines to sea and flew
20 planes to Moffett Field in California to avoid a repeat of the
destruction of aircraft that Andrew wreaked at Homestead Air Force Base
in Florida.

    Sketchy report from Pakistan.  Torential rains caused flooding.
    Authorities there estimate that 1700 people are dead.
    
    Steve

Tuesday, September 15th, 1992

	NPR reported today:

	> Earthquake in south-eastern California registered 4.7 on the Richter
	  scale
	> Death-toll in Pakistan due to severe rain-fall near 3000

Burlington Free Press, Septmber 15th, 1992:

	"FLOODS FORCE 500,000 FROM PAKISTAN HOMES

	The Associated Press

KARACHI, Pakistan -- The government ordered the evacuation of half a million
people in southern Pakistan on Monday, bracing for flash floods that have killed
hundreds of people and destroyed homes, livestock and crops.

At least 650 people died in heavy rain and floods that swept northern and
eastern Pakistan last week, the government said. English- and Urdu-language
newspapers put the toll as high as 1,800.

The churning flood waters Monday started to spill into the Indus River that cuts
through southern Sindh Province.

The river was expected to crest Wednesday or Thursday, officials said.

The provincial government placed an estimated 50,000 troops on high alert and
declared a state of emergency in Sukkur, Larkana and Dadu, three of Sindh's
most flood-prone districts.

It ordered the army to evacuate about 300 adobe villages -- home to about 500,000
people -- along the river banks and to set up relief shelters.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif called the floods a "national tragedy" and gave a
preliminary damage estimate of $105 million.

Officials in affected provinces said that amount was too low.

In eastern Punjab, where most of Pakistan's 120 million people live, officials
said the flood had caused at least $600 million in damage to property, crops and
livestock.

Sharif announced a grant of $50 million for food and medicine for victims, many
of whom are sleeping on the roofs of their homes or in relief camps."

The Burlington Free Press
Wednesday, September 16th, 1992

"STALLED STORM DROPS FOOT OF RAIN

CORYDON, Iowa

Roads turned to rivers and the rivers ran amok Tuesday as a stalled storm dumped
almost a foot of rain across souther Iowa.

For hours, rising water closed roads. Schools were closed, trains were stranded
and low-lying cropland and agricultural terraces were damaged.

All roads leading to the Wayne County seat of Corydon were blocked by water, and
Lucas County authorities rescued one adult and two children trappen in a van
surrounded by rising water, said sheriff's dispatcher Rich Runnells.

"I've been working for the state for 27 years and I've never seen it this bad,"
said Dalla Clifton, a Department of Transportation worker.

No serious injuries were reported."

"ARMY WORKS TO EVACUATE PAKISTANIS

KARACHI, Pakistan

Army helicopters and troops worked Tuesday to evacuate a half-million people from
300 adobe villages along the Indus River.

The Indus has been rapidly rising since torrential rains last week caused
landslides and flash floods in northeastern Pakistan and bordering Indian states.
The official Pakistani death toll is 650. At least 434 people have died in India.

Muzammal Qureshi, a spokesman for the Sindh provincial government, said that in
addition to those ordered evacuated, 600,000 people have been told to be ready to
leave.

Troops were piling sandbags along the Indus to try to keep the surging water from
destroying the cotton and sugarcane crops that are the base of Sindh province's
economy.

The floods have washed away thousands of mud villages. Roads and communciations
links were washed out to many villages, making the extent of the disaster
difficult to assess. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan estimated
preliminary damage in his country at about $105 million. -- From wire reports"

    Boston Globe
    Wednesday, Sep 16, 1992
    
    "QUAKE SEEN LIKELY FOR NEW YORK CITY"
    
    New York - New York has a 60 percent chance of suffering a major
    earthquake that could cause as much as $25 billion in damage, a team of
    civil engineers said yesterday.  The city would be "devastated" by even
    a mild earthquake at a level of 5.0 on the Richter scale, a panel at
    the American Society of Civil Engineers annual meeting here said.
    
    Klaus Jacob, an engineer at Columbia University, said that "you can
    expect in New York City an earthquake of a 5.0 magnitude roughly every
    100 years.  The last one was in 1884".  He said the city was woefully
    unprepared for such an event and that buildings were not built to
    withstand that kind of seismic pressure.
    (Reuters)

Re: .-1 (Mary)

Thanks for posting that Mary. Looks like I should re-think travelling regularly
to NYC for Digital...anyone who might have an inkling/prediction on when this
might happen, your input would be greatly appreciated! At the least, with that
I can make sure not to travel around that time...Digital doesn't pay me to risk
me life! Of course, this assumes that the likelyhood of earthquakes is in the
NYC region, New York is a *big* state!

    Traveling is about the single most dangerous activity that the average
    person does.

    Jamie.

...and I do it for Digital at least 30% of the time...

60%, huh? A 5.0 quake in NYC would certainly be a catastrophe.

Aside from inconceivable damage to buildings, New York's water and
power distribution systems are among the largest, most complex, and
most fragile in the world. NY would probably be in serious trouble for
months, with incredible shortages of everything, disease from
contaminated water supplies ... you name it. It would make Andrew's
damage to S. Florida look like a mild drizzle.

And to think it was "due" in 1984.

In any case, seismologists have been saying for a couple of decades
that The Big One in California is long overdue ... perhaps they'll be right.

    Not to mention the fact that Manhattan is really an island... and there
    is only one route off (and if I remember correctly, that's a tunnel 
    under the ocean... don't know that for sure though).
    
    I won't go to New york at all anymore... I went to a Dead show a couple
    years ago and was a nervous wreck the whole time.  I get a really bad 
    feeling about it...  my friend, Pam wouldn't even stay the night... she
    and her husband checked out of the hotel and drove all night to get home.
    
    My husband has friends who live there.  We tried to suggest to them
    that they get out but.... people don't understand ... and a hunch is
    basically just a hunch afterall.

    
    >Not to mention the fact that Manhattan is really an island... and
    >there
    >is only one route off (and if I remember correctly, that's a tunnel
    >under the ocean... don't know that for sure though)
    
    
    Actually, there are several bridges and tunnels to the island, but even
    so, I wouldn't expect any of them to stay up (given their ages and
    state of [dis]repair).
    
    Beth

NPR reported today that the volcano in Alaska that errupted earlier this year
in June (after 27 years) has errupted again. Also, the torrential rains in
Iowa have moved north to south-eastern Minnesota, dropping over 11" of rain.

These are sketchy as I the reports were very brief (as usual) and I don't
remember all the details. However, any wire or electronic reports someone comes
across, please post them. Thanks.

Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.news.trouble,clari.local.minnesota,clari.news.top
Subject: Heavy rains pummel Iowa and southern Minnesota
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 1:38:18 PDT
 
	DES MOINES, Iowa (UPI) -- Heavy rains deluged parts of Iowa and
southern Minnesota Tuesday, washing away roads and bridges in the
Hawkeye State, but causing only local flooding in Minnesota.
	In Des Moines, National Weather Service forecaster Jerry Adams called
the downpour a ``record flood.''
	``We've got farmers 60-years old saying they've never seen anything
like this,'' he said.
	The city of Van Wert, in south-central Iowa, reported the highest
unofficial rainfall count: 16 inches. The town of Derby tallied the
highest official amount: 11.5 inches.
	Some of the heaviest precipitation hit Thayer, about 50 miles
southwest of Des Moines, destroying a dam and lake that had been in
place since 1859.
	A state engineer's office worker also reported several bridges washed
away by the force of the raging Grand, Platte and Nodaway rivers.
	``We've never had whole bridges washed away before,'' the worker
said. ``The fellas are still out there scrambling to put out road-closed
signs. We're out of barricades now. They're using snow fences.''
	Decatur County Sheriff's dispatchers also reported several roads
flooded and barricaded up.
	Deputies detoured traffic away from all main highways, as well as
away from the Grand River, which was reported overflowing its banks.
Forecasters predicted 25 feet of floodwater at Davis City -- a elevel
that would break a 107-year-old record.
	``It's pretty nasty,'' one dispatcher said. ``I crossed (a river
bridge) at 9 p.m. and they closed it at 10. Now I don't know home I'm
going to get home.''
	The dispatcher added that authorities had closed more than ten miles
of Interstate 35, from Decatur City to the Missouri border.
	Wide areas of Iowa also lost electricity and telephone service as
rains washed away utility poles.
	However, authorities reported no deaths or injuries.
	Still, some Iowa schools closed, and officials reported extensive
crop damage.
	``Any bottom ground in the county has been thoroughly flooded,'' one
official said. ``I saw corn that you could only see the tassles (and)
this was before the water got going good. Beans -- if you didn't know
they were there, you'd think, 'What a pretty lake.'''
	A spokesman for Gov. Terry Branstad reported a dozen state and
federal highways -- as hundreds of miles of local gravel roads -- remained
under water, with rivers and streams still rising in some areas.
	Branstad issued an emergency proclamation for Lucas, Union, Clarke,
Decatur and Wayne counties.
	In Minnesota, a line of thunderstorms dropped up to eight inches of
rain Tuesday evening in the southern suburbs of Minneapolis-St. Paul.
	Towns and suburbs in Dakota, Scott and southern Hennepin Counties
received 3 to 8 inches of precipitation in just over three hours.
	The Minnesota State Patrol said Interstate 35 remained under water
near Elko, about 30 miles south of Minneapolis.
	Officials diverted traffic onto county roads, but said even those
were becoming waterlogged.
	Street flooding also occurred in several suburban and rural Minnesota
communities.
    
    
Newsgroups: clari.news.weather,clari.news.disaster,clari.local.indiana
Subject: Heavy rains spark floods in Wisconsin
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 92 18:01:37 PDT
 
	Heavy rain over the past two days forced residents from their homes
and roads were under a foot of water in some Wisconsin counties
Wednesday while scattered showers plagued southern Iowa -- where nearly
3,800 square miles were inundated by torrential rains that turned
trickling creeks to raging rivers.
	Several inches of rain forced Wisconsin rivers and creeks out of
their banks in Jackson, Richland, Trempealeau, Crawford and Vernon
counties. Water was backing up in the Trempealeau and Kickapoo rivers as
well as numerous creeks. Several state highways and secondary roads were
impassable.
	Gov. Tommy Thompson Wednesday declared a state of emergency in the
areas hit hard by the heavy rains and flooding. The declaration directs
the National Guard and the Division of Emergency Government to help with
flood control efforts and offers sandbags, pumps and generators from the
state.
	``We are under water,'' said Jeff Halvorsen, a police officer in
Arcadia in Trempealeau County. ``Main street is closed. Part of the
industrial area on the west of town is under water.''
	All available firemen from Arcadia and neighboring departments and
members of the National Guard placed sandbags along creeks and near
industrial division buildings, he said. Residents of 14 houses in
Arcadia were evacuated and housed in a church.
	Richland County Sheriff Fred Schram said rain had buried roads under
a foot of water and heaps of mud from the sides of roads slid onto the
pavement.
	``It's closing a lot of roads and chasing a lot of people out of
their homes,'' Schram said. ``We have a lot of mudslides on county
roads, enough mud to block the roads entirely.''
	Schram said 10 to 15 inches of rain fell in the last 36 hours and
more rain was predicted overnight. Parts of the towns of Viola and
Richland Center were evacuated and cots were set up in the Masonic
Temple in Richland Center for people forced from their homes by high
water.
	Keith Ferries, acting director of emergency government in Jackson
County, said 5 to 8 inches rain that fell since 3 a.m. Wednesday forced
the closure of several roads and caused mudslides.
	``They're telling us there's going to be 3 to 6 inches more (rain)
and we have no place to put it,'' Ferries said. ``We're flooding all
over the place.''
	About 20 to 25 inmates from Black River Correctional Institute and
the Jackson County Jail were enlisted to place sandbags on wet ground,
he said.
	In Iowa, no serious injuries or deaths were reported as a result of
the rains that began Monday afternoon, uprooting trees and utility
poles, washing away bridges and flattening crops.
	``White Breast Creek looked like the Mississippi,'' said Jerry L.
Ostendorf, operations manager for the Emergency Services Disaster
Division. ``It's normally just a trickle. But now there are trees
standing in the middle. Some are bent over due to the force of the
water.
	``Our Department of Natural Resources indicates this is a 100-year
flood we're looking at.''
	The flood waters covered 3,770 square miles southwest of Des Moines
with a population of 88,493. Some communities were completely cut off by
10 to 12 feet of water, which is not expected to recede completely until
the weekend.
	``There's a community called Lucas in Lucas County. There were about
six families the sheriff wanted us to check on. We flew around them in a
helicopter. They would give us thumbs up that they were OK. They were on
an island,'' Ostendorf said.
	Ostendorf said no damage estimate has yet been made and teams are not
expected to attempt an assessment until next week.
	A state emergency declaration was issued for Decatur, Clarke, Union,
Lucas and Wayne counties. Ostendorf said severe flooding also was
reported in Adams, Monroe and Marion counties.
	``The area down there in south-central Iowa is somewhat hilly and
water is just flowing everywhere,'' said Larry Ellis, a forecaster with
the National Weather Service.
	``In places the road is acting like a dam so water's just rushing
over there. You kind of got a wake effect on the other side, eating away
at the roadbed. You just basically have water everywhere.''
	Ellis said the damage will be in the millions of dollars, mostly to
crops, roads and bridges.
	``There are some basements flooded and things like that,'' he said.
	Ostendorf said it is unusual for that part of the state to flood. In
the past, most flooding has occurred in the northern half of the state
where most of the flood plain is.
	Heavy rains in Minnesota Wednesday also may worsen the situation,
Ostendorf said.
	``Minnesota received quite a bit of rain. Interstate 35 was closed in
Minnesota. I've never heard of I-35 being closed other than during a
snowstorm. They must have been experiencing something similar to what we
had here -- a lot of rain in a short period of time,'' Ostendorf said.
	As much as 16 inches of rain fell in Iowa. At least six people had to
be rescued because of rising waters.
	Some of the heaviest precipitation hit Thayer, about 50 miles
southwest of Des Moines, destroying a dam and lake that had been in
place since 1859.
	Meanwhile, the National Weather Service posted tornado watches over
portions of western and northern Wisconsin and portions of western Upper
Michigan.
	Tornadoes were reported to have touched down at Bemidji and Nashwauk,
Mont., with thunderstorm-driven winds causing damage near Glyndon.

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.news.gov.international
Subject: Flash floods kill 10 in Philippine capital
Date: 16 Sep 1992 12:35:54 GMT
 
 
	MANILA, Philippines (UPI) -- Rescue workers have retrieved the bodies
of at least 10 victims of a flash flood in suburban Manila, officials
said Wednesday.
	Six others were missing and feared dead in the floods triggered by a
thunderstorm late Tuesday, the officials added.
	Heavy rains sent torrents of water through several areas of the
capital, stranding thousands of commuters and forcing nearly 3,000
residents to flee to higher ground.
	Police said the floods burst a concrete perimeter fence around a golf
course in suburban Quezon city, sending water through a nearby squatter
colony.
	``I saw several children running away but they were caught by
cascading water,'' area resident Thelma Reyes told reporters.

The Burlington Free Press
Friday, September 18th, 1992

"MOUNT SPURR SPEWS MORE ASH

ANCHORAGE, Alaska

The Mount Spurr volcano erupted for three hours Thursday, spewing ash on
several small communities, disrupting air traffic and prompting officials to
close schools and issue health alerts.

The eruption, including a brief blast late Wednesday, was the third since June
for the 11,000-foot volcano, which until this summer had been dormant for 39
years.

By the afternoon, rumblings were still coming from the volcano, but they
weren't thought to be precursors of another eruption, said Steve McNutt, a
volcanologist at the Alaska Volcano Observatory."

Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster
Subject: Quake rocks Alaska peninsula
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 1:24:23 PDT
 
	PALMER, Alaska (UPI) -- The Tsunami Warning Center said an earthquake
measuring 4.6 on the Richter scale late Friday rocked the Kenei
Peninsula of Alaska. There were no reports of injury of damage.
	Center spokesman Guy Urban said the quake's epicenter was located 60
miles southwest of Cordova, or about 147 miles southeast of Anchorage.
	The quake occurred at 11:47 p.m. local time (3:47 p.m. EDT), Urban
said.
	Cordova, a community of 4,000 on the Kenei Peninsula, was affected
during the 1964 Alaska earthquake when the landmass rose more than 6
feet, leaving part of the town's harbor high and dry.
    
    
    
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.local.los_angeles
Subject: Moderate quake jostles Alaska
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 16:52:21 PDT
 
	PALMER, Alaska (UPI) -- A moderate earthquake rumbled the southern
coast of Alaska Thursday, but no injuries or damage were reported.
	The Alaska Tsunami Warning Center in Palmer said the temblor measured
4.7 on the Richter scale. It was centered 30 miles northwest of the town
of Yakutat, about 200 miles northwest of Juneau.
	The quake struck at 2:16 p.m. Alaska Daylight Time (6:16 p.m. EDT).
	It was the second significant temblor in the region in as many
months. A quake measuring 6.6 on the Richter scale on Aug. 7 was
centered in the Pacific about 200 miles south of Thursday's quake.

Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.tw.science,clari.news.group
Subject: Geologists warn of earthquake potential in Midwest
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 92 18:15:47 PDT
 
	WASHINGTON (UPI) -- Energy is accumulating underground in the New
Madrid seismic zone in the Midwest at a faster rate than expected,
highlighting the potential for another major earthquake in the fault
zone at some point in the future, scientists reported Thursday.
	While emphasizing that the new analysis does not mean a major
earthquake is imminent, geophysicist Paul Segall and colleagues at
Stanford University said the data does suggest Midwesterners should be
aware of that possibility.
	``People in the mid-continent region near the New Madrid seismic zone
should do the same (as Californians.) What you have to do is plan for
the possibility (a major earthquake) could occur in your lifetime,''
Segall said.
	``If it doesn't you're lucky. But not preparing in the face of what
appears to be a real seismic threat would not be prudent,'' he said.
	Segall, also a researcher for the U.S. Geological Survey, said New
Madrid fault zone residents should make sure that structures can
withstand earthquakes.
	California's strict building codes have been credited with saving
many lives and considerable property.
	Reporting in the journal Science, Segall and co-authors Lanbo Liu and
Mark Zoback said there had been rapid accumulation of energy in Earth's
crust since the 1950s in the same area where the nation's most severe
earthquake occurred on Dec. 16, 1811.
	The area near New Madrid, Mo., was expected to have major earthquakes
every 500 to 1,000 years, the scientists said.

    Some thoughts on the New Madrid fault:
    
    .  gas pipelines that connect Louisiana (I think) to major cities in
    the northeast (New York, Boston, etc.) run directly over the fault
    line.  So be prepared for a *big* explosion if (or when) an earthquake
    hits there
    
    . the substructure of the earth on the east coast is such that quakes
    travel much further than on the west coast.  The last (major?) quake on
    the New Madrid fault was said to "make the church bells ring in
    Boston."

    Well as my p/n says we are officially experiencing a drought in Europe.
    However last night a thunder storm hit the South of France causing
    widespread damage. BBC WS News was reporting 16 confirmed deaths and an
    unknown number of people missing. A state of emergency has been
    declared and the military helicopters have been out rescuing people in
    almost impossible conditions. One town received its annual rainfall in
    one night. The storm has not yet blown itself out.

    A separate and weaker storm system came across England causing some
    roads and rail lines to be cut.

    As I live in an area that is well below sea-level I hope we don't get
    the French one, Holland might fill up. 
    
    Jamie.

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.news.weather,clari.local.florida,clari.news.top
Subject: Second hurricane plan: Load 'em up, move 'em out
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 92 21:18:57 PDT
 
	MIAMI (UPI) -- Under an ``absolutely last-resort'' evacuation plan,
South Florida residents displaced by Hurricane Andrew would be loaded
into railroad boxcars and shipped north to safety if a second hurricane
threatens.
	``Load them up and move them out,'' was how B.T. Kennedy, Palm Beach
County's emergency management director, summarized the plan.
	Kennedy worked out the plan informally with officials at the CSX and
Florida East Coast railways shortly after Hurricane Andrew struck, while
he was in Miami to assist Dade County Emergency Management Director Kate
Hale.
	Describing the plan Wednesday, Kennedy stressed that it is unofficial
and would require an order from the governor to implement.
	``It was strictly a last resort, an absolutely last-resort plan,''
Kennedy said.
	But with more than two months to go in the 1992 Atlantic hurricane
season, emergency planners were forced to consider what they would do
with the more than 250,000 people displaced by Andrew if another storm
approached.
	Many of the displaced are living in tents, temporary trailers or
condemned buildings, and would have to find somewhere safe. So would the
20,000 soldiers working in the area.
	Dade County officials are so worried about a second storm hitting
that they asked the Army Corps of Engineers for planning help.
	``It would be one hell of a logistics nightmare,'' said the Army
Corps' Stu Appelbaum.
	Emergency officials would have a hard time warning those in areas
still without power. Some 2 million people, half of the region's
population, would probably jam the roadways trying to leave, and many
could be stuck on roadways when the storm hit.
	Debris from Andrew would become flying missiles.
	``It'll be like saturation bombing,'' Kennedy said.
	Michelle Baker, Dade County's hurricane coordinator, said some
residents could be evacuated by bus, but that would not be enough.
	Baker and Appelbaum said Kennedy's boxcar plan has some merit.
	``But you have to explore where the trains would go,'' Baker said.
	Kennedy said northern inland cities would probably be asked to care
for the evacuees. Even if the trains went nowhere, people would be safer
in the heavy-gauge steel boxcars than in tents or mobile homes, he said.
	``They would be uncomfortable but they would be safe,'' said Kennedy.
``It's a horrible thought to even envision. I need to emphasize that
this is a last resort.''
	Statistically, a second hurricane is hardly unprecedented. This is
the 42nd year this century in which a hurricane has hit Florida. In 14
of the previous 41 years, more than one storm hit the state during
hurricane season.
	Although weather forecasters were monitoring two other hurricanes and
a tropical storm in the Atlantic Wednesday, none threatened land.

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster
Subject: Quake felt in Alaska
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 15:01:23 PDT
 
	WASHINGTON (UPI) -- An earthquake in the north Pacific Ocean was felt
in Alaska, U.S. Geological Survey officials said.
	USGS spokesman Don Finley said the moderate tremor occurred at 9:48
a.m. PDT (1:48 p.m. EDT) and was centered about 570 miles south-
southeast of Anchorage.
	Preliminary measurements in Golden, Colo. recorded the quake at 5.7
on the open-ended Richter scale. 
	``The tremor, which occurred in a highly seismic area, was reported
felt lightly'' at the Alaskan communities of Sand Point and King Cove,
Finley said. The center of the quake was about 150 miles southeast of
Sand Point.

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.news.gov.international,clari.news.disaster,clari.news.europe,clari.news.top.world
Subject: New storms, flooding in France leave three dead
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 9:40:22 PDT
 
	PERPIGNAN, France (UPI) -- Heavy rains caused more deadly flooding in
southern France, killing at least three people and leaving five others
missing, police said. Storms also were forecast Sunday for the Vaucluse
region, where at least 33 people died in flash floods last week.
	The rain lasted well into Sunday in the southern Aude department
around Perpignan, and the thunderstorms were forecast to move farther
east and strike an area that included the Vaucluse region devastated by
flash floods and storms six days ago.
	Despite the important safety measures put into place, three persons
were killed in the heavy rains that began Saturday, and four others were
reported missing in an area on that runs from the western coast of the
Mediterranean Sea and runs partly along the Franco-Spanish border.
	Saturday's storms knocked down trees, destroyed crops, flooded
houses, and ruined roads and swept away bridges, leaving villages
isolated.
	All the roads into the tiny Rennes-les-Bains, where two people were
killed, were unusable Sunday. Rescuers arrived on routes through the
Pyrenee mountains because the Sals river running through the village
overflowed, destroying the bridges that crossed it and rising 3.3 feet
high in the village.
	``The mayor warned and evacuated people on the banks of the river,
but we never thought we'd also be touched. It happened so quickly, so
quickly,'' said one inhabitant of Rennes-les-Bains, which underwent
extensive damage.
	Towns on Corsica, off the southeastern coast of France, were cut off
as heavy rains battered the island Sunday, with one person reported
missing, firefighters said.
	The scenes of destruction were all too reminiscent for the French,
still under the shock of last week's storms in southeastern France which
left at least 38 dead and 15 others missing, officials said. 
	While the Vaucluse region prepared Sunday for a new round of heavy
rain, the search continued for victims of last week's storms that hit
the southeastern area around Avignon the hardest. Police said there was
little hope of finding survivors.
	The Vaucluse region was under a state of extreme alert Sunday.
Officials warned the ground was still saturated and the foundations of
houses and trees enormously were weakened by last week's heavy rains,
putting the region under particularly dangerous conditions.

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.news.gov.international
Subject: Earthquake rocks Indonesian island of Ternate
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 20:52:46 PDT
 
	JAKARTA, Indonesia (UPI) -- A strong earthquake jolted Indonesia's
eastern island of Ternate early Sunday, but no there were no immediate
reports of casualties or damage, officials said.
	The quake registered a preliminary magnitude of 6.6 on the Richter
scale, according to the U.S. Geological Survey in Golden, Colo.
Geophysicists in Jakarta said they needed more information before
issuing their own reading.
	The temblor struck shortly after 6 a.m. local time (6 p.m. Satuday
EDT). It was the strongest to hit the area about 1,400 miles east of
Jakarta in more than 32 years, according to USGS spokesman Don Finley.
	An official in Ambon, the capital of Indonesia's Maluku province,
said residents of Ternate could feel the quake, which was centered
offshore.
	``According to the reports received in Ambon, the quake was a strong
enough'' to be felt, the official said.
	An earthquake measuring 6.0 or above on the Richter scale is capable
of causing widespread, severe damage.
	Ternate is a circular, volcanic island about 5 miles across.

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (RALPH JOSEPH)
Newsgroups: clari.news.gov.international,clari.news.disaster
Subject: Explosives threaten Pakistani dam
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 92 14:48:56 PDT
 
	ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (UPI) -- Explosives swept downriver by recent
flooding are believed to have flowed into a reservoir behind the Mangla
dam, one of the largest in the world, and could be devastating if
detonated, a newspaper reported Friday.
	The News said highly explosive 84mm mortar shells swept into the
Jhelum river from military camps in the Kashmir mountains were believed
lodged near at least one spillway in the dam, which is located in the
north of the country.
	If detonated by accident, the blast could threaten the entire dam,
and millions of people living downstream, the report said.
	Earlier this week a villager found packs of 84mm mortar shells
floating in the reservoir, along with other debris upstream.
	Army experts searched the reservoir with a submerged television
camera, and discovered suspicious objects at a depth of 250 feet.
	Divers trying to reach the objects near one spillway were unable to
get below 120 feet, and the Pakistan navy was asked to help, the News
said.
	Engineers feared there may be other mortar shells in the reservoir,
which stretches for seven miles behind the dam.
	An army spokesman said he could not confirm the report in the News,
but added he ``would not be surprised'' if explosives swept into the
Jhelum river were now in the reservoir behind the dam.
	He said there were several Indian and Pakistani military camps in the
Karakorum mountains where flash floods occured early this month. The
Jhelum river winds through Indian- and Pakistani-held areas of Kashmir
before reaching Mangla.
	The News said the mortar shells found upstream bore markings showing
they were made at the Kikry ordnance factory in India in 1986. The
mortars were packed in pairs and fitted with electronic devices.
	Some 2,000 people are estimated to have been killed over the past two
weeks, as water swept down the Jhelum and Indus valleys and the flat
plains of the Punjab and Sindh provinces.
	The floods began Sept. 10 when the gates to the spillways in the dam
were opened to release the reservoir's excess water, which had risen to
dangerous levels after days of heavy monsoon rains.
	Some 4 million people were made homeless or destitute when flood
waters swept away houses, damaging crops and property and killing farm
animals.

    Is there more natural disasters or is it that you're
    just posting it now?

    
    I don't know if there are more or not Joanne.  It's just something
    that I'm following now.
    
    Carole

    Some years ago there were a couple of spectacular jail breaks in the
    UK. These happened within a couple of weeks of each other. Because they
    received a lot of publicity, anyone who managed to get out of custody
    became national headline news. Eventually the media began to ask
    questions about what those in authority were going to do about this
    vast increase in break outs. The answer was, nothing. There was no
    increase there was just same number of people escaping as normal, the
    only difference was the high profile reporting of each incident.

    Quite recently the thing that was being given this treatment in the UK
    was dogs biting children. This came after a child was killed. Hardly a
    day went past without another child being bitten. Again there was no
    actual increase in the number of kids being bitten.

    Earthquakes happen frequently, as do floods, mud slides, droughts and
    other natural disasters. I don't see any real increase.

    Jamie.

    
    What I *have* begun to notice is a lot of extreme conditions occurring,
    some at record breaking intensities.  They are of different varieties
    but occurring within the same time frame.
    
    Carole

    So why don't they stop nuclear testing, huh?  Why won't Bush stop it
    here?  
    
    And they wonder why Clinton is going to win..

    Well that explains it. I don't remember much before 1945, so the
    earthquake rate would not appear to increase to me. As the earthquakes
    are caused mainly by continental drift perhaps the nuclear bombs just
    make them happen earlier that the would normally happen.

    Jamie.

    They could be fracturing plates too, Jamie... or exacerbating
    pre-existing fractures that otherwise would remain fairly stable.

    I doubt it the rather puny power of a nuclear explosion could do that. 
    However as earthquakes are release of stress built up as the plates
    move, I could see the nuclear explosion hurrying the process along a
    bit.

    Jamie.

    Well I doubt if one nuclear explosion could do it too, Jamie... but
    we're not talking about *one* nuclear explosion... we're talking
    about a pattern of multiple nuclear explosions conducted in the U.S
    and the Soviet Union (and possibly other places) for years ... maybe
    since 1945.
    
    Does anyone have the exact stats on that?
    
    Anyway... while a single nuclear explosion might not have much effect,
    a pattern of regularly conducted multiple nuclear explosions is a 
    different story.

    If every nuclear explosion that has gone off so far were all done on
    the one spot I still do not think they would split a plate. They are
    just so vast. However they do vibrate quite easily.

    Jamie.

    Not split, Jamie... but all those nuclear explosions going off for
    so many years could maybe set up occillating vibrations that could
    possibly effect pre-existing but unrecognized hairline fractures and
    other occlusions.

    I somehow doubt that anything as massive as a as that either
    oscillating for very long or running to hairline fractures.

    Jamie.

    Why, Jamie?  
    
    I mean.... regularly scheduled multiple nuclear explosions performed
    since ... what? ... 1945?  is certainly a force to be considered...
    don't you think?  
    
    I think you're overestimating the stability of the Earth and
    underestimating the damage long-term sustained underground nuclear
    testing could potentially cause.
    
    I recognize that this is a judgement call...

    Do you consider a nuclear explosion to be more powerful than a medium
    sized earthquake?
    
    Jamie.

    
    Well...  I'm looking at the cumulative effects of many regularly scheduled
    nuclear explosions over a long period of time ... it doesn't seem to me
    that it matters which is more powerful.. that's not what I'm talking
    about... you know?

    ... it's irrelevant, I mean...

    
    power comparisons aside, why an increase in larger quakes?  If quakes
    are occurring more frequently, the pressures behind them should be
    smaller, generating smaller quakes, perhaps inducing a reduction in the
    number of larger quakes.
    
    I freely acknowledge insufficient education to know what, if any,
    errors exist in the above.  Can anyone enlighten?
    
    Beth

Well, (I *must* stop doing that), we have Collateral Damage, 'Cruise'
Missiles, so I suppose we can call Nuclear Bombs 'Vibrators'.

Dougie

			Really Kinky !

&-)

    1) The tests haven't been as regular as all that.

    2) The Earth damps out oscilations pretty quickly.  How well do most
    rocks ring when you hit them with a hammer?

    3) A nuclear explosion is a pretty puny force on a geological scale.
    We are talking dust-motes to blue-whales here.

    4) A "small" force (such a as an underground nuclear test) *could*
    cause some of the accumulated strain to be released.  There is some
    evidence that merely injecting water into faults can cause this to take
    place.  Whether that strain would have been released by a whole series
    of small quakes or a single even larger one some time later, is
    probably too dependent on too many different factors to make a general
    statement about.

    Bottom line, I don't think that any noticable overall increase in
    earthquakes can plausibly be blamed on nuclear testing.  You might be
    able to make a case, if you had sufficient evidence, for a particular
    quake having been triggered by a particular test.

				    Topher

CADSYS::COOPER 
    
>    1) The tests haven't been as regular as all that.

        How regular have they been, Topher?  Has anyone ever made a 
        list or anything like that?
    
>    2) The Earth damps out oscilations pretty quickly.  How well do most
>    rocks ring when you hit them with a hammer?

        Well... I've been told that in the Northeast the rocky ground is
        such that tremors from an earthquake travels quite a long distance.
        Isn't that the case?
    
>    3) A nuclear explosion is a pretty puny force on a geological scale.
>    We are talking dust-motes to blue-whales here.

        How many dust-motes does it take to kill a whale?  (just wondering)
    
>    4) A "small" force (such a as an underground nuclear test) *could*
>    cause some of the accumulated strain to be released.  There is some
>    evidence that merely injecting water into faults can cause this to take
>    place.  Whether that strain would have been released by a whole series
>    of small quakes or a single even larger one some time later, is
>    probably too dependent on too many different factors to make a general
>    statement about.

     Oh right... :-)
    
>    Bottom line, I don't think that any noticable overall increase in
>    earthquakes can plausibly be blamed on nuclear testing.  You might be
>    able to make a case, if you had sufficient evidence, for a particular
>    quake having been triggered by a particular test.

     But Topher... we're not talking about particular quakes and particular
     tests... we're talking about the long-term accumulative effects of ...
     oh.... never mind... 

RE: .73 (Mary S.)

>>    1) The tests haven't been as regular as all that.
>
>        How regular have they been, Topher?  Has anyone ever made a 
>        list or anything like that?

    For them to have the kind of oscilatory, reinforcing effect that you
    are talking about, they would mostly have to have been set off at the
    precise right minute needed to add to the existing oscilation (if such
    an oscilation could persist with out being of such a magnetude that
    it could not be immediately detected).  Other times would have little
    or no effect or would tend to dampen the oscillation.  Unless someone
    with a lot of pull over a period of decades were working very, very
    hard (virtually impossible to keep secret) to create this effect it
    just wouldn't happen (and that *still* assumes that the Earth is a bell
    instead of a rock).

>>    2) The Earth damps out oscilations pretty quickly.  How well do most
>>    rocks ring when you hit them with a hammer?
>
>        Well... I've been told that in the Northeast the rocky ground is
>        such that tremors from an earthquake travels quite a long distance.
>        Isn't that the case?

    Something like that.  Earthquake waves seem to be less quickly damped
    in the US Northeast than in the US West.  This allows the waves to
    persist, essentially, for a time span measured in additional minutes.
    You're talking about years of time-span.

>>    3) A nuclear explosion is a pretty puny force on a geological scale.
>>    We are talking dust-motes to blue-whales here.
>
>        How many dust-motes does it take to kill a whale?  (just wondering)

    Don't know.  I doubt if they arive one, or even two at a time, with at
    least a day or so between each one, that any number would do it.

>     But Topher... we're not talking about particular quakes and particular
>     tests... we're talking about the long-term accumulative effects of ...
>     oh.... never mind...

    I know.  But particular quakes at particular times is the very most
    that I could see as justified.  Beyond that seems very, very unlikely
    to me.  I'm giving you what I can -- and even there I'm stretching it
    a bit.  Biologically A-bombs are pretty big deals -- geologically they
    are trivially except locally -- more locally than earthquakes.

				Topher

    Oh... ok then :-)
    
    I've wondered for a long time what they were doing to the Earth with
    all that nuclear testing... hope that your're right and there aren't any
    long-term effects..  I still don't like it (nuclear testing) but at
    least now I don't have to worry about it. :-)
    
    I'll bet we can get through these Earth changes relatively unscathed.

    I think it's a factor too, Marcos.. 

    I suggest Mary that you go to the Science Museum and ask them to show
    you the seismograph readings for a nuclear explosion and for an earth
    quake. Then you will see how truly insignificant a nuclear explosion
    is. One decent sized earthquake shakes the entire planet more than
    every nuclear explosion to date.

    Jamie.

    I'm not that curious, Jamie... I don't really care enough to bother...
    I just wondered about it. :-)

    Re .80

    >I don't really care enough to bother...

    Either you suffer from sudden loss of interest a lot lately or that
    particular phrase is becoming your personal cliche.

    Jamie.

    Is that my choice? :-)

    ... oh.. that must be your editorial comment... right? :-)

    Re .77:
    
>   Since you quoted my entry I am not sure what you mean.  I am not
>   "hanging the rap on nuclear weapons testing".  I was just replying to
>   Jamie Anderson.  I just tried to show that scientists seemed to have
>   noticed an increase in the earthquake rate.  I thought and still think
>   that what I said, quoted above, expresses an uncertainty about the true
>   cause of that increase.
    
    After reading your reply and my own, I can understand your confusion. 
    Please accept my apologies for dragging you into it.  I think we're in
    basic agreement on the point that an increase in the earthquake rate
    doesn't necessarily correlate with nuclear testing.

    Not a disaster yet, I suppose, but the ozone hole over Antarctica
    appeared earlier and is larger than in its recent history (of being 
    identified and measured).   It is now 3 times the size of the U.S.
    
    Per 'GBH Morning Pro Musica news this morning.

                     
    Whether or not nuclear testing adds to the severity and frequency 
    of earthquakes...
    
    Can anyone give a _positive_ reason for exploding nuclear devices?
    What is the benefit gained by doing this?  
    
    If not, then why are we (as a country and a world) still doing it?
    
    Cindy

    And an excellent question at that.. 

From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster
Subject: Moderate quake hits Alaska
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 20:56:20 PDT
 
	PALMER, Alaska (UPI) -- A moderate earthquake was felt Tuesday night
at the U.S. Navy base at Adak, Alaska, but there were no reports of
damage or injuries.
	The Alaska Tsunami Warning Center at Palmer said the quake had a
preliminary reading of 5.7 on the Richter scale and was centered about
90 miles southwest of Adak, an island about in the middle of the
Aleutian chain.
	The temblor was felt in Adak and the town of Amchitka and struck at
11:28 PED.

    Re .86:
    
>   Can anyone give a _positive_ reason for exploding nuclear devices?
>   What is the benefit gained by doing this?
    
    Good question.  Until recently, there was a need to test each part
    (ships, planes, missiles, crews, & warheads) of our nuclear arsenal to
    confirm that they would work if needed (and to demonstrate to the other
    side that we weren't bluffing).  With the dissolution of the Soviet
    Union, the impetus is much reduced; the PRC remains a factor, but
    deterrence is all but meaningless against the terrorists who are the
    next most likely members of the nuclear club.
    
    On the scientific front, there ARE some peaceful uses of underground
    nuclear explosions.  One that didn't produce the desired results was
    an effort to fracture a large oil shale deposit so it could be tapped
    using steam recovery techniques to provide a domestic source of oil. 
    In the pilot test, the bomb fractured a much smaller volume than had
    been hoped.  The amount of oil liberated wasn't enough to continue.
                                                 

    Of course, there's the opposite view that if you NEVER test anything,
    then the oposing side can't ever know for sure what you've got and how
    effective it is likely to be.  In many people's view, that is just as
    effective a deterrent.
    
    As to the other thing .... just think of all that radioactive oil
    sloshing around in your engine   No thanks!

    
    
    Just read in the GEOLOGY conference that an earthquake hit the
    Northern Territory of Australia this morning.  Not much detail - 
    no info on intensity, etc. and there is nothing on the net yet.
    
    Carole

Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster
Subject: Four aftershocks rumble Alaskan naval base
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 0:17:45 PDT
 
	PALMER, Alaska (UPI) -- At least four significant aftershocks rumbled
a U.S. Naval base in the Aleutian islands Wednesday, less than 24 hours
after a major earthquake struck the area, frazzling nerves but causing
no injuries or damage.
	The Alaska Tsumani Warning Center reported the latest aftershock,
measuring 5.7 on the Richter Scale, struck a Pacific Ocean area 60 miles
from the U.S. Naval Air Station at Adak Island at 9:02 p.m. local time
(1:02 a.m. EDT Thursday).
	Seismologist George Carte said the 5,000 troops, civilian workers and
dependents at Adak felt the quake, but reported no damage or injuries.
	The latest temblor came one day after five events -- a foreshock,
major earthquake and three significant aftershocks -- struck the area.
	The tsunami center said the main quake measured 6.4 on the Richter
Scale, hitting at 9:33 p.m. local time Tuesday (1:33 a.m. EDT
Wednesday). The temblor knocked items off of shelves at Adak, but caused
no other problems.
	``So far the quakes have only caused minor damage, but people at Adak
have been left very jittery,'' Carte said.
    

    
Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster
Subject: Moderate temblor shakes eastern Alaska
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 8:06:35 PDT
 
	PALMER, Alaska (UPI) -- An earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of
4.9 on the Richter scale shook eastern Alaska Thursday.
	Fairbanks state troopers said no injuries or damage were reported
from the temblor, which struck at 9:35 a.m. EDT. 
	The Alaska Tsunami Warning Center in Palmer said the quake was
centered about 70 miles southeast of Fairbanks and was felt in the city
of Delta Junction.

    People who really care about earthquakes read the GEOLOGY conference
    (like me).
    
    For the others, how about just posting reports of quakes greater than,
    say, 7.0 on the Richter Scale?
    
    						Ann B.

    
    
    I would rather not limit the reporting.  It's the collection of
    events that is most intriguing, at least to me.
    
    
    Carole

        I think  that  all  this  note  is  proving  is that the Earth as
        geologically very active  and that what is being reported here is
        very normal.  I  would bet that if you were to go back any number
        of years and list all of the earth quakes /natural disasters that
        occured  in any give year you  would  find  nothing  out  of  the
        ordinary with this year.
        
        Steve

    
    Hi Steve,
    
    What you say may very well be the case.  What this note is not
    including are those events which would not come under the heading
    of natural disasters, but come under the heading of events pointing
    to earth changes.  It is the combination of timing of all of it
    that makes it most intriguing to follow.
    
    However, even within the realm of natural disasters, we are
    experiencing record breaking events at this time, of different
    varieties and types.
    
    If we mix in hurricanes, tornadoes, wind storms, rain deluges,
    droughts, earthquakes, volcanoes, cold, heat, explosions,
    etc., this picture becomes very interesting.
    
    Carole

Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster
Subject: Moderate quake hits eastern California
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 4:47:39 PDT
 
	PASADENA, Calif. (UPI) -- An earthquake measuring 4.3 on the Richter
Scale struck eastern California early Friday, with no early report of
injuries or damage.
	The California Institute of Technology Seismological Laboratory put
the temblor's epicenter at 20 east-northeast of Lucerne Valley, Calif.,
or some 120 miles northeast of Los Angeles.
	Scientists considered the quake, which hit at 12:19 a.m. PDT, an
aftershock to the June 28 Landers temblor, which measured a strong 7.5
on the Richter Scale.

    Thanks Carole...

Newsgroups: clari.news.disaster,clari.local.florida,clari.news.urgent
Subject: Tornadoes hit Florida Gulf Coast
Date: 3 Oct 92 23:35:07 GMT
 
 
	LARGO, Fla. (UPI) -- Four people were killed and dozens injured
Saturday when a series of tornadoes touched down in Pinellas County on
Florida's Gulf Coast, officials said.
	``We have as many as five, and possibly seven tornadoes, that hit
Pinellas County in various sections sometime between 10 and noon today,''
said Marianne Pasha, spokeswoman for the Pinellas County Sheriff's
Office.
	``The damage is all over the county -- it's countywide,'' she said.
	County spokeswoman Ronnie Goodstein said four fatalities and 25
injuries were confirmed.
	Goodstein said the 24 injuries and one fatality occurred at the Oak
Haven Mobile Home Park. Another person was killed at Glenwood Mobile
Home Park and two died in the 56th Street North area of Pinellas Park,
she said.
	She said the storm destroyed 88 homes, including mobile homes, and
damaged between 100 and 200 homes.
	Goodstein said Gov. Lawton Chiles would visit the area Sunday. He
planned to arrive at St. Petersburg-Clearwater Airport at 1 p.m., she
said.
	Besides the Pinellas Park and Largo areas, damage occurred in parts
of Tarpon Springs, Dunedin and Palm Harbor at the north end of the
county; and Treasure Island and sections of Madeira Beach in the south,
Pasha said.
	Pinellas Park Police spokesman Lee Lerchen said a 10-block by 10-
block area of the city was devastated.
	``It's very, very bad. There's houses completely leveled where we
would need to use heavy equipment to go in and make a thorough search,''
he said.
	He also said the tornado came with little warning.
	``I was there in the area at the time when it happened, and my
warning was that I heard it coming,'' he said. ``I estimate I had 45
seconds to a minute to take cover before it hit.''
	Bogie Winstead, 45, who was in his insurance office in Belleair
Bluffs near Largo, was talking on the phone to a client when the tornado
hit.
	``All of a sudden it sounded like a jet,'' he said. He said the
tornado lasted about 90 seconds.
	``I have never been through anything like that,'' he said.
	Tim Newland, 27, of Pinellas Park, said he was driving to work when
he heard ``a loud whirling sound'' around him.
	``My car was rocking back and forth. It was incredible,'' he said. 
``I just prayed a lot of praying.''
	When it was over, he said, he saw part of a condominium complex's
roof and walls on the road in front of him.
	Tony DiMercurio, 73, was reading a newspaper in his mobile home at
the Glenwood Mobile Home park near Largo when a tornado hit.
	``The next thing you know, glass started flying around me,'' he said.
``Before I realized what was happening, it was over. I didn't even have
time to get frightened.''
	Jo Kritzel, whose condominium in Largo lost its roof, said the
tornado reminded her of the blitz in London during World War II.
	``I just stood there and asked what the heck is this,'' she said. 
``It was so sudden, you didn't have any warning.''
	But, she said, ``I didn't panic.''
	North of Pinellas County, tornadoes also touched down in Pasco and
Hernando Counties.
	A tornado touchdown in Hernando County caused heavy damage in the
Spring Hill area, said David Sloan, county emergency government
director.
	The tornado damaged 40 to 50 homes plus 20 to 30 mobile homes. It
tore much of the roof from St. Francis Cabrini Catholic Church, damaged
a fire station across the street from the church, and tore part of the
roof of a new county blood bank building. The Evergreen Woods nursing
home also was damaged.
	``There was some damage on one end of it, but it's been patched back
up and it was not necessary for us to evacuate anyone,'' Sloan said of
the nursing home.
	In Pasco County, one tornado caused damage in the Moon Lake
subdivision while another touched down north of Highway 52, causing no
damage. No injuries were reported from either touchdown, said Fred
Murphy, county disaster preparedness director.
    

    I had a couple of friends who lived in L.A. for years. We finally got
    over to visit them for a two week holiday. They were both rather
    unhappy that we didn't get even a slight earthquake while we were
    there. They were so used to small earthquakes that they hardly noticed
    them. 

    I think that posting every earthquake that happens, including the ones
    that do no damage at all, in a topic called Natural Disasters is going a
    bit over the top. 

    Jamie.

    She's looking for patterns.. if you can spot the patterns you can spot
    the trend.

    Re .100:

>   I think that posting every earthquake that happens, including the ones
>   that do no damage at all, in a topic called Natural Disasters is going a
>   bit over the top. 
    
    I agree.  I don't consider any California quake below 5 on the Richter
    scale to be newsworthy.  The "Big One" is expected to be at least an 8,
    which is 1000 times the energy release of a 5 (and 10,000 times that of
    a 4, which is enough to rattle windows and bounce people out of bed).

    So every tiny little earthquake that so much as nudges a seismograph
    needle of its course will be recorded here? We may well need a disk all
    to ourselves.

    Jamie.

    
    Hi all,
    
    The information I'm getting is off the net.  I don't believe they
    post every "nudge" of the seismograph needle, only those newsworthy
    events.  A continuation of seismic activity in the active area of
    California is significant to follow.  I will continue posting what
    I find unless the moderators of the file feel it is inappropriate
    in this note.
    
    I would also like to request that a new note be opened up for 
    comments about natural disasters, and leave this note to reporting
    of the events.  The base note put no qualifiers on size or intensity
    of items to be posted here....as a matter of fact the basenoter 
    encouraged the posting of these items.
    
    Carole
    
    

    Lest someone accuse me of backing Jamie up once again, :^), I have to
    say that, having lived in LA almost all my life, if you are going to
    record all earthquakes that we are subjected to you'd probably do
    nothing else all day. Every earthquake of significant magnitude, such
    as the 6.5 and 7.4 we had in June, is followed by *thousands* of
    aftershocks, hundreds of those will be in the 3-4 range, while dozens
    or more will be 5 or larger. 
    
    If I might make a sort of compromise suggestion, if you feel that all
    independent earthquakes are worth noting (pun unintended until now),
    limit them to the ones not associated with a previous earthquake.
    Aftershocks are not indicative of anything other than that a larger
    quake was felt some time in the recent past.
    
    
    Marilyn 

    
    Thanks for the suggestion Marilyn, but until it is a request by
    the moderators, I'm going to continue entering the stuff I pick
    up off the net that feels appropriate to me.
    
    It's up to you, Topher, et al.
    
    Carole

    
    Carole,
    
    Feel free to continue.
    
    For those who are not interested in this topic, please use the next
    unseen key.
    
    Cindy

    Well as we seem to be using this note to record disaster which are not
    disasters, but mild earth tremors, on the weather front Amsterdam
    suffered a light rain storm last night. No damage was done, no one was
    hurt.

    Jamie.

        It is  snowing  here  in  Colorado  Springs.    There has been an
        accident on I-25 unknown if there have been any injuries.
        
        Major national disaster:  It looks likes Slick Willy (Clinton) is
        going to win the election.
        
        Steve  

I've just had a pint of Mild, and the bubbles are heading through my body
with only one thing in mind.

Dougie

    Carole,
    
    I trust your intuition, please continue inputting those entries from
    the Net which you feel have value here.
    
    Thanks,
    
    Ro
    

    Hey Carole, what Ro said. :-)
    
    BTW. There was a 3.5 Righhter scale tremor at Franklin, NH yesterday.
    While small on the scale, it was felt by people there. Now NH is not
    really noted for quakes, but we one or two tickles a year. However
    Franklin is where the Pemigewasett River goes over Franklin Falls and
    becomes the Merrimac River. There is a large (again, large for NH) dam
    at Franklin and another at Bristol a few miles north of Franklin and
    another at Manchester, a few miles south. A good size quake or a number
    of small ones could cause quite a flood disaster for our state. 
    
    PJ

    Jamie,
    
    I presume Harry is very busy (because of the recent disaster)?  If so,
    please convey to him my sympathy.
    
    						Ann B.

    
    re: .108  (Jamie)
    
    It's been pretty cold here.  The other day I (and presumably many 
    others) had frost on my windshield, making it rather dangerous to
    drive.  I arrived at work without incident. 
    
    
    guy

    
    From someone who was reading this topic with interest: those who don't
    care, quit clogging it up!  We know you don't agree with the
    definitions used to determine a posting, but stop being insulting!
    
    Beth
    (another vote for Fretts to continue)

    
    >I presume Harry is very busy (because of the recent disaster)?  If so,
    >please convey to him my sympathy.

    Well while Harry is a consultant pathologist, he is not a forensic
    pathologist. In Holland all forensic pathology is done by a team of
    specialists employed by the government. So his work load has not gone
    up, but thanks for your concern.

    The disaster in question here, where a fully loaded 747 went clean
    through an apartment building in an Amsterdam suburb could be seen as a
    partially "natural" disaster, it was blowing a gale at the time, which
    may well have caused the extra load at take off causing the initial
    fire. The high winds did not help the pilot while he was fighting for
    control and no doubt contributed heavily to the eventual crash sight.

    BTW if Carole is picking every earthquake disaster off the net, where
    does her intuition come into play?

    Jamie.
                                                                         

    
    re: .115 (Beth)
    
    At the risk of further "clogging" this file...;-)
    
    I haven't insulted anyone.  If someone chose to be insulted by
    something I said then I'd say that was a bad choice, 'cause I didn't
    intend my note that way.
    
    Carole Fretts ought to know by now that I would never stop her or
    anyone from posting anything.  
    
    regards,
    
    guy

    I'm surprised that no one has logged this, but as it happened outside
    the American continents, I suppose none of you have heard about it yet.

    Yesterday an earthquake measuring 5.8-9 on the Richter scale occurred
    in Egypt. The city of Cairo was badly damaged and the death toll is
    currently being reported around 350. Many of the dead are children,
    trampled to death in the stampede to get out of a collapsing school.

    Jamie.

    Maybe people just stopped posting things here, Jamie... in deference to
    those of you who think it's a waste of time.

    >Maybe people just stopped posting things here, Jamie... in deference to
    >those of you who think it's a waste of time.
    
    It would be a first.

    Jamie.

    It's what you want, isn't it?

    >It's what you want, isn't it?

    You get the strangest ideas.

    I pointed out that it is possible to distort the picture if every
    disaster is reported, especially those which, as no one was hurt and no
    damage was done, could not reasonably be described as a disaster.

    Jamie.

        re .122
        
        Exaclty.   I  lived  in  San Diego for 5 years.  During that time
        there were many  4.0+ earth quakes.  I never noticed even one.  I
        always found out about in on the evening news.
        
        Steve

    re: last few
    
    Comments about this note belong in the "comments about natural
    disasters" note, not here.  Please stop spoiling this for everyone who
    is interested in the purpose of this topic.
    
    Thanks,
    Mary

    
    Just wanted to let everyone know that I won't be posting any further
    items from the net in this topic.  The following of these and other
    earth changes events is an interest of mine and one that I have been
    and will continue to do on my own.  Extracting the notes from the 
    net and posting here takes my time and energy, and I was doing this
    purely to share information.  The atmosphere in this notesfile in
    recent months is one of diverting most topics off their main purpose,
    and for me at this time is not something that I want to get caught up
    in or feed.
    
    For those who have been following these notes with interest and have
    written to me off-line, I hope you understand my position on this.
    If your interest is strong, I suggest you consider subscribing to the 
    Earth Changes Report as it covers a variety of these and other topics 
    of interest.
    
    My best to all in these changing times,
    
    Carole

    Re .125:
    
>   Just wanted to let everyone know that I won't be posting any further
>   items from the net in this topic.  The following of these and other
>   earth changes events is an interest of mine and one that I have been
>   and will continue to do on my own.  Extracting the notes from the 
>   net and posting here takes my time and energy, and I was doing this
>   purely to share information.
    
    Thanks for the postings you *did* do.  We'll miss them.
    
>   The atmosphere in this notesfile in recent months is one of diverting
>   most topics off their main purpose, and for me at this time is not
>   something that I want to get caught up in or feed.
                                                                  
    Please excuse our lack of discipline.  We're merely human.  As for the
    discussion about whether earthquakes should/should not be posted, you
    might have missed the point of (at least) my comment.  Earthquakes
    below 5 on the Richter scale are SO common in California (especially
    along the various segments of the San Andreas Fault and its neighbors)
    that they aren't worth trying to keep up with (if the RATE suddenly
    changed, THAT would be newsworthy).  Significant quakes elsewhere (and
    there have been several in the past two weeks) ARE newsworthy.
    
>   For those who have been following these notes with interest and have
>   written to me off-line, I hope you understand my position on this.
>   If your interest is strong, I suggest you consider subscribing to the 
>   Earth Changes Report as it covers a variety of these and other topics 
>   of interest.
    
    Thanks for the pointer.

    Carole,  thank you for posting the info.  I, for one, was interested. 
    Too bad some people haven't learned to use next unseen yet.
    
    Anyway, on my way in this morning, I heard about an earthquake
    somewhere in the midwest or west yesterday and something in Columbia(?).  
    I wasn't fully awake yet, so the details of what and where didn't make 
    it to the memory cells.   I think Columbia was a combination earthquake(s) 
    and a geiser blowing up over the weekend.
    
    Also, there is another major typhoon headed for Guam -- 2nd this
    season.

                                                              
    Re.120 (Anderson), and other who voiced similar opinions against the 
           postings
    
    >>Maybe people just stopped posting things here, Jamie... in deference
    >>those of you who think it's a waste of time.
    
    >It would be a first.
    
    Then you now have your first 'first'.
    
    I'm sure that those of you who protested could say that you aren't 
    forcing Carole to stop posting.  And that's true.  However after a 
    while, the energy expended in posting, AND having to read the constant 
    stream of protests every time one is made, is very energy draining and 
    not worth the aggravation or the effort.
    
    So you won.  Enjoy your victory.  You got what you wanted.
    
    Cindy

    Carole, I thank you for what you did and honor your decision to
    discontinue. You're right as to the atmosphere here lately. Some people
    either don't, can't, or choose not to understand what is happening.
    They try to induce humor via ridicule or putdowns and that is always
    wrong. It is usually fear that causes this to happen. Whether te person
    acknowledges this or not. It's a shame.
    
    
    Again, thank you for your efforts, Carole. They were very appreciated
    from this quarter.
    
    
    PJ

    Cindy, actually, they lost. As these disasters become more and more
    prevalent and a pattern emerges, those who can see it may be better
    prepared for whatever may be happening. I would like to see people joke
    their way out of a 7.0 scale quake in their town. Actually I wouldn't
    like to see that. I don't wish such disasters on anyone, but youu know
    what I mean.
    
    
    PJ

    
    Now which side of this issue is being more manipulative?
    
    I thought we were all adults in here.....
    
    
    
    

    Not even the British Secret Service can manipulate a double Earth sign 
    moved to anger.

    <----     :-)

    Taurus has a will of steel... (I know cause I have a taurus moon)

    Hey, my horse has a taurs sun.  Stubborn as a mule!

An interesting turn in this topic since I have been away on business trips and
have just gotten to reviewing this once again. I must say that the efforts to
discourage entries into this topic, of what Carole Fretts has been graciously
giving her time and effort to do for our benefit, are very suprising to me.

It is obvious that the people discouraging continued entries are speaking from
ignorance, and trying their best to promote ignorance. That is a very childish
attitude, and one that I thought was not part of this notes conference. It is
to say that if those people were to briefly examine the history around the
current natural disasters which are the bulk of what has been reported here,
or even just to listen at the reports themselves, they will find that many of
them are record-breaking disasters, and so to those who chose not to read, they
will stay in their ignorance and will not be able to navigate through these
times. Also, if those skeptical would even take the time to look at the GEOLOGY
notes conference, which obviously you didn't, you will find that that notes
conference is basically dried up and no one had posted these important events.

I had originally started this base note because we were not getting this
information from other notes conferences, and I knew that some (apparently few)
of the noters in this conference are together with me in understanding these
events in a global/spiritual level, another aspect which cannot be found
elsewhere.

It is unfortunate that those few did not prevail, as we will find in a global
context, how important understanding this element of our existence really is.

In thanks especially to Carole for her hard efforts to providing this information
to us for the time that she did. More than her fair share. Also, in thanks to
those her supported her, we now have a better understanding of where we are
going.

To those whose belligerent discouragement of continuing this topic, your Karma
will come back to you, soon.

    Can't the topic be writelocked by the basenoter, and administered by
    same? 
    
    Dougie
    

    
    You've missed the point, Dougie.
         
    Cindy

    re .125 Carole - Thanks so much for your postings.  Please consider
    continuing those postings here for those of us who appreciate and value
    this information and IGNORING negative comments!
    

    First let me say I have no objection whatsoever to anyone posting
    natural disasters in this conference. However posting non disastrous
    things in here does seem to be a waste of time, energy and disk space.
    I too am sorry that Carole has gone into sulk mode, but I seriously
    doubt that humanity will miss recognising a pattern from these
    disasters because of her decision.

    Jamie.

    Who is to say what is "non disastrous"?  To Jamie, it might be if it
    doesn't affect him personally?  If a rockfall in the Andes affects no
    person, yet destroys the nest of a condor is that a disaster?  To the
    condor, probably!
    
    There is a linkage between every occurence/disaster which, when taken
    as a whole may reveal a relevance to your own life .......  Or perhaps
    some people just don't car - and that would be a part of a real
    disaster.
    
    Brian

    Following your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion we would
    therefore have to record an analyze every possible natural event that
    in any way killed or harmed any thing from a single cell life form
    upwards. This would overload our resources.

    So what should we consider as the lowest level event that is worth
    recording. I will be interested in your input.

    Jamie.

No, we don't *have* to record and analyse every possible event, but there are
people on this earth who actually do care about the totality of life, and not
just whether it has a direct, usually adverse, effect on their own person.

This world is a living entity.  The rocks, oceans, plants and animals that
inhabit it all have their place in it's creation, past, present being, and
future.  There is no "lowest level event" that is NOT worth recording for
someone.  Even thoughts ......

Jamie, perhaps you should read a few of the "Holy" books, or teachings of the
great native americans, or philosophers.  Even songs by Dylan, The Byrds, or
many others (remember "Protest Songs"?  Maybe you're too young, or didn't grasp
the real meaning).  Perhaps if you open your mind you may begin to understand.

Brian

    Re .143

    With the greatest respect I find that this entire reply to be a load of
    waffle.

    Jamie.

  Re .14 (Brian)

> Jamie, ... (remember "Protest Songs"?  Maybe you're too young, ...

  Jamie too young ?  Heh, heh, heh ...

  Re. <minimum level of "disaster">

  As far as earthquakes go, why not set the filter at about M5 for most places
  but include exceptional events (eg., noted increase in frequency of smaller
  tremors in certain areas, unexpected [albeit minor] tremors in supposedly
  stable areas) ?

  With regard to other "disasters", personally I don't think that man-made
  situations qualify (eg., famine, plague, pestilence caused by ignorance,
  incompetence or simple greed) as these aren't "natural" in the sense that
  geological/ecological/meteorological events are.

  Frank

    > Jamie too young ? Heh, heh, heh ...
    
    Ah, now there's the rub.  Perhaps not young in body (I have NO idea
    incidentally as I know him only by his node::name and comments in here)
    but certainly VERY young in understanding.
    
    .144  Jamie, how can you expect people to treat your notes with
    respect when you display such immaturity and petulance?  

    Calling waffle, waffle is no sign of immaturity and writing screeds of
    waffle is not a sign of maturity either.

    Old I may be but I like to think that I am young at heart.

    Jamie.

    Well, Cindy, in this context, it means "reams and reams".
    
    						Ann B.
    
    P.S.  I know that if Digital profived us with *real* dictionaries,
    you wouldn't have to ask such questions.

    
    Cindy,
    
    It's a person with a stuffy nose trying to say "screen". ;-)
    
    
    guy

    
    That's great, Anne!  I didn't know that.
    
    Well done, Jamie.  I thought you had made a typo, when in fact 
    'screeds' and 'screens' have the same meaning in this case.
    
    Cindy
    
    
                                                              

    Jamie,
    
    It's nice of you to be concerned about disk space, but since your not
    the moderator here, it's really not your call.  But, since you have
    raised the concern, I wonder how much disk space you have wasted in
    this note in particular and this file in general?  No less than anyone
    else who participates, I'd be willing to bet.
    
    Also, I can think of a lot of words to describe Carol and her behavior,
    but sulky doesn't fit them.  Carol has taken her interest in natural
    disasters off-line to the people who expressed an interest.
    
    Mary

    Mary, to record all the details of all the "disasters" to the levels
    that have been suggested would waste entire disk drives. I'm not sure
    what happens when a notefile gets larger than the disk drive on which
    it resides, but I'll bet you that the system manager of HYDRA would be
    a tad upset if we did that. BTW I think that Juan may in the last few
    weeks well have passed my entire output in this file.

    So how about a minimum reasonable level of disaster below which we do
    not record?

    Jamie.

    
    Re.155
    
    >to the levels that have been suggested would waste entire disk drives.
    
    Given that the noise/gripe/complaint/whining/protesting note ratio far 
    exceeds the actual number of disasters that were actually recorded here
    initially, I would tend to agree with this observation.
    
    Cindy

    How churlish of you, Cindy.  I gather you don't believe in what
    Juan has been writing about?
    
    						Ann B.

	I bet she does Ann.
	I bet she was a medieval peasant in a former life.
	nyuck nyuck.
	
	Jay (with dictionary in hand ;-)

    
    I don't see the connection, Ann.  Please elaborate.
    
    Cindy

    As it didn't happen in America I suppose that it is not worth
    reporting but, there has been a severe earthquake in Indonesia with
    over 1000 people killed.

    Jamie.

Newsgroups: ca.earthquakes
Subject: Earthquake Window on West Coast.
Date: 26 Mar 93 19:55:27 GMT
 
Portland, Oregon, had a 5.4 yesterday morning.
 
In today's Oregonian (paper) there's an article  from  columnist  Phil
Stanford  talking  about  a  prediction  made  for  the  quake  by the
"Institute   for   Advanced  Studies  in  Aspen,  Co.".   Specifically
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
physicist Adam Tromley and David Farnsworth.
 
The  prediction  was  vectored  thru Norm Paulhus at the Department of
Transportation in Washington, DC - as relayed  from  the  Coast  Guard
strategic planning. The person at the Coast Guard is Cmdr. Mike Egan.
 
According to the Institute, a think tank, we are entering a few  month
window on the "entire West Coast of the United States", and this shock
was a precursor to the main event.   They  have  been  monitoring  for
several years, and apparently predicted the Loma Prieta quake in 1989.
 
Here is a quote from the article, spoken by physicist Adam Tromley:
 
  "We've been watching the pressure build up  for  three  weeks  now.  It
   really  got  critical about a week-and-a-half ago." .. "Well, as of 24
   hours ago" - it was about 10:30am Thursday morning - "we knew that  it
                                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   was going to be in the Portland area." ..  "But  there's  a  lot  more
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   happening, We need to be very cautious in what I say. I want  to  make
   sure that we don't cause a panic up there." .. "I wouldn't want to  do
   anything to damage our relationship with the people we are speaking to
   in Washington, we have been so grateful that someone in Washington  is
   listening  to  our  forecasts." .. "It's this, we have been monitoring
   these processes for several years now, and we feel that  the  world is
   entering into a period of time which will  accelerate  seismic  events
   all over the world. Our focus of concern at the moment is  the  entire
   West Coast of the United States. We predict that  over  the  next  few
   weeks  -  several  months  actually - there will be a series of rather
   large seismic events on the West Coast." .. "In other words, this  one
   - the one this morning - is just a precursor to the main event."
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 
PREDICTION BY GORDON-MICHAEL SCALLION

Subj:	Extract from "The Earth Changes Report"
From "The Earth Changes Report" - Issue 17, Feb/ 1993 Prophecies for Jan. 27, 
1993 and beyond...

Special Report
Final Warning Signs for California Super-Mega Quakes 8-12 on the Richter Scale 
- Predicted to Occur No Later than May 9, 1993.

In December, ECR predicted that the next 2 months would be highly volatile for 
earth changes west of the Rockies - floods & storms have devastated CA and 
a 5+ quake hit northern CA in an area that had, up untilnow, been seismically
quiet.  

East of the Rockies storms racked the NE & portions of NYC went under 
water.  Additionally, significant earth changes have occurred globally in 
Dec. and Jan. - a 7.5 quake hit Japan (ECR prediction 12/92), and on Dec. 12th 
the first Indian Ocean quake and subsequent tidal wave occurred (ECR prediction 
10/92).  In my opinion, the final warning bell has been sounded for California.

Previously Published West Coast Warning Signs

. Erratic weather pattern changes and severe storm predictions -  now on-going.
. First L.A. Quake Prediction - occurred April 22, 1991.
. Second L.A. Quake Prediction - occurred June 28, 1992.
. First Indian Ocean Quake/Tidal Wave Prediction - occurred December 12, 1992.
. 7.5 quake predicted for Japan - occurred January 15, 1993.[TRUE AGAIN..Len]
. West Coast Migrations predicted to begin - 200,000 left in '92.
. Prediction for partial land mass fracture in CA - 44 mile fracture occurred 
  along ECR predicted fracture line on June 28, 1992. -> [I'ver heard that the 
  fracture was shown on a PBS local station. The land has shifted by at least 
  4 feet and a portion of the town of Los Gatos is missing ... M.]


. Prediction for Third L.A. quake - 8+ has not occurred.  However, my prophecy 
  states that it will happen no later than May 9, 1993 and may occur along 
  with the super-mega quakes.

Time is short - within 4 months.  Back in '83 my information was "watch 
August 1991 to May 1993".  Later, in April 1991, the date became more specific 
- no later than May 9, 1993.

I have sought guidance as to how I can best assist at this late hour.  Here is 
what I received.

"If an 8.0+ quake occurs in the Indian Ocean region - Sri Lanka should be 
watched carefully - then within days major earth changes shall occur in Japan, 
Alaska, Italy, Martinique and the western US and Canada.  As to the day and 
hour of the 'big one' [CA quake], this should not be seen as a singular event.
While May of this year will be remembered as the month when the great plates 
shifted, events shall occur even before this - many (earthquakes) exceeding 7 
on the Richter scale occurring roughly along a line drawn from Vancouver B.C. 
to Eureka to San Diego. Think in terms of quakes lasting not seconds, but 
minutes.

Now, to clarify so there may be preparation and knowing.  The super-mega quake 
shall not have a singular epicenter.  Rather, the land itself displaces its 
forces from north to south.  The current Richter scale will not be able to 
measure its magnitude. Later, it shall be computed to have been in excess of 10 
and a new scale shall be created.  The following areas of CA shall experience 
inundations.  Portions of San Diego shall go under water as well as much of the 
Imperial Valley.  Tidal waves shall be created traveling south and s/w along 
the whole West Coast.  Los Angeles shall be the hardest hit and initially will 
be thought to be the location of epicenter, though later found to be only a 
portion of same.  Multiple quakes shall occur.  The aqueducts feeding many 
cities such as Los Angeles shall fail & much of CA shall be without power.  
Roads that cross other roads shall come down and become impassable.  Portions of
land from San Francisco to Sacramento shall be displaced by hundreds of feet in 
some areas.  Numerous bridges shall collapse throughout CA causing many high-
ways to become impassable.  Migrations will be to Arizona, Oregon, Nevada, Utah 
and Idaho. Loss of life shall be great.  Property damage and business loss 
shall be measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars, causing the national 
and global economy to severely decline."

If the final warning signs occur as presented, the areas close to my predicted 
fracture zone - 50 miles either side - will be the hardest hit.

Thousands of ECR readers have written to me saying that they know the big one 
is coming, but feel they have no choice but to stay because of jobs, family, 
home, investments, etc.  As I have repeatedly stated, each must trust his or 
her own intuition in this, as well as in all matters.  I can only give you the 
signs.  Please pay attention to your intuition, now, more than ever.  We have 
been warned on all levels.  If you have consciously decided to stay during 
these changes for whatever reason, maybe you will be able to help others.  I 
believe only 1 in 3 will choose, or be able to, leave CA during Tribulation.  
Healers in the thousands will be needed, especially at the emotional-mental 
levels.
	Global Earth Changes Update
	---------------------------
Hawaii - At this time I can be more specific in my forecasts.  I see several 
tidal waves hitting the Islands before summer.  Waves will exceed 50 feet and 
may reach 150 ft.  The warning sign here is to watch for a quake exceeding 8.0 
in Japan, or the Indian Ocean region.  If either of these occur, then shortly 
thereafter - within days, the CA super-mega quakes will occur.  Once they begin,
tidal waves from CA will travel to the eastern side of the Islands.  It is 
possible that just prior to the CA quakes, the island of Maui will have 
increased volcanic and seismic activity. Watch for volcanic activity in Italy 
and Martinique for they are connected to the Hawaiian vents.

Australia - ...more of you have been writing, sharing your visions of tidal 
waves hitting Australia.  The visions are similar as to timeframe - spring '93, 
size of wave - 50+ feet and direction - one from the north-n/w and one from the 
north-n/e.  These visions fit my prophecy windows and description.  The early 
warning signs to watch for is activity in Japan or in the Indian Ocean region 
of Sri Lanka.  If mega-quakes occur in either of these areas, then within 3-5 
hours waves will hit Australia and move inland for miles.  I would suggest that 
3 miles would be the minimum safe distance from the shore. The coming predicted 
CA quake will also create additional tidal waves.  These come from the north-
northeast, traveling at over 200 miles per hr and reaching a height of 100-150 
feet.  Advance notice will be only hours.  ...store fresh water.  Keep a small 
battery-type AM/FM radion with fresh batteries.

Japan - I see every imaginable type of Earth change activity occurring in Japan 
this year and beyond.  Major volcanic activity will begin this yr; earthquakes  
exceeding 7.5 will hit offshore in the Sea of Japan; storms from the north, and 
a major fire in the city of Tokyo.

Europe - I continue to see severe weather for the UK and Scandinavian 
countries.  Rain, floods and some type of problem for the new "channel" tunnel.
Quakes come to this region mid-to-late tribulation (tribulation = 1991-1997).  	
===============================================================================

Thanks Marcos for entering this information.  I've been watching this 
quite closely as my son attends college in Olympia, Washington which 
falls right along this line.  My daughter will be flying out 
to visit her brother at his school during the last week of April.  I'm 
apprehensive about them being out there during that critical period.

Ro

    Re .164:
    
>The  prediction  was  vectored  thru Norm Paulhus at the Department of
>Transportation in Washington, DC - as relayed  from  the  Coast  Guard
>strategic planning. The person at the Coast Guard is Cmdr. Mike Egan.
Hmm.  Couldn't they have relayed this through some, say, seismologists
and/or meteorologists?
    
>Final Warning Signs for California Super-Mega Quakes 8-12 on the Richter Scale 
>- Predicted to Occur No Later than May 9, 1993.
I hope I remember to check in here on May 10.
    
>East of the Rockies storms racked the NE & portions of NYC went under 
>water.  Additionally, significant earth changes have occurred globally in 
>Dec. and Jan. - a 7.5 quake hit Japan (ECR prediction 12/92), and on Dec. 12th 
>the first Indian Ocean quake and subsequent tidal wave occurred (ECR prediction 
>10/92).  In my opinion, the final warning bell has been sounded for California.
Is the weather a function of the seismic activity, or the other way around?
Many people expected the weather to be "odd" this year, because of the
lingering effects of the Mt. Pinatubo eruption.
    
>. Erratic weather pattern changes and severe storm predictions -  now on-going.
>. First L.A. Quake Prediction - occurred April 22, 1991.
>. Second L.A. Quake Prediction - occurred June 28, 1992.
>. First Indian Ocean Quake/Tidal Wave Prediction - occurred December 12, 1992.
>. 7.5 quake predicted for Japan - occurred January 15, 1993.[TRUE AGAIN..Len] 
Did I miss news reports of this quake?  (I honestly don't recall.)  Or are
they saying the prediction occurred 1/15/93?
>. West Coast Migrations predicted to begin - 200,000 left in '92.
There's only 200,000 people on the West Coast?  No kidding!  (Or was that
2092?  Never mind...)
>. Prediction for partial land mass fracture in CA - 44 mile fracture occurred 
>  along ECR predicted fracture line on June 28, 1992. -> [I'ver heard that the 
>  fracture was shown on a PBS local station. The land has shifted by at least 
>  4 feet and a portion of the town of Los Gatos is missing ... M.]
How often do these people predict earthquakes?  How often are they right?
Wrong?
    
>The current Richter scale will not be able to 
>measure its magnitude. Later, it shall be computed to have been in excess of 10 
>and a new scale shall be created.  The following areas of CA shall experience 
This one wins the prize.  These clowns are predicting earthquakes, and they
apparently know almost nothing about the Richter scale!
    
>Rain, floods and some type of problem for the new "channel" tunnel. 
    Ah, this one may have come true.  I read today that the Chunnel opening
    will probably be delayed again, and they need to raise $1.5 billion.
    
    The rest of it is just gloom and doom.
    
    Mark
    P.S.  None of this is meant to indicate that people (especially those
    in earthquake-prone areas) should not be prepared for a significant
    quake.  Just that I doubt these guys' predictive ability.

You can dought all you want. Unfornately Mr. Scallion has been pretty 
acurate on many other predictions. I actually don't care about that part 
of it. It's the first part. Native American prophecies have talked about 
these earth changes and the specific earthquakes for hundreds of years. 
My teacher said he expects the "big" California earthquake in April 
according to the prophecies that were handed down to him. Now the 
physicists are seeing the increased activity. Noone can dought that there 
is increased seismic activity out there and there have been meetings of 
the civilian defense people. There are government people that are quite 
concerned. Of course there will be skeptical people always waiting for a 
"huge" disaster when there are many, many signs of earth changes all over 
the earth, many of them predicted many years ago. Look at what's been 
going on the last 2 years - remember Florida, etc? Places that never get 
rain and snow getting plenty of both? 

Sam

RE: .166 

>>The current Richter scale will not be able to 
>>measure its magnitude. Later, it shall be computed to have been in excess of 10 
>>and a new scale shall be created.  The following areas of CA shall experience 
>This one wins the prize.  These clowns are predicting earthquakes, and they
>apparently know almost nothing about the Richter scale!

    To expand on that a bit: the Richter scale is an open ended scale.
    There is no largest number on the scale.  In principle a quake large
    enough to shatter the Earth to dust would still have a value on the
    Richter scale.

    In fairness, though, there are reasonable statements that they might
    have made that this note might be a distortion of.  There are already
    some complaints in the geological community that the Richter scale
    becomes less and less meaningful as a measure of anything particularly
    meaningful as the quakes get large.  There have been some proposals
    put out for replacement scales.  I've even seen some used -- but not
    in "popular" stuff where it might confuse people.

					Topher

    Re .168:
    "these" Earth changes?  How are "these" different from any others
    (other than quantity, perhaps), and did these ancient prophecies predict
    these "different" events?  Did they predict this particular time,
    too?  (Saying "there will be an 8+ quake in California" isn't much of
    a prediction.)
    
    Also, while it is statistically rare for places like Florida to get
    snow and freezing weather, it does happen.  If Mobile, Alabama gets
    snow every year for the next 2 or 3, I'll grant you have something
    interesting, but once?  No way.  (And who's getting rain that doesn't
    usually, or shouldn't, barring the recent drought?)
    
    I'll be surprised if a big quake hits California in the next six weeks.
    
    re .169:
    I agree that the Richter scale is pretty meaningless on a human scale
    beyond 10 or so.  But I doubt anyone claiming to know seismology would have
    written that line, which makes me doubt much of the rest of the
    substantive predictions.
    
    Mark

    Ruth Montgomery an author  and psychic channeler weaves a similar
    scenario to the previous note in  her book "The world Before".
    I believe the approximate date given was Sep/Oct 1999.
    Also the famed channeler psychic Edgar Cayce has forecast earth changes
    that  will begin when  Mt Vesuvius erupts again.?
    

    Re .171:
Fine, there are two separate things.  Let's look at them separately then.
            
>First there's a prediction by the Institute for Advanced Studies in Aspen, 
>that happened right as predicted, i.e. the 5.4 quake in Portland, Oregon. 
Marcos, do you have more info on this "Institute for Advanced Studies"?
Like what areas are they performing advanced studies in?
I asked before, I ask again:  How many predictions have these people made?
How many were right? Wrong?
    
>He's sort of a somewhat famous medium whose predictions are said to 
>have been more than 80% accurate.
As above: How many predictions has he made?  How many were right? Wrong?
Is someone independent of him keeping the statistics?  If not, why should
we believe them  (selective memory...)?
    
    Re .172:
    That didn't help at all.  It doesn't predict *when* this cataclysm is
    supposed to happen.  (Which is like saying "There will be an 8+ quake
    soon.")  As I said before, without a date, or range of dates, this
    prediction is meaningless.  Have these people published anything with
    specific predictions, Marcos?  (And try to find answers to the
    questions I posed above for this "channel", too.)
    
    In summary, why should I believe any prediction that does not have the
    following properties:
      (1) it is specific (time interval, general location, minimum magnitude
          if a quake is being predicted)
      (2) the predictor has an independently verifiable track record of
          accurate predictions[*], OR there is is scientific evidence
          supporting the prediction
    
    I'd really like to believe someone can make predictions like these.
    But I have the feeling none of these people can provide this
    information (absent further information on this "Institute for
    Advanced Studies").
    
    Mark
    [*] Their predictions satisfy (1), and were published before the time
    interval, and a statistically significant number of these predictions
    came true.

    You "said it was posted for informative purposes only."
    
    You are being asked for information.  If you don't want to give
    information, apologize for your false claim or retract it.
    
    						Ann B.

    What claim, false or otherwise, did Marcos make, Ann?  Unless I missed
    something, he posted someone else's claim which he found interesting,
    and which he felt might relate to some other things in his experience.
    I do not think that he is required to back up someone else's opinion.

    (For what it is worth, Marcos asked my opinion as to whether or not it
    was responsible to post this note, and I said that I believed that
    given the publicity elsewhere for this claim and that the noters here
    have the opportunity to discuss and make up their own minds about it
    that it was responsible and appropriate for him to post).

				Topher

    With the flack he's taken for posting things in various
    conferences, I admire Marcos for continuing to post things
    like this of possible interest and being sensitive enough about their
    impact to add disclaimers and ask moderators about it first.
    
    And of course, anyone who signs off with "kind regards" at times
    can't possibly be all bad.  :-)
    
    						kind regards,
    
    						todd

It's getting real nasty in here. People can't even post things for 
informational purposes without having the so-called Defenders of the 
Gullible going crazy. Why can't we mellow out and allow information to 
be posted and discussed?

Sam

    Re .175-.179:
    
    Marcos, I fully realize you are disclaiming your contributions.  I am
    "as a service" questioning the substance of the claims you are entering
    "as a service".  It is not incumbent on me to search out the answers to
    these questions if I do not want to.  (It is incumbent on those who
    wish to support the claims to provide the answers.  If no one provides
    substantive answers, then I believe I am safe in concluding that I
    should not pay attention to these claims.  In fact, I'm probably safe
    in telling others to ignore them, too.  But I'll let them draw their
    own conclusions.)
    
    I am only asking you for information since you posted the original
    information, and may have access to the kind of information that will
    answer the questions I pose.  As the original contributor of the
    material, you might also have an interest in answering them.
    
    If I am coming across as hostile, it is not because I am being hostile
    to you, Marcos.  (With a name like that, how could I :-) I am
    questioning the message, not the messenger.
    
    Peace,
    >Mark

    
    I'm trying to find out more about the people making the predictions,
    and whether the predictions ought to be taken seriously.  (For all I
    know, the Institute for Advanced Studies may be a highly regarded
    scientific institution, which would lend, IMHO, some weight to their
    predictions.)  Until more information is on the table, I can't make
    what I consider a reasonable decision on the validity of the claim.
    If I sound skeptical, it is because I suspect (1) answers to my
    questions are not forthcoming, or (2) if they are, they will not show
    anything interesting (like there's a good reason to believe the
    claim).
    
    I thought we were discussing the information...
    
    Mark
    P.S. Just to reiterate, I'm not trying to be hostile to anyone in this
    conference.  Just the seemingly-unsubstantiated claims.

    Well that proves that I'm not always the one who starts the fights.

    Jamie.

	Oh Jamie, quit sulking  ;-)  ;-)
	You start a good percentage of them   :-)
	
	I'll also thank Marcos for posting the info.
	
	Jay

    ... such is life ...

Re .186:
    Thanks for entering that, Marcos.  Do earlier issues of the Earth
    Changes Report make predictions too?  (If I want to see more, I'll
    try to get copies...)
    
    What follows is my attempt to distill a set of "fundamental"
    predictions from the text (the summary at the end is not complete,
    omitting things like the events in Hawaii).  Most of these are
    supposed to happen over the next six months.  We'll see what happens.
    
    Mark
    
Predictions of Gordon-Michael Scallion
Published April 1993 Earth Changes Report

** Harsh winter 92-93 predicted in 11/92 issue
    (I believe weather experts said the same.  This is not an
     an interesting prediction.)

** Path of '93 Blizzard will be followed by other storms
    (what's atypical about its path?)

** Storms come from Gulf of Mexico/Florida Straights
    (No kidding.  Lots of storms start there.)

Total number of predictions: 13
    
1. Storm prediction: West Coast Florida to Louisiana/Texas coast
   (date range: balance of 1993)

2. Storm prediction: Florida Keys to Nova Scotia (winds to 175-200)
   (date range: balance of 1993)

3. Quake prediction: 6+ activity in Aleutians precurses major seismic
   activity.
   (this prediction fails one of several ways:
    1. there is major activity, not preceded by a 6+ in the Aleutians
    2. there is a 6+ in the Aleutians, not followed by major activity
    3. there is neither major activity, nor a 6+ in the Aleutians 
    If none of his major predictions occur, and there is no other
    non-predicted major activity during 1993, I will deem that a failure.
   )
    
4. Volcano prediction: Washington, Mt Baker blow-out
   (date range: spring to early summer 1993)

5. Prediction: "Changes" begin in Northwest US in 1993
   (Seismic activities end in 1998-2001 interval)

6. Volcano prediction: Hawaii (big island), major eruptions

7. Tidal wave prediction:  Hawaii, result of seismic activity on mainland

8. Quake prediction: California, precursors to large (7.8-8.8) quake
   (date range: April 1-30, 1993)
   (magnitude: unspecified, assume 5+)

9. Quake prediction: California, large (7.8-8.8) quake (95% probability)
   (date range: before May 9, 1993)
   (location: Palm Springs, 100 mile radius)

10. Volcano prediction:  Mojave desert (date range: 1993-1995)
    (formation of a new volcano)

11. Quake prediction: California, large 8.2+ quake (95% probability)
    (date range: spring-summer 1993)
    (location: Sonoma County)

12. Volcano prediction: Mt. Rainer
    (date range: spring-summer 1993)
    (magnitude: large than Pinatubo, Mt St Helens together)

13. Quake prediction: California, mega 10+ quake
    (date range: given in ECR 5/92? or 2/93?, but not here)
    preceded by activity on Pele and Vesuvius, mega quake in
    Indian Ocean

    Mark,
    
    Your analysis of prediction number 3 was inadequate:
    
"3. Quake prediction: 6+ activity in Aleutians precurses major seismic
   activity.
   (this prediction fails one of several ways:
    1. there is major activity, not preceded by a 6+ in the Aleutians
    2. there is a 6+ in the Aleutians, not followed by major activity
    3. there is neither major activity, nor a 6+ in the Aleutians 
    If none of his major predictions occur, and there is no other
    non-predicted major activity during 1993, I will deem that a failure.
   )"
    
    Your failed to note that the Aleutians are the most geologically
    active area of North America, and that (as lovingly recorded in
    Note 42.* in the GEOLOGY conference) Mt. Spurr is *constantly*
    rumbling.  (The concern level for Mt. Spurr is now code "green",
    and it's still producing almost daily tremors!)
    
    						Ann B.

    In evaluating the previous predictions and these new ones there are
    several things that must be taken into account:

    1) General predictions -- those which can be "fulfilled" by many
    different outcomes -- are easy to get accurate.

    2) Unsurprising predictions -- those which someone well versed in
    conventional sources for making such predictions would rate as
    likey -- are easy to get accurate.  There is a skill, though to finding
    ones which can be at least phrased to sound surprising.

    These first two can be combined fruitfully -- as in the case of the
    8.0 earthquake in CA sometime in the coming years.

    3) Shotgun predictions are easy to get right.  It is easy to make many
    different predictions some of which will be right -- particularly if
    you make use of the first two techniques.  In evaluating someones
    ability to make accurate predictions you must look at all the
    predictions they made, not just their successes.

    4) Bull market effect.  If you predict that specific stocks are going
    to go up, and the market happens to be going up, you will frequently
    be right.  That is not a whole bunch of successful predictions but
    only a single one -- that the market was going up.  It can't be
    counted as a number of different successful predictions.  The stock
    market broker who always acts like the market is going up -- the bull
    investor -- combines this with the shotgun system.  Each day they make
    a bunch of predictions which are not independent -- that stocks will go
    up.  Those days when the market is bullish they claim wins, many of
    them.  Those days when the market is bearish they can only claim a
    few.  What they trot out to investors is their wins -- not their losses
    (which is easy to do when the market is bullish for a while).

    Application to the preceding is left as an exercise for the reader.

				    Topher

    Re .194:
    I'll take your word on that.  Are there really 6+ tremors on a regular
    basis?  If the volcano blows, I suppose there will be.
    
    This would remove some of the possible causes of failure, leaving
    the truly interesting ones (that these quakes are followed by
    The Big One(s) (tm)).
    
    Re .195:
    It is for reason (1) that the predictions need to be as precise as
    possible for them to have any significance.
    
    Reason (2) caused me to reject most of Mr. Scallion's predictions about
    the East Coast weather (general storm patterns, sources of storms).
    They were also fairly general.
    
    Reason (3) is why you need a fairly complete list of predictions.
    That way you have a clue as to how accurate the predictor really is.
    (This could also be termed the "crap-on-the-wall" or "direct-mail"
    approach.  Throw enough out, and some of it's gotta stick.)
    
    For these predictions, the "bull market" effect would only seem to
    be a problem if there are valid seismological reasons for believing
    there will be significantly more seismic activity in the target
    areas over the given time windows.  (Which, if generally known, would
    render many of the predictions less interesting.)
    
    >Mark

    
>    For these predictions, the "bull market" effect would only seem to
>    be a problem if there are valid seismological reasons for believing
>    there will be significantly more seismic activity in the target
>    areas over the given time windows.  (Which, if generally known, would
>    render many of the predictions less interesting.)

    You're combining 4 (bull market) with 2 (predictable by more
    conventional means).  It can also act on its own to create a false
    level of signficance -- if the "target" predictions are not independent
    of each other (whether or not the direction of those dependent
    predictions can be decided in advance by conventional means).  Many
    climatologists believe that at least some of our current extreme
    weather is due to the combinded influence of two specific factors,
    which may not themselves be independent: this is an El Nino year and
    the dust from Mt. Pinatuba (sp?) is screwing up the heat budget.  Even
    if he didn't know that they would cause lots of extreme weather
    patterns the fact that he predicted a lot of extreme weather conditions
    and that, as it happens, these climate factors were creating extreme
    weather conditions would make more of his specific predictions to
    come true than you would guess by chance.  He seems to get a lot of
    "hits".  Of course, if those factors -- or other -- had resulted in
    more than expected exceptionally mild weather he would have gotten
    *fewer* than average hits.

    Imagine that I'm going to try to guess what a bunch of coin tosses are
    going to be.  My particular "calling habits" result in my guessing a
    lot of heads.  Unbenownst to me the coin is biased to get heads every
    time (I might even know that it is biased -- but not which way and the
    argument doesn't change).  WOW -- I got 75 out of 100 right!  The odds
    of that are astronomical!  In fact I had a 50% chance of my biases
    happening to match those of the coin.  The seperate coin tosses are
    not distinct trials.  I should only get credit for getting 1 right
    with a 50% chance of getting it right, rather than the astronomical 75
    out of 100.

				    Topher

    Re .197:
    
    I hear you, Topher.  It certainly follows that if the seismic trend is
    to high activity (especially of the magnitudes predicted), many of
    Mr. Scallion's predictions stand a better chance of happening.  I think
    some of his predictions (e.g. specific volcanic eruptions, and the
    Palm Springs quake) are fairly independent,  and predicting
    a 10+ quake in such a short time window strikes me as pretty
    outlandish.  (Not to mention that lesser seismic activities might
    reduce the stresses that eventually cause the Big One (tm).)
    
    And while El Nino and Mt Pinatubo have effects on the weather, I
    wonder whether those effects can be connected to specific storm
    tracks (i.e. the two predicted by Mr. Scallion).  I just wonder
    what the historical odds are of storms following those two tracks
    in a given season are...
    
    Mark

    Taken from the PSI-L mailing list.

==============================================================================

Subj:	Re: ECR
From: Jack <ASD003%NMSUVM1.BITNET@pucc.Princeton.EDU>

The earth changes board is a bulletin board which posts information
concerning the predicted cataclismic earth changes that are coming
between now and the year 1998 and into 2001.  These predictions are
from Gordon-Michael Scallion who write Earth Changes Report, a monthly
newsletter and other psychics included some channeled material.
Scallion's prediction success rate is 87% right, 13% wrong.
Jack

==============================================================================

Subj:	Re: ECR
From: Jack <ASD003%NMSUVM1.BITNET@pucc.Princeton.EDU>

Dear Friends,
In order to subscribe to the earth changes list,
send e-mail to lpb at stratus.swdc.stratus.com and ask to be added to
the list.
Jack

Just a curious bit for you: a couple of weeks ago, I submitted a batch
job scheduled to run on 7-may to remind me that 8-may was to be the day
to watch for the Big One. I didn't happen to notice it at the time, but
the batch job got assigned an entry number of 666. I didn't do this on
purpose, and I'm not making this up.

Coincidence?

    Mike,
    
    go to your room.

The storm tracks are not unusual for the east coast as has already 
been mentioned.  Storms with significant amounts of moisture originate
in the southern region and move north.  This follows basic heat engine
mechanics for global atmospheric activity.  The effects of El Nino and
Pinatubo could easily be expected to have extreme, interesting and
noticeable effects.  The weather mavens predicted this and so did I.

The unpredictable part is the magnitude and frequency, however, using
chaos theory, it is reasonable to predict large and chaotic changes.
The reason is that the two aforementioned causes have further upset
the equilibrium of the system (I say further because global warming
has already caused some disruption of the equilibrium).

As for the earthquakes, the only interesting predictions in that set
are the specific dates for really large quakes.  Those are relatively
short-term and I guess we will find out.  

By the way, I will be leaving for LA Friday and staying through the 19th
so it seems like I might get a first hand look at the quakes if they come
to pass.

80)

    
    Re.203
    
    Hahahaha!!!!!
    
    Er...sorry, Mike.  
    
    Cindy

That's ok, you guys just go make fun of poor ol' Mike, psychic toddler.
You'll see. Some day I'll show you. Nyah nyah.

    
         Earlier in this topic the program Sightings was mentioned.  Did
    anyone happen to see a episode that told of some soldiers and a 
    OUIJA board?  If I remember correctly they predicted the bombing of
    the world trade center by terrorists and the awakening of Mt. Rainer
    in Washington state.  I don't remember the other predictions but
    have the nagging feeling they were about earthquakes and riots.
         If anyone remembers or has taped that segment please let me
    know.
    
                                             Thankyou
                                             Gale
    

    In the last 3-4 weeks Columbia, Md has had 10-12 quakes around
    4 on the scale. This is an area not known for quakes. Is something
    really getting ready to happen??

>The native indians of the area have long said, "When the daughter 
>speaks, the 
>grandfather will answer". The 'daughter' is Mount St. Helens, the 
>grandfather 
>is Mt. Ranier. The daughter has spoken, so will the grandfather answer?

I have heard the prophecies about these things this year frm native 
elders this year and it can happen this year. That's all i'll say.

Sam

    
    I'll be over in TAY2 in May, Mike.  So you can show me then.
    
    Cindy

> I'll be over in TAY2 in May, Mike.  So you can show me then.

I'm in TAY1, but hey, it's just a walk. Wanna see my etchings? Oops,
maybe that comment belongs in the charge-or-drain topic.

    So Cindy, are you going to *cultivate* a friendship? ;^)
    
    Ruth

    
    Good one, Ruth!
    
    I cannot say....(;^)
    
    Cindy

    Re .216:
    Was this a hurricane?  Did it come up the Florida Coast?  (Both
    of these are parts of his prediction.)
    
    I haven't been especially plugged into the news over the last few
    days, so I might have missed the news.  In any event, the news clipping
    doesn't say anything about "hurricane force winds".
    
    Re .192 (my list of Scallion's predictions, distilled from .186):
    After re-reading parts of .186, I am unsure whether the weather
    predictions I ended up with are meaningful, as the section predicting
    the specific storm paths can be interpreted to read that the storms
    will happen sometime within the *decade*.  This somewhat alters the
    chances of getting a particular storm path, possibly enough to render
    the prediction uninteresting.
    
    I'm willing to give him credit for a "hit" if the predicted storm
    tracks happen this year.
    
    >Mark

                
>Sightings finally had the segment on Scallion. You should have seen what he 
>called the future map of the US after the earth changes! First, envision 2 
>immense islands:  separated by what was once the Mississippi River which has 
>now become a wide strait/channel. The East coast shows erosion which 
>eliminates all of Long Island in New York and Cape Cod in Massachusetts, with 
>new coastlines now 50-100 miles inland from the present. But it was the West 
>coast that showed the greatest changes.....like someone took a huge bite
>engulfing all of central California south and east through Arizona and Nevada. 
>Baja peninsula gone. Northeast Mexico gone.  Denver Colorado a seaport. 
>"Probably by 1998" he said.   

	I saw the Sightings program, and the predictions given there about
    	North America earth changes are very similar as to what Edgar Cayce 
    	predicted way back in the early 1930's.  If anyone wants to check them 
    	out, you can find them in a book called "Edgar Cayce on Atlantis",
    	around pages 158-159.
    
    

    re .218:
    
    >I agree. It's impossible to say whether or not Scallion were referring
    >specifically to the event that hit Louisiana recently. However, what does a
    >"psychic" see? What's in a "vision"? Does he see every detail of the event 
    Scallion's written prediction on a storm was fairly precise in certain
    details.  This event did not satisfy those details.  Go back and read
    what *he* wrote.
    
    If Scallion's prediction is "there will be severe weather somewhere on
    the Louisiana coast this year", then the prediction isn't very
    interesting, as the odds of this event happening are reasonable.
    To be really interesting, some features of the prediction have to be
    somewhat specific (exact location, shorter time window, defined storm
    track).
    
    I am not in the business of interpreting Scallion's visions.  He is.
    I am interested in extracting interesting predictive information out
    his statements.  If his visions are vague, and his statements are
    vague as a result, his predictions are not likely to be interesting.
    If his statements are specific, we have no way of knowing if his
    visions are vague or not.  By not (often*) quantifying a confidence
    level in his predictions, he is leaving himself an opening (viz.
    "I must have misinterpreted the vision"), but it doesn't alter the fact
    that his prediction was *wrong*, and using him as an oracle is suspect.
    (That is, it's fine if he has the vision, but if you can't usefully
    act on it because either his interpretation or the accuracy of the
    vision is off, what good is it?)
    
    [* some of his predictions include percentages, but the two storm
    predictions did not, as I recall]
    
    >Are you [prepared to give Scallion credit for a hit]? 
    Of course.  But I'm not giving partial credit on any individual
    predictions.  They're either right in all details listed (details
    *he* chose to "interpret" from his visions), or they're wrong.
    Otherwise, we have something statistically almost useless.
    
    In this particular instance, the prediction was for a hurricane
    moving up the Gulf coast of Florida, and across to Louisiana.
    I have heard *nothing* in the media about such an event.  And
    sizable storms usually do get national media coverage.  Scallion
    may have gotten "power outages," "shortages," and "high winds"
    (i.e. tornadoes), but what about "hurricane" and "Gulf coast of Florida"?
    
    Mark

RE: .220 (Mark)

>    Of course.  But I'm not giving partial credit on any individual
>    predictions.  They're either right in all details listed (details
>    *he* chose to "interpret" from his visions), or they're wrong.
>    Otherwise, we have something statistically almost useless.

    Not true at all, Mark.  Its just we must be very clear in advance
    what qualifies as "correct" and how we will deal with partial
    correctness.  Certainly if there was three pages of exact details
    about a storms course, the damage it did, where, and so on -- all
    exactly correct except that the storm was Huricane Steven instead of
    Huricane Stephan you wouldn't want to discount it as meaningless,
    would you?

    As it happens, I'm now working on a formal method for evaluting this
    kind of material -- but I'm afraid its not ready yet.

				    Topher

    I wouldn't give credit on "high winds" for a *tornado*; a tornado
    is too,... too specific a phenomenon to be subsumed under "high
    winds".
    
    						Ann B.

    Re .221 (Topher):
    I did say almost. :-)  If you want to assign confidence values to
    parts of the prediction, you could use something (Bayesian logic,
    perhaps?  Don't remember this stuff well) to determine how closely
    a particular event matches a prediction.  But we don't generally
    have these for Scallion's predictions, as he didn't provide them.
    
    I think there are two ways to look at it:
    
    1.  The predictor makes a prediction, giving as much details as she
        thinks are part of the prediction, stating "All of this will
        happen."
    
        If some of it doesn't happen,  or is wrong in details provided
        in the prediction, why should credit be given?  The predictor
        obviously has confidence in those details, otherwise why give
        them?
    
    2.  The predictor makes a prediction, categorizing details of the
        prediction by a confidence level.  ("A hurricane will hit
        the Louisiana coast (100%) called Steven (70%).")
    
        If the hurricane hits, but is called Stephen, what kind of
        partial credit does he get?  What about a hurricane called
        Steven that hits Florida?  Do we use some kind of truth
        calculus?
    
    For this experiment, I prefer to deal in black and white, it's
    much easier.  If the details Scallion gave in his prediction don't
    match those of the event, the prediction is not satisfied by the
    event. (In other words, he's giving details because he has confidence
    in them, and hasn't said he doesn't have confidence in them.)
    
    In re Louisiana:
    It's had more bad weather, but it came from the west, I believe.
    More thunderstorms and twisters.
    
    In re earthquakes:
    Read on the Usenet that seismologists are predicting the following:
       1. 7+ quake due in Nevada "soon" (a 30-year cycle that seems to be
          late).
       2. 50% chance of "major" quake along South San Andreas Fault
          within (darn, didn't copy time window) 5 years, I think.
    
    Mark

    Why stop there?  Why not insist that every prediction ever made by
    Scallion be 100% accurate or you will not count anything he says?

    You are choosing to group a bunch of related predictions into a single
    prediction and saying "these all must be accurate" or I will not count
    anything.  Yes, this method is easier, but it is less, in the jargon
    of statistics, less sensitive.  You are reducing your work and the
    liklihood that you will mistakently declare an event to be of interest
    by reducing the liklihood that you will declare notice an event which
    *is* of interest.

    That is fine, you do have to select some tradeoff, or you will simply
    declare a priori that Scallion is right or wrong without paying any
    attention to the accuracy of his predictions.  Just don't say that
    any other choice is -- what was your phrase -- statistically
    meaningless?  You've simply decided to apply a rather strict standard
    because you believe it is both appropriate to the situation and easier.

    An alternative would be to treat each statement about the same event as
    a seperate, not necessarily completely accurate, "feature" in an
    overall prediction.  In a sense, you would have a vector of
    predictions.  Each potential event would be matched against the entire
    cluster and a measure taken of how accurate it was.  You could then
    take as a measure of success how likely it is that *some* event would
    occur which was as close to the given event as the actual one.

    Much more work?  Certainly.  Worth it?  Not to me -- at least for a
    formal evaluation.  Possible?  Very much so.

    (I do not see that you would need to use Bayesian statistics here.  But
    you probably would need to use subjective rather than frequentist
    probabilities here, whether or not you cluster all the predictions
    about each event.  Subjective probabilities are the basis for Bayesian
    statistics, while conventional statistics is generally developed from
    frequentist probability theory.  In traditional, frequentist
    probability theory it is impossible to talk about how likely a single
    unique event is -- it simply doesn't mean anything in the theory).

				    Topher

    Re .224:
    
    >Why stop there?
    Well, we do want some granularity.  I suppose I've chosen "event"
    as the level of granularity.  The finer granularity of prediction
    might be "features of event", where an event can be said to satisfy
    the prediction if enough features in the event match the prediction.
    What is interesting about Scallion's predictions is the combination
    of features of each event.  Take too many features away, and they
    aren't interesting anymore (falling into the statistical levels of
    prediction appropriate to the field).
    
    Take this specific instance:
      1. There was bad weather on the coast of Louisiana
      2. There were power outages
      3. There were water shortages
      4. There were "high winds" in the form of tornadoes
      5. This weather pattern was not apparently a hurricane
      6. It did not apparently come from the Florida coast
    
    Contrast with Scallion's prediction
      1. There will be a hurricane (with "high winds")
      2. It will move up the Florida coast to Louisiana
      3. There will be power outages
      4. There will be water shortages
    
    I think many people would say there is no match here.
    
    I tried to break Scallion's predictions down to the point where
    removal of any "feature" would render the prediction uninteresting.
    That way, if there isn't a very good match, the event falls into
    the realm of normal statistical interest.
    
    If you think my summary of his predictions isn't like that (i.e.
    features can be added or removed from predictions and they're still
    statistically interesting), I'd like to know.
    
    >Why not insist that every prediction ever made by
    >Scallion be 100% accurate or you will not count anything he says?
    I think the insistence is that his track record be statistically
    significant (i.e. better than chance or predictions by experts
    in the appropriate fields) for it to be taken seriously.
    
    Mark

  Just a comment from a bystander : the use of the example "Stephen vs Steven"
  is a totally bogus point.  To decide validity based on a specific variant of
  a common name (especially a homonym as in this case) is somewhat ridiculous.
  People who do so aren't judging the prediction, they are justifying their
  preconceived opinions by judging the accuracy of the proof-reader, the
  transcriber into reviews, the copier into Notes, the interpretation of the
  interviewer, the diction of the radio announcer, and so on.  [ In this case,
  the main difference between Stephen/Steven/Stefan/Steiven is personal taste
  with slight cultural or geographic biases ].

  The form of most predictions is a partial snapshot of an event, usually in
  the first person (audio/visual), but sometimes as a descriptive commentary
  from a third person.  If I was to read half a dozen phrases *describing* the
  hit of a hurricane/intense storm/tornado/typhoon to a group of you - without
  mentioning *any* of the above words - and got you to precis the event, it
  would be interesting to see how the resulting transcriptions vary.  Similarly
  if I was to flash a number of discrete 1 second images on a screen for about
  ten seconds.

  I've never been out when a true hurricane or tornado or typhoon has been in
  progress so anything more than my internal concept of 'a real heavy storm'
  would probably be classed as 'a hurricane' as that is the "next step" up in
  intensity in my scale.  If I saw a definite spiral form then I might change
  "hurricane" to "tornado".  If I saw a lot of coconut palms and straw huts I
  might even think of "typhoon" but I doubt it :-)  If the report was coming
  from the meteorological office then I would expect the correct term to be
  accurately used.  If it's coming from a lay person, I would expect that the
  description might be biased by their own particular experiences because the
  output is ALWAYS relative to the frame of reference used and the frame of
  reference (in this case) is going to be built primarily on the observer's
  own experience.

  The point is that the event being described should be the focus of the
  investigation rather than locking onto the literal form of one particular
  description.  I'm not suggesting you allow any fluffy ballpark phrase to
  pass as a valid prophecy, just be a little more realistic with your pedantry.

  Frank

    Re .226:
    Much of what you say is *exactly* what I mean about interpretation.
    Scallion chooses to interpret his vision as "hurricane", when it
    might also be "tornado".  If he says one, and the other happens, he can
    claim to be right, due to the ambiguity in interpreting the vision.
    On the other hand, if he had realized there might be an ambiguity,
    he would have said "bad weather, high winds", and been right (but
    his prediction is less statistically interesting).
    
    If someone predicts "hurricane", and I prepare for that, and a
    tornado strikes instead, what good has the prediction done me,
    other than heightening my emergency preparedness?
    
    In re visual/audio descriptions of events:
    Hurricanes are characterized by widespread damage.  Tornados are
    characterized by localized heavy damage, often leaving nearby
    infrastructure undamaged.  Absent the ability to make this
    kind of distinction in the "vision", it could be difficult to tell
    the difference.  (See above on interpretation.)
 
    >People who do so aren't judging the prediction, they are justifying their
    >preconceived opinions by judging the accuracy of the proof-reader, the
    >transcriber into reviews, the copier into Notes, the interpretation of the
    >interviewer, the diction of the radio announcer, and so on.
    So am I supposed to call Scallion up personally and ask him for his
    prediction?
    
    No one seems to be doubting the claim that the words entered here by
    Marcos are a faithful rendering of Scallion's communication.  Are you
    saying we should be?  (Specifically, do you have a problem with the
    list of features I presented in .224 as an accurate summary of one
    of the weather predictions Marcos entered in .186?)
    
    Mark

SQM::TRUMPLER 
    
>    If someone predicts "hurricane", and I prepare for that, and a
>    tornado strikes instead, what good has the prediction done me,
>    other than heightening my emergency preparedness?
    
     Sometimes heightening emergency preparedness can make a big difference
     to the people caught up in the emergency.  

    Either way.. you'll not be likely to be having a picnic in the park.

    Having observed a tornado at what I considered at the time to be far
    too close range and having survived a couple of hurricanes I prefer the
    latter.

    In hurricanes the rain goes sideways not the more normal vertical or
    near vertical. Sitting through my first one on a Caribbean island I was
    wondering where all the rain was coming from, visibility was zero
    because of rain, when it suddenly occurred to me that as the rain was
    going sideways it didn't actually stop until it hit something. So it
    was really the same rain that was going round and round the eye of the
    storm. I pointed out this interesting titbit of information to Harry as
    we watched the roof try to take off, and he kicked me. 

    Jamie.                                  

  Also re .227 (Mark)

> (Specifically, do you have a problem with the
> list of features I presented in .224 as an accurate summary of one
> of the weather predictions Marcos entered in .186?)

  Revisiting your lists in .225
    
>    Take this specific instance:
>      1. There was bad weather on the coast of Louisiana
>      2. There were power outages
>      3. There were water shortages
>      4. There were "high winds" in the form of tornadoes
>      5. This weather pattern was not apparently a hurricane
>      6. It did not apparently come from the Florida coast

  Combine the wind descriptions [ 1, 4, & 5 ], combine the geography elements
  [ 1 & 6 ] and renumber the old #6 as the new #4 :

       1. There was bad weather, not apparently a hurricane but involving
           "high winds" in the form of tornadoes.
       2. There were power outages
       3. There were water shortages
       4. It did not apparently come from the Florida coast but hit the coast
            of Louisiana

>    Contrast with Scallion's prediction
>      1. There will be a hurricane (with "high winds")
>      2. It will move up the Florida coast to Louisiana
>      3. There will be power outages
>      4. There will be water shortages

  Reorder to match your first list [Scallion's] and renumber accordingly :

       1. There will be a hurricane (with "high winds")
       2. There will be power outages
       3. There will be water shortages
       4. It will move up the Florida coast to Louisiana

>    I think many people would say there is no match here.

  A clear 50% [#2, #3] is more than "no match".  Of the remaining 50%, 25% [#1]
  is subject to the current debate on weather descriptions.  I think the reason
  why people could justifiably reject this prediction is tied to the route of
  the "high wind" event and the emphasis placed on this point.  I'm afraid I
  don't know how the event was reported at the time but one thought that springs
  to my mind would be to wonder if phrases such as "coming in from Florida",
  "following the coast", or "moving Westward along the coast" were used, any of
  which could result in a one-liner like #4 above.

  Again, it boils down to the expectations of the reader :

    Do you want precise directions or tendencies ? If the former then you will
    reject the prediction as the degree of correlation between a natural event
    and an arbitrary linear baseline is generally very low [ a common point
    used to distinguish the artificial from the natural ].  If the latter then
    you may tolerate it until the next decision point.

    Do you want precise meteorological terms or indications of the scale of
    damage "seen" ?  If the former then you will be disappointed with the output
    of anyone other than a met office psychic (and probably even then :-) but
    if the latter, you may tolerate the prediction until the next point.

  This goes on but there is one thing guaranteed about the analysis of events
  such as this, you will be able to make point measurements that agree with any
  prediction as well as point measurements that disagree - the real decision
  comes right at the end of all the analysis : it's whether the "impression" of
  the prediction ties in with the "impression" of the event ... and that tends
  to be reached on a personal level.

  Frank

    
  >We have exactly the same problem with the media reporting of world affairs :
  >if there's "revolution" then it's news [for a day or so] but if there's just
  >"unrest" that kills a few dozen people then who cares ?
    I understand your point, even the example isn't great.  (The difference
    in what these things are called is often political.  Which terms are
    used depend on the agenda of the speaker.)
    
    re weather predictions:
    Weather models may not be able to predict exactly when a particular
    spot is going to be rained on, but we're not looking for that kind
    of accuracy.  I don't think I'm asking for anything more extraordinary
    than a weather forecast.  (Except, of course, that the time window is
    somewhat different.)
    
    re comparing this event with Scallion's prediction:
    >   2. There will be power outages
    >   3. There will be water shortages
    
  >A clear 50% [#2, #3] is more than "no match".  Of the remaining 50%, 25% [#1]
    Right, but if Scallion had predicted just these two things, people
    would have snickered at him.  They're not the meat of the prediction
    (as you go on to say.)
    
    re expectations of the reader:
    I want enough information to make useful decisions on.  Saying "there
    will be a hurricane" isn't really very exciting, unless more details
    are forthcoming.  Predictions of "bad stuff in location <x>" are also
    not particulary exciting, unless the time window is fairly short.
    "A specific <bad thing> in location <x> sometime in <small* time
    window>" is more useful, and may be statistically interesting.
    [* "small" is obviously somewhat context-sensitive.]
    
    >Do you want precise meteorological terms or indications of the scale of
    >damage "seen" ?
    If a predictor wants to predict this, then yes.  Otherwise, s/he
    shouldn't be talking about it, or (at a minimum) downplaying it.
    
    Let's try it this way:  If an event E occurs, that has features in
    common with some prediction P, and the probabilities associated with
    the combined common features of P and E (that is, the feature set
    present in both) is statistically interesting, then credit may be
    given for the prediction.
    
    Of course, for the prediction to be even considered, its feature set
    must be statistically interesting (and preferably minimally so; that
    way, the match must be quite close).
    
    Mark

    
    Jamie,
    
    Harry just doesn't have the objectivity that you do at certain times.  (;^)
    
    Cindy

Mike Glantz's predictions for May 1993 and beyond.

Disclaimer: nobody particularly cares what I predict, anyway.

If no super-mega-earthquakes occur in California between May and July,
Gordon-Michael Scallion will fade boringly into obscurity. If, on the
other hand, anything even remotely resembling a newsworthy earthquake
occurs anywhere on the West Coast, from Alaska to Chile, he will issue
profuse and prolific "reports", more predictions, and other
peacock-like behavior to a rapt following and a greedy press (not to
mention a network already loaded with this stuff).

The guy really can't lose, can he? I mean, if he's wrong, is somebody
gonna sue him or something? Is somebody gonna lock him up as a crazed
lunatic? Of course not. Are his fans going to say "man, this guy was
really full of it"? Of course not.

You gotta admit, this prediction biz is a can't-lose setup. I think I'm
in the wrong job.

    My prediction: GMS is wrong on the quakes and right on Bosnia
    (air strikes).  But one needn't be psychic to predict the latter.
    
    Mark

    Re .240

    How true, but I think that will not be classed as a natural disaster.

    Jamie.

From a report I received over the net:

[AP, 05/04/93] HONG KONG -- At least four people have died and many more are
missing in what could be the worst floods to hit southern China's Guangdong
province in 200 years, newspapers said today. The official China Daily said
floods resulting from 2 days of torrential rains killed at least 4 people and
left thousands homeless, while the Hong Kong-based Wen Wei Po said many were
missing in the worst hit areas--in north Guangdong. The Ta Kung Pao news-
paper, also based in Hong Kong, quoted meteorological experts as warning that
"a flood disaster the like of which is seen once every 200 years is quite
possible." It said a major dike on the Beijiang River, a tributary of the
Pearl River, needed emergency repairs after flood waters exceeded warning
markers by more than 6 feet. The dike, considered 1 of the 7 most vital in
China, protects 4.5 million people and the provincial capital Canton.
(Forwarded by: Wenfeng)



Ro

    A question.

    Come Sunday will California still be there?

    Jamie.

    Re .192 (my list of GMS's predictions):
    
    prediction #3:
    There was a small quake (4.4) on Alaska's Kenai peninsula
    a day or two ago.  GMS predicted 6+ in the Aleutians preceding
    the major activity.
    
    Magnitude differences and geographic proximity to the predicted are not
    good enough to warrant much in the way of credit.  But then, this
    might be a precursor to something bigger in the right place...
    
    prediction #6:
    I hear Kilauea has never really stopped producing lava, and that lava
    is still flowing into the sea.  While this might be classed as a
    "major" eruption, I believe it predates the prediction.
    
    prediction #8:
    Don't recall hearing about any 5+ quakes in California during the
    month of April.  Absent news of same, this one fails.
    
    Mark

$ show time
   9-MAY-1993 20:13:53
$ findnode oaklnd

Name	= OAKLND
Node	= 10.10
Number	= 10250

UCS Mountain View, CA

$ set host oaklnd
		       
		      Property Of Digital Equipment Corporation
                  Unauthorized access to this network is prohibited
Username:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q.E.D.

No. It doesn't necessarily happen every year, but if it were the sort
of thing which happened only once every 100 years, it would be blasted
all over the front page of every newspaper in the country, and would be
getting international coverage, as well. You can always get a rough
idea of how unusual something is by amount the coverage in the media.
And if there were a psychic of the actual ability which GMS claims to
be, that would be in the news, too.

    Re .248:
    There are lots of twisters every year.  The fact that there's more
    flooding than usual is easily attributable to the relatively severe
    winter we just went through.  (In particular, I don't believe twister
    activity is that unusual in that part of the country.  It's certainly
    happened in recent years, dunno about the severity.)
    
    As we discussed earlier in this thread, the only really interesting
    prediction here is the one for the hurricane with the fairly specific
    path (which has not, to my knowledge, come to pass).
    
    Re .192:
    Prediction #9 bites the big one :-).
    
    Mark

Well, LA is still there, Vesuvius and Pele are quiet and we are having
normally bad spring weather in the midwest and southern states.  

I would say Scallion had a whole set of clean misses here.

I would go further to ask if anyone remembers the severe flooding and other
bad weather that occurred in Arkansas and Texas just 2-3 years ago.  I 
remember it because of some of the jokes that came from it.

Actually, when I saw the weather patterns starting to build, I was very 
tempted to predict severe weather with tornados and flooding in that area.
But, hey, that would be cheating.

80)

Received this on the net:


:#: 91682 S1/General Info
:    10-May-93  11:12:30
:Sb: #Scallion's Response
:Fm: Dave Fassett 76675,1545
:To: All
:
:I just called Scallion's Earth Changes Hotline (1-900-903-2745) and here
:is what he said about the California earthquake miss (paraphrased):
:
:"This prediction is a miss on the date. I wish I could predict with 100%
:accuracy the dates when these events occur, but I am unable to do so. The 5%
:uncertainty will change only the date, NOT the event...On May 4th I felt an
:increase in pressure on the San Andreas. An earthquake monitoring station
:reported very high [ULF?] readings. A few days later, they decreased...The
:new window for the 8.3 quake is May 10 thru July 27, with a high probability
:of it occuring between May 17 and May 23."
:
:Two small earthquakes did occur in the LA area over the weekend, a 3.4 in
:Barstow (80 miles NE of LA) and a 3.0 centered 27 miles northeast of Lucerne
:Valley (100 miles east of LA). It looks like these occured instead of the
:8.3, but the big one may still be coming...
:
:Dave

--

    So I suppose that he will now keep slipping the date until an
    earthquake happens and then claim that he predicted it.

    As the L.A. area seems to get earthquakes like we get rain I am less
    than impressed with the "Two small quakes".

    Jamie.

> So I suppose that he will now keep slipping the date until an
> earthquake happens and then claim that he predicted it.

A lot like the way many engineering groups meet their milestones ...

    Re .252:
    Tee hee.
    
    He *didn't* predict the quake date with certainty, as his time window
    allowed it to happen earlier than May 9.
    
    From .186 (GMS's own text):
    >. The 3rd L.A. earthquake 95% probability, no later than May 9,
    >  1993, epicenter 100 mile radius of Palm Springs, magnitude
    >  8.3 plus or minus .5.
    Miss on date, baloney.  He missed a whole multi-month window.
    
    Mark

  I'm slightly acquainted with Eric; he's a fairly rational and
  skeptical fellow.


          <<< CDSRV::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]ASKENET_V5.NOTE;1 >>>
                           -< Ask The EasyNet (V5) >-
================================================================================
Note 40.0                   strange earthquake dream                  No replies
HANNAH::OSMAN "see HANNAH::IGLOO$:[OSMAN]ERIC.VT240" 27 lines  12-MAY-1993 09:45
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This morning, probably about 5 a.m., I dreamt I was in some sort of cafeteria, 
maybe work, maybe school.

All of a sudden, the entire floor shifted several inches one direction, then the
other.  Everyone was shaken up, but there was no obvious damage or injuries.
I announced to the people near me:  "that was an earthquake!  Did you feel that?".

But I was really scared.  Someone suggested that we get out.  I agreed.  As we
were all shuffling for the exit, I woke up.

When I woke up, I realized I was really scared about the dream, emotionally
shaken.

Then on the car radio at about 7 a.m., I heard the end of a news broadcast about
a real earthquake near Manila.  Can anyone provide details ?

I'm near Boston.  I found it eerie that I should have such an upsetting dream,
and then hear about a real quake.

Was the quake at about the time I had the dream ?   Any details appreciated.

I've never been one to believe much in "paranormal" events, but this seemed
like quite a coincidence, so who knows...

/Eric

    Re .256:
    I'm sure GMS does it for publicity, just like psychics and channelers
    everywhere.  I mean, Jeane Dixon makes predictions that are frequently
    wrong, and no one seems to care.  GMS has now gotten his publicity, and
    he will now proceed to get (or he's been getting) rich(er) as a result.
    
    Re .257:
    Coincidences happen.  How many dreams has Eric had that might have
    correlated to real incidents, but didn't?  (This is a rhetorical
    question.)
    
    Mark

One thing that people haven't talked about is that there may be certain 
things that are "slated" to happen, or "written in" but people are given 
free will and that can change things. What I am refering to is that there 
are a lot of medicine people as well as many others(lightworkers, etc) 
praying hard for these things not to happen at this time. This is all 
behind the scenes. There are many things that people don't know about.

Sam

    Sam, earthquakes are mainly caused by continental drift. Pressure
    builds up and eventually this is released as an earthquake. The longer
    the build up the more massive the quake. These people praying and
    stopping the quake will make it even more disastrous when it finally
    happens. Perhaps they should not interfere with the inevitable.

    Jamie.

    :-)
    
    .... time to make some more popcorn... this is getting interesting..

    Agreed.  If one does have the power to effect such things, one really 
    should not.  It would be better to directs one's energy toward being
    prepared, and one's prayers toward minimizing human and other
    suffering.
    
    It is not wise to tamper with the forces of nature.  We do not have the
    vision to forsee all of the ramifications.
    
    Judy (who calls the wind ("Tie down the lawn furniture, she's at it
    again!"))

    
VAXRIO::MARCOS    

>Not really. You have to read it carefully. 

    Are you kidding, Marcos?  Consider the source!  ... that's what
    interests me.. :-)
    
    
    
   CAADC::BABCOCK  
    
    >Agreed.  If one does have the power to effect such things, one really 
    >should not.  
    >It is not wise to tamper with the forces of nature.  We do not have the
    >vision to forsee all of the ramifications.
    
    I more or less agree with you.
    
    I say more or less because ... well... on a *subconscious* level one will
    do what one can to protect oneself and one's family.... that's the
    nature of survival.

    
    JA...JA...
    
    Oh, OK - got it now.  (;^)  Took a few seconds.
    
    Cindy

VAXRIO::MARCOS
    
>No I am not. That's what I think JA's implying. Of course only JA can say
>exactly what he really meant. 
>
>Considering the source is exactly what I am doing. You really don't believe that
>JA believes that prayers can stop quakes, do you?  Please consider:

    Well... let's just say that in all the notes I've read that Jamie has
    posted, there's been little (if any) indication there that he believe
    that anything can effect the material world but the material world
    itself... so you can understand why that note perked my interest... was
    Jamie having a change of heart or did he reveal some heretofore unseen
    side of himself. :-)
    
>"Perhaps they should not interfere with the inevitable"  
>
>The inevitable is by definition inevitable. Trying to avoid the inevitable is 
>therefore a waste of time.

    Oh... right.... course how does one know what is and what is not
    inevitable until *after* it happens, huh? :-)
    
>"These people praying and stopping the quake will make it even more disastrous 
>when it finally happens" because if they not get away they'll be in the list of
>casualties.
>
>I must say that, for different reasons, I must agree with him. The planet is
>geologically unstable. If we were put on a geologically unstable planet there
>must be a reason or we would not have been put here in the first place. If
>there's a reason for such things it's a waste of time to pray for such things
>not happen.

    :-)... you guys crack me up...you really do...
    
    The planet isn't unstable... the planet is the way it's supposed to
    be... are you unstable because you breath?  Is a bird unstable because
    it flys?  

    I mean... such things do happen and always have happened and will
    continue to happen because that is the nature of existence... but...
    on the other hand... if someone were able to alter things, then that
    too is the nature of existence ... and those two different aspects
    of nature co-exist.. and probably would continue to do so.. cause 
    that's the way things are... don't you think? 

    Well... I didn't mean you cracked me up in a negative way... I ment
    that I enjoy talking to you..

I guess people didn't understand. We are coming to choice. WE get to 
choose to continue our destructive ways or to choose a way of earth. What 
people are praying for is for us to choose the way of Earth, so this 
destruction will not be unleashed.

Forget it. Why bother explaining it?

Sam
 

    Re .270:
    Are you saying we have a choice about what tectonic plates do?
    
    Re .192 (my list of GMS's predictions):
    There was a magnitude 6.4 earthquake near Sand Point, Alaska (on
    the Alaska peninsula, which runs out to the Aleutian islands).
    There was no apparent major damage.  This would seem to qualify
    as the trigger event for prediction #3.
    
    Was GMS's prediction of major cataclysm only off by a few weeks?
    Let's wait and see...
    
    Mark

    I understand, Sam.

    
    Re.271
    
    Mark,
    
    Re.270 - Ultimately, yes.
    
    However, for as long as you are not conscious of the fact that you do 
    have a choice, then it is true...you do not.
    
    Cindy

    Re .268

    >was Jamie having a change of heart

    No thanks, once was enough.

    No I do not think that prayer can stop an earthquake. We, as has been
    stated, live on a slightly geologically unstable planet. As long as the
    continents drift there will be earthquakes.

    The point that I was trying to make was, if there really was anyway to
    delay a quake, since it is not possible to stop them, all that would
    happen would be a worse quake at a later date. I was also wondering if
    these people had considered this point.

    Jamie.

   With regard to praying to minimize earthquake diasters, this is related to
   how one views the earth. For many people, the earth is a living being, that
   can respond in like fashion to the states of mind of people. If the people
   on the surface continue in a very unbalanced relationship to the earth, the
   earth, as a living being, will respond to correct the imbalance. The earth
   could release tension gradually, or abruptly. Nothing is pre-determined
   except repeated behaviorial patterns (karma) that people do not take
   responsibility for. Praying means listening and raising the energy level to
   allow clearing and release in a positive way, without fear. Why hang out in
   limited states of awareness? There is very little ecstasy in such states of
   mind.

   Wayne

    Re .275

    Very often we can postpone the inevitable but not avoid it in the end,
    why should the praying and earthquakes be outside this category.

    Re .276

    Doesn't make a lot of sense. Nearly all the objects that we have seen
    in the solar system appear to have seismic activity. Most of these are
    seem to be quite dead worlds which have no life forms on them. Why
    should this planet be different? You don't need life to have
    earthquakes. 

    Jamie.

    
    	There were 2 butterflies on a tree and they were chatting about
    	life in the world.  
    
    	Do you think this tree we are standing on is alive ?.
    
    	I don't think so, I have been around this tree all of my life,
    	I'm nearly to the end of my life span, and I haven't seen this
    	tree do anything at all.  As far as I'm concerned, the tree is
    	not alive, it is dead.
    

   RE: Are you saying we have a choice about what tectonic plates do?

You don't understand. That's at the simplistic level. The reply 2 ones 
back (.276?) was right on. Mother Earth is a living organism that we must 
take care of. She will do whatever purge she needs to do in order to 
return to balance, just like a person would do to return to balance. What 
people are praying for is NOT TO STOP an earthquake. People are praying 
that people return to the Sacred Hoop, to the circle, with respect for 
all peoples and respect for Mother Earth. Then people will do things that 
help Mother Earth restore her own balance.

Sam

    Well, I think tectonic plate theory is NOT operating at a "simplistic
    level", but at a very high, very sophisticated level.
    
    After all, people have been using the `living balance' theory for
    millenia to keep this planet operating, whereas the tectonic plate
    theory is only a few decades old.  I submit that that is an indication
    that the former idea is "simple" or "easy" (which does not make it
    wrong) whereas the latter is "sophisticated" (which does not make it
    right) and therefore, not at all simplistic.
    
    							Ann B.

    "However since the quake threshold seems to be the same with and
    without stress release ..."
    
    I don't think you understand what stress relief is.
    
    							Ann B.

    .279
    
    But Sam... whether the Earth restores her own balance or whether
    people return to the circle.... either way... balance *will* be
    restored.
    
    We'll be ok, Sam... and the Earth will be ok too... we'll get through
    it ... as best we can... just like always..
    
    mary

    You're right, I don't understand.  Here's why.
    
    You seem to be saying the following:
      * Mother Earth controls geologic events (quakes, volcanoes)
      * The rate of geologic activity is directly correlated to the
        abuse of Mother Earth by Mankind
      * Mother Earth is now being abused by Mankind
      * In the past, Mother Earth was abused less by Mankind
    (Any problems with this?)
    
    So I ask:
      Is it fair to conclude from this that, in the past, the rate
      of geologic activity was less than it is today?
    
      If yes, is the difference proportional to the difference in
      amounts of abuse?  If not, why not?
    
      Is the answer to the first question borne out by the geologic
      record?  If not, why not?
    
    I'm not a student of geohistory, but I'll wager there isn't much of
    a relationship between Mankind's abuse of the environment and the
    rate of geologic events.  (With the possible exception of the
    detonation of large bombs underground.  But we should be able to
    figure that in.)
    
    Mark

    He isn't saying it's the one and only cause.. he is saying it is
    a factor..
    
    Well... I shouldn't speak for him.  I apologize, Sam.

    Ah.  Jamie said nothing about stress relief as the *technique* for
    delaying an earthquake.
    
    In fact, the only stress relief I know of *is* an earthquake.
    
    Now, given that, and given that there is NO guarantee that an earthquake
    will occur simply because a certain level of stress has been reached...
    the longer the delay (all else being equal), the bigger the resultant
    earthquake will be.
    
    You don't want that.  Trust me.
    
    						Ann B.

    Re .287:
    Well, the implication of Sam's words is that human activity (prayer,
    being nice to Mother Earth) can have an effect.  If this is going to
    work, the correlation between said activity and geologic activity
    better be sizeable.  In other words, noticeable and somewhat
    measurable.  I'm asking about those measurements.
    
    Re .288:
    Another way to reduce the stress might be to simply stop the plates
    (and the forces moving them.)  This is what Sam seems to be
    suggesting.  (But maybe I'm putting words into his mouth, too.)
    
    Mark

    I see know reason to believe that the Earth is geologically unstable.
    It seems very stable as near as I can tell.  What it is not is
    *static*.

    A small quake can occur (and in fact frequently does occur) when there
    is a large strain, and it releases a small amount of the pent up
    strain.  If I wanted prayer (or psychokinesis) to accomplish a
    minimum miracle to accomplish the desired outcome, I would recommend a
    whole series of small quakes to reduce the strain.  Each quake could be
    barely or im- perceptable.  Given the indications that tectonic stress
    release follows a fractal/chaotic dynamics, the "butterfly effect"
    allows this to be accomplished with a very small "intervention" into
    "normal" physical processes.

				    Topher

    Ah, the good old white man linear thinking - let's measure this and
    that, and have 40 double-blind studies. I'm not saying every earthquake
    is tied to an abuse patern by mankind. What I am saying is that we are
    polluting and destroying the earth at such a rate that Mother will do
    whatever is neccessary to return to balance. Like any living organism,
    it wants to stay in balance and it will do so in any way it can whether
    it be earthquakes, floods, etc. The stuff that has been happening and
    is building up has been forcast for hundreds of years. Previous worlds
    have been destroyed by water and other means because scoiety grew out
    of balance with earth. We are coming to that time again. Read about the
    Hopi Prophecies.
    
    I don't waste time with statistics and playing your games with linear
    logic. I'm thinking circular. I just have to look out into my world and
    see what's happened. We are swimming in our own shit.
    
    Sam
    

    RE:  .21
    
    The theory espoused is what is called the Gaia (sp?) theory.  An
    English scientist (sorry, I don't recall his name) has written several
    books on the subject.  
    
    The Gaia (named after the Greek goddess of the Earth) theory postulates
    that the earth itself is a living organism.  The theory has its
    supporters and its detractors.  
    
    I don't know if the Gaia supporters believe that:
    
    * Earthquakes, floods, and other catastrophes are ways of righting the
    balance
    
    * Man's actions may contribute to an increased rate of catastrophes
    
    * Prayer or meditation by man (e.g. humans) may avert or reduce the
    severity of a catastrophe
    
    The third point, phrased this way, is an almost verbatim quote from the
    Jewish High Holiday service.  As I write this, it seems that the Gaia
    theory is a modern-day religion of sorts, for those who no longer
    follow traditional religions.  The God element is minimized or
    eliminated, and the Earth element takes its place.  Funny-strange.  
    
    Laura

    Consider the Himalayas a massive mountain range. It was created by
    continental drift and goodness knows how many earthquakes of staggering
    magnitude. I wonder just who Mother Earth was pissed off at then, it
    certainly was not us as we did not come along until a lot later.

    Jamie.

    Marcos.... would that be the right thing to do though?  Or is it better to
    just let nature take it's course?
    
    Topher.. that would probably work... but ... would it be the right
    thing to do..?
    

    So the thing to pray for is more earthquakes?

    Jamie.

Re .290 & .296: "I would recommend a whole series of small quakes..."

Sounds good, but may I assume the recommendation is rhetorical?  If the
recipient of the prayers is worth praying to at all, It can probably figure
out the many-small-quakes strategy (or something even better) without
recommendations. 

Re .291: "Ah, the good old white man linear thinking..."

Don't be racist.

Re .292: Gaia hypothesis

The originator of the hypothesis was Lovelock.  As he originally conceived it, 
I think it only regarded the whole biosphere -- all living things on Earth -- 
as a single life form, and did not include gross geological activities like 
volcanic eruptions as actions of Gaia; rather, they were events that Gaia 
responds to in such a way as to keep itself as healthy as possible.  Reactions 
were, in the original version, mediate by ordinary, mundane responses of 
various populations of organisms.  Critics questioned whether these optimizing
responses actually happened, and how such a system could evolve through 
Darwinian selection.

I do not, however, know what may have happened to the idea since it left 
Lovelock's hands.
 
Earl Wajenberg

    re: .297,
>>Re .290 & .296: "I would recommend a whole series of small quakes..."
    >	Sounds good, but may I assume the recommendation is rhetorical?  If the
>recipient of the prayers is worth praying to at all, It can probably figure
>out the many-small-quakes strategy (or something even better) without
>recommendations. 
    
    Hey, if the Creator/Creatrice/Creatification Process could do it themself, 
    would they have needed to make us capable of intelligence ?
    
    In fact, I can envision a distant future edition of the Bible...
    
    Scene fades to a dimly lit corner of the universe.  The Creator
    speaks with Saint Kulagina of the moving matchbox :
    
    "And how did my other human children use that nifty macro-PK power I 
    provided for them ?" asked the Creator ?"  Did they recognize in it the 
    limits of their wisdom, the hints of my divinity, and see in it the 
    miraculous splendor and grand mysteries of nature ?  Did they enfold it 
    into their daily prayer ?  Did they perhaps even listen to my faithful 
    caste of techno-magi and combine their powers to shift the face of their 
    planet to build great monuments to the glory of creation ?"
    
    "Or did they use it to influence thousands of games of MegaPachinko in a 
    basement in New Jersey, and to bend spoons at parties ?  Yup, those
    _linear_white_male_humans_ were among my silliest of creations.  Must
    have mistimed the uterine testosterone/melanin/carotene blend on that 
    series.   Half their brain completely unused, no sense of humor,
    ugly polyester leisure suits.  Oh well, let's hope the priesthood of
    giant herbalist reptiles works out better on my other test planet."
    
    						todd

    Re .291 (Sam):
    
    >I don't waste time with statistics and playing your games with linear
    >logic. I'm thinking circular. I just have to look out into my world and
    >see what's happened. We are swimming in our own shit.
    
    "games with linear logic"?  Look, I can see as well as the next person
    the mess this planet is in.  I believe that hard work may be able to
    mitigate the problems we face.  I do not believe that prayer will, as
    you claim.  People have prayed for all kinds of things for centuries
    (nay, millenia), and look what we have.
    
    Scientific inquiry (including statistics and logic) *can* be used to
    identify *good* ways to solve problems.  In order to implement some
    solutions, a large number of people need to change their behavior,
    which is basically a political process.  Unless you can show me
    evidence (against 4 millenia or so of largely dissenting evidence) that
    prayer will work at this, I'm going to remain skeptical.
    
    Mark

    Just for fun, consider this datum about California.
    
    If you put up a six-foot high map of California, and (with an ordinary
    black pen) drew in every known geological fault, your map would be
    solid black.  That's how many faults there are in California.
    
    (The above information is from my friend Leslie, who used to work at
    Lincoln Labs, where they analyse such stuff.)
    
    							Ann B.

    But is it the right thing to do?
    
    I mean... violent natural disasters lead to dramatic quick change... 
    to a different way of living... 
    
    Is it better to mitigate the quakes so that they don't do so much
    damage and give folks a chance to change on their own... or is it
    better to let nature take it's course and force change upon them?
    
    Taiwan is building all kinds of nifty cheap little electric cars that
    Californians could use that wouldn't poison their air... in a few years
    or so... they'll be buying them up in droves... 
    
    It would probably take a tremendous effort to mitigate the kind of
    quake that's building up but .... well... it would be worth it if
    things could be guided gently in the right direction... 
    
    Or would it?  Would it be wrong to interfer?

    Earthquakes are neither good nor bad.  They just are.  They existed 
    long before humans and they will continue long after we are gone.
    
    I do not think we have the power to effect these things, and I am SURE
    we do not have the wisdom.
    
    It would be better to focus our prayers (or whatever) on keeping people
    safe, but even there we are better off to put our efforts into
    education (safty and preparation) and good engineering.  The
    spiritually inclined (and I am one of these) tend to suffer from
    inertia.  Sometimes a little action is more productive than a lot of 
    thinking (praying, meditating, ...).
    
    Judy

Re: 300

I don't understand your comments Todd. I take them to be a shot at me 
based on some things in there. My understanding of things like the Hopi 
Prophecies shows that there were "worlds" here before (the Hopi's say 4) 
that were destroyed because the people grew out of balance with earth and 
turned to mass materialism. This is also in the Bible (Noah). The Hopi's 
believe we are at a cross-roads again as well as many others. We are at 
that same choice. And yes, there have been earthquakes before, but if 
this "purge" happens, they will be massive earthquakes, taking out a lot 
of the Left Coast.

> Hey, if the Creator/Creatrice/Creatification Process could do it 
>themself,
>    would they have needed to make us capable of intelligence ?
Yes, because we are part of the whole. We are here to all learn, to all 
grow towards perfection, where we re-integrate what we have learned with 
the Creator.

"Or did they use it to influence thousands of games of MegaPachinko in a
    basement in New Jersey, and to bend spoons at parties ?  Yup, those
    _linear_white_male_humans_ were among my silliest of creations.  Must
    have mistimed the uterine testosterone/melanin/carotene blend on that
    series.   Half their brain completely unused, no sense of humor,
    ugly polyester leisure suits.  Oh well, let's hope the priesthood of
    giant herbalist reptiles works out better on my other test planet."

Yes, they are silly. That's why they're destroying the planet at the rate 
they are in the name of mass counsumerism. It isn't a priesthood of 
herbalists (maybe a shot from my discussions in the Holistic notes 
conference). It's about living lightly on Mother Earth, living in 
balance with Mother Earth. This did happen a lot more in the past. Maybe, 
I am just wasting my time arguing this stuff.

Sam

RE: .297 (Earl Wajenberg)

>Re .290 & .296: "I would recommend a whole series of small quakes..."
>
>Sounds good, but may I assume the recommendation is rhetorical?  If the
>recipient of the prayers is worth praying to at all, It can probably figure
>out the many-small-quakes strategy (or something even better) without
>recommendations.

    Two seperate hypotheses: the supernatural (prayer) and the paranormal
    (PK).

    The supernatural is a bit hard to deal with in general terms.  You
    can make differing assumptions and come up with almost any answer.
    Anything capable of suspending the laws of physics and perhaps even of
    logic is incapable of being reasoned about.  You have to make some kind
    of assumptions about limitations and/or motivations to be able to
    deal with the subject at all.

    The obvious response to your question, then, is if the recipient of the
    praryers is worth praying to at all, it can probably figure out that
    something should be done without recomendations (i.e., prayers).
    Whether you need to be specific depends on the motivation and
    "literalness" of the being which answers the prayers.

    I can be a bit more informative about PK (why are you not surprised?
    ;-)).

    The "obvious" answer is that to get the affect you want you have to
    mentally "do" the right thing.  After all, if you want to pound in
    a nail, you have to think about, at some level at least, taking a
    hammer, holding it by the handle and moving it in such a way as to
    strike the nail with force, and repeat until the goal is accomplished.
    You have to plan and act in accordance with that plan to reach a
    goal.

    But that is based, apparently, on a false analogy.  PK quite distinctly
    seems to be "goal-directed".  For PK to operate you don't have to
    worry about the mechanics -- you have to decide on the goal and to
    somehow (if I knew in any detail what that "somehow" entails I would
    be far and away the world's most famous parapsychologist -- maybe the
    world's most famous scientist) set the PK going.  The details then
    apparently take care of themselves.

    This is, in this case, almost certainly "a good thing".  If, as now
    seems to be the case, earthquakes are a critical phenomenon, no
    feasable amount of computation could reliably determine the exact
    amount/placement of an influence (and no amount of precision could
    apply it if you could calculate it) so as to avoid having any
    particular "small quake" not grow into the "big one".  But a truly
    goal directed phenomenon doesn't have to worry about the details and
    so can accomplish it.  Think of it as a kind of transtemporal feedback
    loop that assures that only the right thing happens.

    So if the agents (who, in their own minds, are praying rather than
    PKing) set as a goal "No big-one with associated loss of life" then it
    should work out (assuming that they can pull together "enough" PK to
    get it to work at all).  But if the only thing which would satisfy them
    is for all the seismographs to flatline, then Jamie's "fears" would be
    justified (unless, of course, the "easiest" way to reach the goal is
    to blow the fuses on all the seismographs).

                                     Topher

    re: .305, Sam,
    	No, it wasn't intended as a shot at you, Sam.  
    	I don't consider you a giant reptilian herbalist
    	priestess/priest.  
    
    	That part was to indicate the thought process I 
    	envisioned a Creator engaging in while trying to 
    	decide how to guide evolution in other ways on other planets
    	to correct the mistake of linear white male thinking.  
    
    	I can't imagine that 6 billion Hopis living simply in balance 
    	with Mother Earth would be totally without problems, either, even if
    	such a thing could have come about.  Even if they avoided the
    	earthquakes caused by all the MacDonalds Big Macs and Popeil's Pocket
    	Fishermen, and other forms of mass consumerism, they'd have
    	their own set of problems.   That's the small advantage of
    	natural disasters, they keep the population down and make the
    	problems simpler temporarily.
    
    						kind regards,
    
    						todd

    AP 05/17 23:49 EDT V0002

    Copyright 1993. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. 

    EARTHQUAKE  

    INDEPENDENCE, Calif. (AP) -- A strong earthquake rolled across a wide
    area of California and Nevada on Monday, but it was centered in a
    sparsely populated area and there were no immediate reports of injuries
    or severe damage. The quake measured 6.0 on the Richter scale and
    struck at 4:20 p.m., said Douglas Smith, spokesman for the California
    Institute of Technology.  

    AP Newsbrief by FRANK ELTMAN

RE .306 (Topher)

>    so can accomplish it.  Think of it as a kind of transtemporal feedback
                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    loop that assures that only the right thing happens.
     ^^^^

Topher,

did you find this analogy in literature?
Some shamans I know, describe their work in similar wordings.
I might ask them for references if you're interested.

Arie

    Thing is... you'd *never* get a flatline... the most you could hope to do
    would be... like safety glass in a automobile... a lot of cracking and
    splitting over the whole area rather than concentrated damage in the
    LA area...
    
    It would be a lot of more moderate damage to a lot of area and people 
    instead of intense damage to a confined area and group.
    
    Is that an improvement?  

    I think that could be done... I mean... I think it's possible to do
    that... spread it out like that..
    
    ... but is it the right thing to do?

    Well...it's worth a try, I guess...

Seems like CNN (Cable New Network)likes to keep up with earthquake news:


A cable televison news channel (CNN) reported this morning that an earthquake
measuring 6.0 hit Anchorage, Alaska this morning (18-May).  It also mentioned
the California quake that occurred yesterday in the Serra Nevada mts.

CNN also reported a few days ago that two small quakes hit Mexico City.
Although the quakes did not do much damage the people of Mexico City were
upset and concerned because of the huge quake that hit them several years ago.
   

    Yea... it's really building up... all sorts of reports coming out..

Thanks for your clarification, Todd. My mistake.

>        I can't imagine that 6 billion Hopis living simply in balance 
>        with Mother Earth would be totally without problems, either, 
>even if
>        such a thing could have come about.  Even if they avoided the
>        earthquakes caused by all the MacDonalds Big Macs and Popeil's 
>Pocket
>        Fishermen, and other forms of mass consumerism, they'd have
>        their own set of problems.   That's the small advantage of
>        natural disasters, they keep the population down and make the
>        problems simpler temporarily.

It isn't just the Hopi's. At one time, we were all tribal people and 
lived close to the earth, walked lightly on earth, and lived closely to 
what's refered to as "the original instructions" from the Creator. There 
are always problems. I'm not saying that this was without problems. Your 
statements above: the earthquakes don't come from McDonalds. They come 
when mankind has gotten so out of control and so far away from the 
original instructions. It has more to do with all the pollution, the 
digging into the earth for uranium, non-respect for others, etc. 

I don't know anything. I'm just trying to discuss somethings that I have 
studied and read. I don't know what's going to happen. I know that the 
world is seriously out of balance. But I hold a lot of hope because 
people are returning to the Sacred Hoop and circles, and enpowering 
themselves so that we can change.

Sam

Yes, it's building up on the West Coast. If nothing else, there will be 
very increased siesmic activity for the next few months.

Sam

    ... culminating around August...don't you think, Sam?

                                                     
    According to Mayan shaman Hunbatz Men, what used to happen is that
    civilizations would 'know' in advance when the Earth was going to
    become volatile in certain areas, so, living in tune with Nature, they
    all chose to move to a 'safer' location.  The vibrations of the locale
    would change, and be detected by those living there.  They would move
    to a place where the 'vibes' were much healthier.
    
    With our lifestyles, etc., we don't do that today...or rather it's not
    an easy feat to accomplish...so we end up with the situation we
    currently have - major segments of the population in places they should
    have migrated from some time ago.
    
    Cindy

    ... see.. the thing is ... that area can't be kept calm forever..
    sooner or later, it's going to happen... what's the point in... well...
    I don't know... I don't know..

Good note Cindy. I have seen that in my studies as well. People moved to 
certian areas to be in harmony with the vibrations there and would move 
from place to place. This is nearly impossible now.

    re: .321,
    	Bingo, my previous point with Sam exactly.  Part of our 'imbalance 
    	with nature' is related to sheer complexity and mass, and no amount of
    	spiritual attunement or shifting attitude toward the earth 
    	would of itself likely change that, for whatever other
    	benefits it might have.  Unless we started over in a cataclysmic
    	sense.  
    						kind regards,
    
    						todd	

    Is it really building up on the West Coast? 
    
    Or are we witnessing over reporting that makes it appear to build up?

    I notice that as the dreaded sate in May has passed, totally without
    incident, now attention is focusing on August. If nothing happens then I
    wonder which month we will choose next.

    Given the fact that San Francisco was severely damaged by an earthquake
    in 1906, why did they ever rebuild it? Surely it would have made more
    sense to move somewhere else where the seismic activity was less.

    Jamie.
             

    It won't make it until August... not at the rate it's building up.
    

RE: .309 (Arie)

    Arie, the apparent "goal directed" character of psi phenomena, which is
    the motivation for my statement about transtemporal feedback, is now
    widely discussed in the parapsychological literature.  Virtually any
    contemporary theoretical discussion of psi by anyone knowledgable in
    the field, will mention it, if only in passing or if only to reject it.
    It is now pretty pervasive in theoretical thinking in the field.  It
    was first explicitly discussed by Rex Stanford in connection with his
    PMIR (Psi-Mediated-Instrumental-Response) model of psi, maybe 18 years
    ago.

    The only place that I know of in the formal literature where the
    concept that I described here as "a kind of transtemporal feedback
    loop" is discussed is in some papers I did, also about 18 years ago.
    These were never published, but one was delivered at a conference.
    However, The concept is in my opinon, implicit in the various theories
    lumped under the term "Observational theories."

    In the more "informal literature" something which might be described
    rather similarly (though rather different when you get down to
    specifics, from my construct) appears in the international best seller
    "Dune" by Frank Herbert.  His "Golden Path" may have been influenced
    somewhat by the concept of the Tao, or perhaps by Sufi thought, or
    both.  In any case, it is not unlikely that modern Shamans might be
    influenced by Dune in their concensus reality conceptualization and
    descriptions of the Shamanistic state.

				    Topher

    Anybody that watched "Sightings" Friday night, did you notice that the
    Ouija board segment included some predictions that the army folks got
    from the board that matched very closely with Scallion's? 
    
    They said there was to be an 8.5+ quake in California, the eruption of
    Mt. Rainer, both by mid-summer 1993, and a United Europe by the end of
    this year. 
    
    The thing is, they supposedly got this information from a Ouija board
    back in 1988 or '89.  
    
    Just thought it interesting. It's a possible confirming source, IF they
    really got the information then, and aren't just copying Scallion. 
    
    - Russ

Carole Fretts and I watched that show together Friday night.  We 
thought it was very interesting that the six AWOL soldiers went to 
Gulf Breeze (as directed by the Quiji) and were subsequently arrested
by the Army as they apparently made their whereabout public, their
'predicitons' confiscated, and then given honorable discharges. 

Many of the 'predicted' events according to Sightings have happened.
Would like to hear more of the details of that case...

Ro

    Yes, Ro, I'd forgotten they went to Gulf Breeze. 
    
    It's almost like a contrived story, putting together components of
    several other stories or events like Gulf Breeze, Scallion, etc. Except
    we don't know if it's being contrived or not. 
    
    They went to Gulf Breeze to see a psychic. Why? And did she help them
    with anything? 
    
    Unfortunately, "Sightings" usually raises twice as many questions as it
    answers. I'd prefer the format be a bit more involved, maybe having
    only one story per show, with a bit more investigation. 
    
    We'll see what happens, though.
    
    - Russ

    A United Europe? Surely you jest.

    Jamie.

    Well, that's what they said, Jamie.  I think it rather far-fetched also. 
    
    russ.
    

    Anyway I think that a United Europe should really be listed under the
    heading of Man-made disasters. It is a bit unfair to blame it on
    Nature.

    Jamie.

    It  seems strange they were all granted an Honorable discharge, unless
    they also had  predictions  of an intellligence nature that would have
    to be disclosed at a trial??
    

    Well the dire predictions of increased seismic activity seem to be at
    an all time high. However reported seismic activity seems to be about
    normal.

    I think it is going to take a bit more than hype to get me to believe
    that the "Big One" is about to happen.

    Jamie.

    I'm curious, Jamie... what research are you basing your conclusion on
    that reported seismic activity is about normal?

    Perhaps the contents of the GEOLOGY conference?
    
    							Ann B.

    Interesting, Ann... what exactly is in the geology conference that
    brought you to that conclusion.  I'm curious.

    Well as June the first has arrived and nothing can be heard over the
    casting of clouts I think that we may safely conclude that May was not
    the month that the "Earthquake to end all earthquakes" was destined to
    happen. So much for accurate predictions.

    On what do I base my conclusion that seismic activity is normal? Well
    judging by the over reporting of any seismic tremor in California, had
    there been even the slightest build up there would have been endless
    comment. However the reliable sources monitoring the actual, rather
    than predicted, activity have not told us of any increase.   

    Jamie.

    Oh... 
    
    I was hoping you had access to some kind of study of seismic
    activity extending back for some significant period of time.

    If you go to the Science Museum they will have all the records. They
    have a recording seismometer

    Jamie.

    Which science museum are you refering to?

    The one in Boston. As science museums go it is a fine specimen.
    
    Jamie.

    How long have they been tracking seismic activity, Jamie?  Do you
    happen to know?
    
    One would think ... well... one would assume that to identify a truly
    "normal" pattern of seismic activity would take a very long term study
    ... don't you think?

    The Boston Science Museum opened for business in the late 1940's.
    It is the direct descendant of the amateur science clubs that have
    existed in Boston and Cambridge since the early 19th century.  (I
    went last month; the had an exhibit on their history.)
    
    Really, it only takes ten or twenty years of records to ascertain that
    1992-1993 has been typical.
    
    							Ann B.

    It only takes ten or twenty years of records to ascertain that
    1992-1993 has been typical?
    
    Gee.. I thought that it would take much longer... I mean.. for a 
    scientific study to be accurate.  Ten or twenty years doesn't seem 
    very long considering the subject matter.

    If year <x> looks like year <x-1>, <x-2>, ... <x-y> then it is a
    typical year.  The *sequence* <x-y> - <x> may not be typical within
    a larger context, but within the context which you and everyone else
    here has been using, "<x> is typical/not typical" is a very easy
    determination to make.  This past year has been geologically ordinary.
    
    						Ann B.

    If year x looks like year x-1, then wouldn't you need to know a full
    range of years beyond 10 or 20?
    
    All you can average that way is a typical year out of the last 10,
    isn't it?          

RE: last few

    It doesn't take very much data to destinguish "normal" from "at least
    fairly unusual", but it may take a lot of data to be able to say just
    how unusual some behavior is.  If you have 10 years of records then
    you can say that something is fairly typical of those 10 years, or
    near the extremes of those 10 years, or more extreme than is found in
    those 10 years.  But in order to say "outside the extremes found in 100
    years" one obviously needs at least 100 years of data -- assuming that
    one is only comparing things to the raw data.

    In fact, however, there are quite good models of the statistical
    behavior of seismic regions which would allow one to estimate how
    unusual any particular month is given only the model (which of course
    is derived from data for the region) and the raw data for that
    particular month.  Off-hand, I do not know the model, nor its
    application to CA (which, since it is one of the most intensly studied
    seismic regions in the world, should have a pretty accurate statistical
    model developed for it), but I bet that someone in the GEOLOGY
    conference could come up with it with very little effort.

				    Topher

From: andy@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Andy Michael USGS Guest)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology,ca.earthquakes
Subject: N. CA, USA, and World Quake Report 5/6-5/12/93
Date: 14 May 1993 02:40:19 GMT
Organization: Stanford Univ. Earth Sciences

DISCLAIMER -- THIS IS NOT AN EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION OR WARNING!
  The commentary provided with these map(s) is for INFORMATIONAL
USE ONLY, and SHOULD NOT be construed as an earthquake prediction,
warning, or advisory.  Responsibility for such warnings rests with
the Office of Emergency Services of the State of California.
PLEASE REMEMBER -- THIS IS PRELIMINARY DATA
  Releasing these summaries on a timely basis requires that the
data, analysis, and interpretations presented are PRELIMINARY. Of
necessity they can only reflect the views of the seismologists who
prepared them, and DO NOT carry the endorsement of the U.S.G.S.
Thus while every effort is made to ensure that the information is
accurate, nothing contained in this report is to be construed as
and earthquake prediction, warning, advisory, or official policy
statement of any kind, of the U.S. Geological Survey, or the
U.S. Government.
FOR QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS REPORT
  Send e-mail to andy@pangea.stanford.edu


Seismicity Report for Northern California,
the Nation, and the World for the week of
   May 6 - 12, 1993

Data and text prepared by
  Steve Walter, Barry Hirshorn, and Allan Lindh
U.S. Geological Survey
345 Middlefield Rd.  MS-977, Menlo Park, CA  94025
Graphics by Quentin Lindh

San Francisco Bay Area  
    
    After two weeks of minor earthquake activity in the Bay Area there was
a notable increase during the past seven days, primarily along the
creeping segment of the San Andreas.  For the 7-day period ending at
midnight on Wednesday, May 12, 1993 the U.S. Geological Survey office in
Menlo Park recorded 28 earthquakes of magnitude one (M1) and greater
within the San Francisco Bay area shown in Figure 1.  Ten of these events
were as large as M2.0, including two M3 earthquakes .  This compares to
just 17 earthquakes during the previous week, four of which were as large
as M2.0. 
   The main activity on the creeping San Andreas occurred during a small
swarm that began Monday evening a couple miles west of San Juan Bautista
(#5 in Figure 1).  It was capped by a M3.2 shock and included three
earthquakes as large as M2, including a M2.7 foreshock that preceded the
mainshock by about 30 seconds.  This is probably the most active segment
of the San Andreas in the Bay Area and it regularly produces earthquakes
in the M2 to M3 range.  The most recent notable activity here was a swarm
last December 10-11 that included five M3 earthquakes. 
   After just a couple of M1 earthquakes in the previous two week, the
Calaveras fault generated a trio of M2 shocks.  They included a pair of
M2's about 6 miles northeast of Milpitas, near where the Mission fault
splays off from the Calaveras (#2/1), and a M2.6 on the central Calaveras,
about 9 miles north of Morgan Hill (#7/1).  
   There were two earthquakes of note in the North Bay during the week,
both large enough to have been felt.  The first was a M3.0 on the central
Concord fault about five miles southeast of Concord (#3/1).  This is the
largest earthquake on the Concord fault in at least the past 2-1/2 years. 
On Monday morning a M2.6 occurred on the northern Hayward fault about 3
miles east of central Berkeley (#4/1).  This is pretty much the same
location as a trio of M2's that occurred in late March.  
   One other earthquake of note:  a M1.6 that occurred Tuesday morning
beneath the western edge of San Francisco Bay, just a couple miles south
of the San Francisco airport (#6/1).  Occasionally earthquakes of this
size have been seen here in the past.     
      
Northern & Central California

    It was a fairly quiet week throughout the rest of northern and central
California.  Except for the Bay Area, the only M3's were in the Cape
Mendocino area.  The first of these, a M3.3 last Sunday night, occurred
near the Cape about 14 miles northwest of Petrolia (#2/2).  With a focal
depth of about 27 km, it was likely related to subduction of the Gorda
plate beneath the continental margin.  It was preceded by a slightly small
M2.9 last Thursday morning that was also quite deep at 25 km.  A second
M3.3 occurred late Tuesday night about 44 miles west of Eureka (#7/2).  
This location lies about 20 km west of the continental slope, indicating
that this earthquake occurred within the Gorda Plate itself.
   Other earthquakes of interest in the north state include a M2.5 last
Thursday beneath the northern Sacramento Valley, about 19 miles south of
Red Bluff (#1/2), a M2.8 on Tuesday in the north Coast Range, about 12
miles southwest of Willitts (#6/2), and a M2.8 Wednesday afternoon in the
northern Sierra Nevada, about 19 miles south of Chester (#8/2).
   Central California saw only a few earthquakes as large as M2.  This
included a M2.4 and a M2.3 on the creeping San Andreas about 12 miles
northwest of San Benito (#5/2), a M2.3 beneath the western San Joaquin
Valley, about 25 miles northeast of Coalinga (#3/2), and a M2.1 along the
Big Sur coast, about 7 miles southeast of San Simeon (#4/2).
  
Long Valley Caldera
    
   The caldera was again active with a small but energetic swarm in the
eastern end of the south moat late Tuesday afternoon and evening (#4/3). 
The activity began with a M2.2 just after 3pm and continued at a pretty
active pace for the next 8 hours, producing a total of 13 earthquakes as
large as M2, the largest a M2.6 just after 8pm PDT.  Most earthquakes in
this swarm had focal depths of 8-9km, somewhat deeper than other recent
swarms in the south moat/resurgent dome areas that were mostly in the
depth range of 3-6km.
    Other earthquakes in the caldera include a scattering of M1 events
along the southern edge of the resurgent dome, a pair of M2's at the
western end of the south moat (#3/3), and a pair of M1's beneath the
southwest rim of the caldera, beneath Mammoth Mountain.
    Activity south of the caldera was limited to a pair of M2.0 events
last Thursday and Friday that were both located about 6 km west of the
Hilton Creek fault (#1,#2/3).
 
    . . .

 Table 1.  Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY  6 1050 54.41 36 43.54 121 23.93  6.08 50   .21  .3  .7 SJB   2.0
93 MAY  6 1115 33.27 39 54.22 122 12.72 22.36 11   .04  .3  .7 SAC   2.5
93 MAY  6 1232 55.30 37 36.77 118 51.47  4.49  8   .08  .6 1.1 SMO   1.5
93 MAY  6 1258 44.54 35 57.56 120 30.82  5.90 22   .06  .3  .4 MID   1.7
93 MAY  6 1341 55.20 36 56.33 121 40.21  6.32 20   .10  .3  .6 SJB   1.2

93 MAY  6 1536 27.68 38 49.61 122 48.71  1.67 10   .03  .3  .6 GEY   1.4
93 MAY  6 1653  9.37 40 28.90 124 37.73 25.08 15   .06 2.0 1.0 MEN   2.9
93 MAY  6 1926 48.23 37 27.96 118 47.26 11.16 24   .12  .4 1.0 MOR   2.1
93 MAY  6 2009 56.44 37 15.34 121 38.18  6.76 12   .05  .4  .8 SFL   1.2
93 MAY  6 2012 53.12 35 44.60 118 27.59  6.42  8   .04  .6 1.3 WWF   1.8

93 MAY  6 2059  3.99 36 56.37 121 33.26  6.62 20   .18  .4 1.0 SAR   1.0
93 MAY  7    1 11.82 37 39.05 118 54.54  8.01 18 1 .11  .5  .7 DOM   1.7
93 MAY  7   13  0.64 36 33.74 121  4.80  9.33 13   .04  .4  .8 BVL-  1.0
93 MAY  7  226  5.28 36 51.51 121 34.80  4.70 12   .09  .4  .6 SJB    .9
93 MAY  7  452 43.15 38 49.52 122 49.95  0.00 16   .30  .6 3.4 GEY * 2.3

93 MAY  7  729  2.67 37 38.86 118 51.04 11.19  8   .06  .8 2.3 HCF   1.0
93 MAY  7  734 15.33 36 22.50 120  2.59 23.12 13   .13 3.7  .6 JQN   2.3
93 MAY  7  736 57.88 37 39.27 118 56.13  6.44 11   .07  .6  .8 SMO   1.2
93 MAY  7  739  7.15 37 39.15 118 56.38  6.32 16   .12  .5  .7 SMO   1.5
93 MAY  7  753  4.49 37 29.03 118 34.46  8.22 13   .07  .4  .9 RVL   1.0

93 MAY  7  822  3.21 37 39.92 118 56.95  7.27 11   .13  .9 1.4 SMO   1.3
93 MAY  7  902  1.45 38 47.80 122 45.88  1.61 14   .08  .3  .6 GEY   1.5
93 MAY  7  942 30.71 37 40.13 118 56.61  7.28  8   .06  .9 1.0 SMO   1.0
93 MAY  7 1454 47.30 37 29.53 121 50.55  8.09 61   .18  .2  .8 MIS   2.2
93 MAY  7 1903 27.30 38 47.33 122 45.37  1.46  7   .03  .3  .9 GEY   1.0

93 MAY  7 1921 34.63 37 31.98 118 48.85  5.50 25   .11  .4  .9 MOR   2.0
93 MAY  7 2003 53.67 35 35.86 121  4.83  6.68 18   .12 1.4 2.6 SSM   2.1
93 MAY  7 2035 52.93 38 51.55 123  0.67  3.28 13   .11  .4 1.9 MAA   1.6
93 MAY  7 2338 42.19 36 42.01 121 17.80  7.09 19   .19  .6 1.1 PAI   1.7
93 MAY  8  221 40.24 38 48.90 122 49.66  0.19 15   .15  .4 1.0 GEY   1.6

93 MAY  8  229 16.67 37 34.93 118 50.72  7.84 11   .10  .6  .9 MOR   1.5
93 MAY  8  426 47.51 35 55.66 120 28.63  4.89  8   .02  .5  .8 MID   1.1
93 MAY  8  444 11.07 38 52.62 122 59.34  5.81  9   .08  .4 1.3 MAA   1.5
93 MAY  8  456 28.88 38 49.54 122 48.26  0.00  8   .10  .4 2.4 GEY * 1.1
93 MAY  8  547 40.81 38 47.56 122 44.69  0.94  7   .07  .4 1.0 GEY   1.1

93 MAY  8  646 37.22 40 11.92 121 21.45  4.52 13   .11  .7 3.0 ALM   1.9
93 MAY  8  825  3.68 38 49.84 122 48.16  2.18  8   .02  .3  .7 GEY   1.2
93 MAY  8  831  1.35 38 50.06 122 47.96  0.08 11   .08  .4 1.0 GEY * 1.4
93 MAY  8  832  5.15 38 48.77 122 55.51  4.48 12   .13  .4 1.3 GEY   1.5
93 MAY  8 1348 19.02 37 56.47 121 59.91 12.20 90   .23  .3  .4 CON   3.0

93 MAY  8 1436  0.60 38 47.83 122 46.86  4.32  9   .01  .3  .8 GEY   1.2
93 MAY  8 1946  4.47 37 37.39 118 48.85  4.63  8   .03  .7 1.0 HCF   1.3
93 MAY  8 2026 22.57 37 30.30 121 51.87  8.25 34   .12  .3  .8 MIS   2.0
93 MAY  8 2211 59.83 38 47.73 122 46.67  2.52  7   .02  .3  .6 GEY   1.1
93 MAY  9    3 26.22 38  4.39 118 49.72  7.08 10   .11 4.110.6 MOL - 2.3

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY  9  204 53.37 37 29.96 118 47.16  1.75  8   .17 1.816.0 MOR - 1.1
93 MAY  9  223 48.72 36 13.30 121 26.26  2.47 14   .13  .5 3.4 SUR   1.8
93 MAY  9  247 32.42 39 21.62 122 54.74  7.47 12   .09  .4 2.0 BAR   1.8
93 MAY  9  535  7.91 37 38.56 118 56.85  7.15 15   .08  .4  .8 SMO   1.4
93 MAY  9  645 34.43 37 38.50 118 56.92  7.13 11   .10  .6 1.3 SMO   1.1

93 MAY  9  720 13.89 37 55.25 118 26.40  6.40  7   .06 3.1 7.1 CHV - 1.4
93 MAY  9  822 19.80 37 39.01 118 56.80  7.71  8   .08  .9 1.4 SMO   1.0
93 MAY  9  842 57.17 36 53.28 121 19.80  3.85 10   .07  .7 1.1 QUI   1.1
93 MAY  9  956 34.85 37 38.53 118 56.84  6.56  8   .04  .6 1.1 SMO   1.0
93 MAY  9 1030 14.39 38 40.21 122 45.66  7.70 10   .03  .4  .9 NAP   1.1

93 MAY  9 1159  3.94 36 52.48 121 35.99 10.57 11 1 .08  .6  .8 SJB   2.5
93 MAY  9 1203 26.44 36 53.02 121 36.86  8.89 17   .17  .5  .9 SJB   1.8
93 MAY  9 1207 38.01 36 52.76 121 36.53  9.77 25   .16  .4  .8 SJB   1.2
93 MAY  9 1233  0.18 37 53.71 118 27.57  8.22 13   .09 2.2 4.0 CHV   2.1
93 MAY  9 1503 10.36 37 38.80 118 56.79  7.50 15   .12  .6 1.0 SMO   1.3

93 MAY  9 1503 41.97 37 38.80 118 56.88  7.35 18   .11  .5  .7 SMO   1.8
93 MAY  9 1520 54.23 36 49.20 121 21.38  3.29 15   .09  .3 1.3 HOL   1.2
93 MAY  9 1641 11.91 37 38.71 118 56.92  6.76 13   .09  .5  .9 SMO   1.5
93 MAY  9 1725  7.31 37 38.25 118 57.13  8.24 19   .10  .4  .6 SMO   2.1
93 MAY  9 1739 32.18 37 38.67 118 56.71  7.98 10   .08  .6 1.2 SMO   1.0

93 MAY  9 1919  7.72 37 38.10 118 50.81  5.73 12   .13  .5  .7 HCF   1.4
93 MAY  9 1921 29.35 37 37.80 118 57.86  8.16 12   .10  .7 1.4 SMO   1.4
93 MAY  9 1928 31.75 35 57.37 120 31.17  8.13  9   .08 1.0  .8 MID   1.3
93 MAY  9 2037 19.30 37 38.61 118 56.95  7.09 12   .05  .5  .8 SMO   1.4
93 MAY  9 2101 29.96 37 37.71 118 58.06  7.60 12   .07  .5 1.0 SMO   1.3

93 MAY  9 2236 31.09 37 38.69 118 56.79  6.93  8   .02  .6 1.5 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 10  230 50.88 37 38.37 118 56.58  6.35  8   .06  .5 1.1 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 10  510 13.95 38 47.85 122 44.50  1.40 11   .06  .3  .7 GEY   1.6
93 MAY 10  648 47.04 40 24.97 124 31.43 26.68 20   .09 1.4  .7 MEN   3.3
93 MAY 10 1131 38.35 37 39.99 118 55.94  3.47 15   .18  .6 1.1 SMO   1.9

93 MAY 10 1308 59.00 37 40.13 118 56.03  3.15 14   .07  .3  .5 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 10 1359 42.85 39 29.70 122 56.69  9.85  8   .06  .4  .8 BAR   1.9
93 MAY 10 1523 26.70 37 38.66 118 56.85  6.83 10   .02  .4  .9 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 10 1540  9.46 37 51.98 122 14.01 10.80 62   .20  .3  .5 HAY   2.6
93 MAY 11    4 28.99 37 40.27 118 55.89  4.72 12   .09  .4 1.2 DOM   1.4

93 MAY 11   31 10.49 37 39.31 118 52.25  4.66 17   .11  .4  .6 DOM   1.9
93 MAY 11  345  2.97 36 50.49 121 34.12  5.00 64   .22  .3  .5 SJB   2.7
93 MAY 11  345 29.39 36 49.45 121 35.85  5.96 18   .23  .7 1.8 SJB   3.2
93 MAY 11  355 12.16 39 24.62 123 17.07  6.54 12   .09  .3 1.1 MAA   1.8
93 MAY 11  459  1.73 37 33.44 119  1.92  2.43  7   .13 2.5 8.9 SIL   1.3

93 MAY 11  503 38.32 37 37.50 119  0.94  3.51  9   .06  .5  .8 MAM   1.3
93 MAY 11  507  0.28 37 37.62 119  0.86  3.98 10   .08  .7 1.0 MAM   1.6
93 MAY 11  509  2.38 37 37.48 119  0.83  3.77 10   .06  .7  .9 MAM   1.7
93 MAY 11  606 49.73 38 49.76 123  9.84  1.90 19   .08  .2 1.4 PAR   1.9
93 MAY 11  742 25.59 36 37.06 121 13.53  5.00 14   .04  .3  .8 PIN   2.4

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 11  804  2.16 37 38.69 118 56.54  7.64 12   .07  .5 1.0 SMO   1.1
93 MAY 11  805  8.39 36 37.11 121 13.30  4.86 23   .09  .3  .8 PIN   1.9
93 MAY 11  855  9.93 39 15.92 123 27.90  1.03 35   .18  .4 3.6 PAR   2.8
93 MAY 11 1010  2.05 36 50.73 121 34.57  4.82 42   .21  .4  .7 SJB   2.2
93 MAY 11 1058  9.30 38 47.82 122 46.80  4.26  7   .01  .3  .9 GEY   1.1

93 MAY 11 1412  7.98 37 38.90 118 55.84  5.65 13   .13  .5 1.0 SMO   1.3
93 MAY 11 1559  1.82 37 35.57 122 21.01  9.24 14   .13  .6  .9 SFP   1.6
93 MAY 11 1610 43.50 37 38.76 118 56.10  5.20  8   .05  .6 1.1 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 11 1636 51.14 36 48.85 121 32.71  6.21 60   .22  .3  .6 SJB   2.4
93 MAY 11 1638 30.33 36 49.20 121 32.30  6.00 19   .14  .4  .6 SJB   1.6

93 MAY 11 1658 21.14 37 38.39 118 57.30  8.07 23   .11  .4  .5 SMO   2.2
93 MAY 11 1703 50.83 37 37.81 118 56.84  6.17  8   .06  .5 1.1 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 11 1745 18.25 38 49.42 122 46.21  1.23  7   .05  .3 1.1 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 11 2203 37.96 37 37.62 118 51.53  8.56 24   .10  .4  .6 SMO   2.2
93 MAY 11 2212 29.16 37 38.39 118 50.80  9.96 10   .05  .7  .8 HCF   1.4

93 MAY 11 2301 43.30 37 37.40 118 51.72  9.17 17   .12  .5  .8 SMO   2.2
93 MAY 11 2321  3.77 38 47.79 122 45.00  1.00  7   .03  .3 1.0 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 11 2328 51.14 37 33.48 118 50.71  9.28  8   .02  .7 1.4 MOR   1.0
93 MAY 11 2332  0.48 37 37.54 118 51.61  9.06 26   .12  .4  .6 SMO   2.3
93 MAY 11 2334  9.56 37 38.47 118 50.63 10.15 10   .13  .8 1.5 HCF   1.1

93 MAY 12   19 40.69 37 37.42 118 51.41  8.60  7   .04 1.0  .8 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 12   22  3.18 37 39.03 118 51.47  8.22  7   .04 1.9 2.9 HCF   1.1
93 MAY 12   25 58.55 37 37.60 118 51.38  8.08 20   .11  .4  .7 SMO   2.1
93 MAY 12   27 37.90 37 38.70 118 50.14 11.64  8   .03 1.1 1.9 HCF   1.0
93 MAY 12  100 38.75 37 38.49 118 51.28  7.91 10   .09  .7 1.0 SMO   1.4

93 MAY 12  101 21.16 37 38.46 118 50.79  9.99  9   .07  .7 1.3 HCF   1.2
93 MAY 12  110 35.30 37 38.62 118 50.93  9.36  9   .06  .7 1.4 HCF   1.1
93 MAY 12  114 29.25 37 37.37 118 51.34  8.82  9   .03  .8  .6 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 12  121  9.25 37 37.60 118 51.48  8.07 24   .12  .4  .6 SMO   2.0
93 MAY 12  122  6.69 37 38.86 118 51.23 13.09  9   .14 1.3 1.7 HCF   1.7

93 MAY 12  122 59.60 37 37.65 118 51.36  8.68 20   .13  .5  .6 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 12  125 41.50 37 38.34 118 51.21  8.66 10   .13  .7 1.0 SMO   1.8
93 MAY 12  126  1.10 37 37.24 118 51.44  9.45  8   .05  .6  .8 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 12  126 39.21 37 38.41 118 50.09 10.04  7   .10  .9 2.0 HCF   1.4
93 MAY 12  136 28.49 37 36.95 118 51.00  1.06 16   .19  .4  .5 SMO   2.0

93 MAY 12  138 18.92 37 37.96 118 51.32  7.95 14   .10  .5  .7 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 12  139 25.54 37 37.75 118 51.48  9.39  7   .14 1.1 1.6 SMO   1.3
93 MAY 12  147 47.21 37 36.55 118 52.00  7.04  8   .16  .9 1.3 SHE   1.2
93 MAY 12  149 41.67 37 37.80 118 51.22  8.66 15   .10  .5  .7 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 12  202 37.05 37 38.40 118 50.67  9.82 13   .08  .5  .9 HCF   1.3

93 MAY 12  215 38.58 37 37.15 118 51.42  8.94 10   .09  .9  .9 SMO   1.1
93 MAY 12  221  7.89 37 37.75 118 51.34  8.20 16   .10  .5  .6 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 12  224 49.59 37 37.81 118 51.07  9.23  7   .01 1.2  .8 SMO   2.1
93 MAY 12  225 13.05 37 37.81 118 51.54  8.50 17   .10  .5  .7 SMO   2.3
93 MAY 12  225 54.32 37 37.54 118 51.64  8.38 18   .15  .5  .8 SMO   2.0

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 12  227  3.01 38 49.76 122 48.18  1.68 13   .07  .3  .6 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 12  232 43.80 37 37.72 118 51.29  9.38 15   .14  .6  .8 SMO   2.3
93 MAY 12  233 15.38 37 37.84 118 51.42  8.05 23   .10  .5  .6 SMO   2.5
93 MAY 12  234 57.38 37 37.98 118 51.58  7.69 11   .15  .8 1.3 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 12  239 41.59 37 38.38 118 50.32 11.30 10   .05 1.0 2.0 HCF   1.1

93 MAY 12  244  5.70 37 37.96 118 51.56  8.00 21   .22  .6  .9 SMO   2.2
93 MAY 12  303 39.53 37 38.31 118 50.80  9.81  9   .06 1.4  .6 HCF   1.1
93 MAY 12  308 54.25 37 15.24 121 38.11  5.43 68   .10  .2  .4 SFL   2.6
93 MAY 12  320 33.11 37 38.15 118 51.36  8.54 12   .10  .6  .8 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 12  329 11.51 37 38.54 118 50.70  9.88 10   .06  .6  .9 HCF   1.1

93 MAY 12  333 21.81 38 50.59 122 48.84  1.28  9   .08  .4 1.0 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 12  412 37.61 38 49.17 122 49.56  0.04 13   .08  .3  .8 GEY * 1.7
93 MAY 12  414 34.80 37 38.23 118 50.00 12.31  9   .11 1.5 3.0 HCF   1.1
93 MAY 12  518 59.47 37 38.59 118 51.40  7.88 10 1 .08  .7  .9 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 12  519 30.87 37 37.69 118 51.53  9.08 18 1 .14  .7  .6 SMO   1.6

93 MAY 12  616 58.44 37 37.68 118 51.67  8.25 27 1 .11  .4  .6 SMO   2.3
93 MAY 12  628 49.32 38 49.06 122 47.34  1.37 15   .07  .3  .5 GEY   2.0
93 MAY 12  629 46.20 38 48.87 122 47.19  0.00 11   .24  .6 2.5 GEY * 1.5
93 MAY 12  630  9.26 38 49.03 122 47.35  1.26 20   .09  .2  .5 GEY   2.1
93 MAY 12  637 35.15 37 37.70 118 51.69  8.81 17 1 .15  .6  .8 SMO   1.6

93 MAY 12  653 19.64 40 43.90 125  0.62 22.05 19   .12 3.713.3 DEL - 3.3
93 MAY 12  707 43.93 37 38.46 118 50.64 10.17 10   .08  .7 1.3 HCF   1.1
93 MAY 12  708 12.64 37 38.46 118 50.84  9.37  9 1 .04  .4  .8 HCF   1.4
93 MAY 12  710  7.67 37 38.27 118 51.22  8.38 12 1 .09  .6  .9 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 12  712 59.92 37 37.78 118 51.30  8.47 17 1 .11  .5  .7 SMO   1.6

93 MAY 12  714 28.43 37 37.80 118 51.23  7.91 16 2 .10  .4  .6 SMO   1.6
93 MAY 12  738 24.20 37 38.59 118 51.50  7.56 10   .08  .6  .9 SMO   1.1
93 MAY 12  853 41.46 37 38.46 118 56.79  6.66 13 2 .05  .4  .8 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 12 1102 56.46 37 38.75 118 56.66  7.87 14   .08  .5 1.0 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 12 1236 17.90 38 47.24 122 45.39  1.89  9   .03  .3  .7 GEY   1.4

93 MAY 12 1246  2.14 37 30.76 121 40.79  6.10 17   .04  .2  .7 HAM   1.8
93 MAY 12 1255 40.71 37 15.07 121 37.98  6.01  9   .04  .4  .8 SFL   1.2
93 MAY 12 1419 39.72 36 58.63 121 37.50  2.61 17   .15  .4 1.5 SAR   1.2
93 MAY 12 1419 59.70 36 58.68 121 37.42  2.16 24   .16  .3 1.6 SAR   1.5
93 MAY 12 1745  0.44 36 34.11 121  9.49  5.42 40   .13  .3 1.0 PIN   2.3

93 MAY 12 1902 49.83 37 38.81 118 56.86  7.83  7   .08  .9 1.9 SMO   1.1
93 MAY 12 2202 48.46 40 26.00 124 55.16  0.01 12   .25 9.312.9 MEN - 2.7
93 MAY 12 2245  1.05 40  2.32 121 16.02 14.15 24   .13  .6 1.8 ALM   2.8
93 MAY 13  310 21.03 37 30.25 118 40.11 12.32 20   .12  .5 1.2 WCS   1.7
93 MAY 13  537 28.69 37 15.18 121 38.06  4.99 31   .06  .2  .5 SFL   1.8

93 MAY 13  541 19.99 37 15.06 121 38.07  5.58 10   .03  .3 1.0 SFL   1.2

		. . .

Notes: Origin time in the list is in GMT, in the text and on maps
       it is in local time.
       N RD: is the number of readings used to locate the event.
       N S: is the number of S waves in N RD.
       RMS SEC: is the root mean squared residual misfit for the
                location is seconds, the lower the better, over 0.3
                to 0.5 seconds is getting bad, but this is machine,
                not hand timed, data.
       ERH: is the estimated horizontal error in kilometers.
       ERZ: is the estimated vertical error in kilometers.
       N FM: is the number of readings used to compute the magnitude.
       REMKS: obtuse region codes that denote the velocity model
              used to locate the event.
       DUR MAG: is the magnitude as determined from the duration of
                the seismograms, not the amplitude.  Sort of like
                going to echo canyon and measuring how loud your
                yell is by counting echos.
       FIG: denotes the figure/event number in the maps posted separately.

    [Explanatory Info same as before]

Seismicity Report for Northern California,
the Nation, and the World for the week of
   May 13 - 19, 1993

San Francisco Bay Area  
    
    For the 7-day period ending at midnight on Wednesday, May 19, 1993 the
U.S. Geological Survey office in Menlo Park recorded 27 earthquakes of
magnitude one (M1) and greater within the San Francisco Bay area shown in
Figure 1.  Seven of these events were as large as M2.0, including one M3.0
earthquake on the southern Calaveras fault .  This compares to 28
earthquakes during the previous week, ten of which were as large as M2.0. 
    The week would have been very quiet except for activity on the
southern Calaveras, a tight cluster of events located about 6 miles
northwest of Hollister.  As it was, this cluster of 14 earthquakes
accounted for over half the activity observed in the Bay Area during the
week.  These earthquakes began Monday afternoon with a M3.0 felt event,
followed by four M2's within the next 90 minutes, the largest a M2.9 (#3
in Fig. 1).  The most recent M3 in this epicentral area occurred in mid-
April of 1992.  Incidentally, the M5.0 in mid-January of this year that
was widely felt throughout the Bay Area occurred just 5 miles farther
north along the Calaveras.      
    The only other events as large as M2 were two M2.0 events last
Thursday, one on the San Andreas about 2 miles south of San Juan Bautista
(#2/1), the other on the central Calaveras about 10 miles east of San Jose
(#1/2).  Finally, a M1.9 occurred on the northern Hayward fault last
Friday afternoon beneath the Berkeley Hills.
      
Northern & Central California

    The main news this week is a M6.0 earthquake and active aftershock
sequence in the Eureka Valley area of east-central California.   The
mainshock was widely felt throughout much of central and southern
California and western Nevada.  Because of the remoteness of the
epicentral area, damage from the earthquake was minimal and no injuries
were reported.  A fuller description of the Eureka Valley sequence follows
the Long Valley caldera section below.
   Seismicity throughout most of the rest of northern and central
California was pretty low level.  The only area that saw any noticeable
increase was the Coalinga/Parkfield.  There were five M2 events in the
Coalinga area during the week, the largest a M2.8 last Thursday afternoon
(#1/2).  It was followed later that evening by a M2.0 on the Parkfield
segment of the San Andreas, approximately one mile northwest of the town
of Parkfield (#2/2).  Early the next morning, a M2.4 occurred northwest of
the Parkfield segment, about 15 miles northeast of San Ardo (#3/2). 
   Activity north of the Bay Area was also pretty limited.  The Coast
Ranges saw a pair of M2 events, the first a M2.9 fourteen miles south of
Ukiah (#8/2), the second a M2.1 about 18 miles northeast of Lakeport
(#9/2).  Cape Mendocino experienced just three M2 earthquakes during the
week, none larger than a M2.6 last Sunday morning (#4/2).  A somewhat
larger M2.9 occurred in the Gorda plate about 110 miles offshore of
Crescent City (#6/2).  Finally, a couple small 2's occurred in the
northern Sierra Nevada last Friday afternoon.  The first occurred about 18
miles northwest of Quincy (#5/2), the second about 11 miles southeast of
Susanville (#7/2).  
          
Long Valley Caldera
    
   Seismicity within the caldera was up slightly during the past week with
a dozen or so earthquakes distributed throughout the south moat area. 
Among these was a M3.4 event early Saturday morning that was felt in the
town of Mammoth Lakes (#2/3).  This was the largest earthquake in the
western end of the south moat since a M3.0 in early March.  
   South of the caldera, a M2.9 occurred last Thursday southeast of Mt.
Morrison and a M2.0 occurred about 4 miles southwest of Silver Peak
(#3/3).

Eureka Valley Swarm

    A M6.0 earthquake occurred at 4:20 pm (PDT) Monday afternoon, May 17. 
It was widely felt in California and Nevada with reports coming from the
San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento, and Los Angeles in California and from
Carson City, Ely, and Las Vegas in Nevada.  A fairly energetic aftershock
sequence followed, producing two M5's, six M4's, and at least forty M3's
as of midnight on Wednesday.  The number of aftershocks is typical for a
California earthquake sequence; their rate of occurrence continues to
decrease with time.  
    The epicenter of this earthquake (see Table 3) locates in the
southwest side of the Eureka Valley, about 33 miles southeast of Bishop
(Fig. 3a).  Part of the Basin and Range Province, Eureka Valley is about
15 miles east of the Owens Valley (generally taken as the boundary between
the Basin and Range and the Sierra Nevada provinces) and about 10 miles
west of the Northern Death Valley/Furnace Creek fault zone.  Because of
the remoteness of the area, earthquake damage was minimal (mostly products
knocked off shelves) and no injuries were reported.  
    The locations of earthquakes shown in Figure 3a are preliminary and as
a result show a fair amount of scatter.  Subsequent analysis will improve
the locations and refine the structure of the fault that ruptured in the
mainshock.  Even so, the aftershocks appear to form a trend oriented 
north to northeast.  This orientation of aftershocks is consistent with
the focal mechanism for the mainshock which showed vertical movement along
a fault striking in a north-northeasterly direction.  Figure 3a shows that
most faults in the Eureka Valley are also oriented in this direction. 
    The Eureka Valley earthquake is the largest earthquake to occur in
California since the M7.5 Landers earthquake in June of last year.   

USA Seismicity
   
    There were a number of earthquakes in the lower 48 states outside of
California according to data provided by the National Earthquake
Information Center (NEIC).  Several occurred in the Basin and Range
province, as did the Eureka Valley sequence described above.  Among these
were a M2.9 in southern Nevada (#1/4), a M3.8 in north-central Nevada
(#6/4), and a M3.1 in southwestern Utah (#4/4).  A second Utah quake
occurred in the northern Colorado plateau (#3/4).  
    Several interesting earthquakes occurred in the central and eastern
U.S.  A M3.0 occurred in southern Texas that was felt in the Jourdanton
area (#5/4).  The careful reader may remember that a M4.2 occurred in this
same area in early April.  Finally, a pair of small but reportedly felt
earthquakes occurred in the area of Reading, Pennsylvania, the second week
in a row that earthquakes were recorded in this area.
    
The Planet Earth  (May 12 - May 19)
  
    The Pacific margin was quite active during the past week, producing
seven earthquakes as large as M6.  Two of the largest were in the northern
Pacific along the Aleutian archipelago.  The first and largest of these
was a Ms6.9 last Thursday on the Alaskan Peninsula about 15 miles
southeast of Sand Point (#1/5).  On Saturday a slightly smaller Ms6.7
occurred in the Andreanof Islands that was felt on Adak and Amchitka
(#5/5).  The southern Pacific also experienced M6 earthquakes with a Ms6.7
in the Tonga Islands (#6/5), a Ms6.5 in the New Britain region of Papua
New Guinea, and a Mb63 in the Philippines region.  Along the eastern
Pacific margin, in addition the M6.0 in eastern California, there was a
Mb6.0 along the Mexican coast that was strongly felt in Mexico City
(#3/5) and a Ms5.5 on the Pacific-Antarctic Ridge (#4/5).  

 Table 1.  Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 13 1106 56.28 38 47.70 122 44.43  2.18 22 1 .11  .2  .5 GEY   1.8
93 MAY 13 1109 38.49 37 11.28 121 34.89  4.56 17   .08  .3 2.0 SFL   1.1
93 MAY 13 1146  8.04 37 21.40 121 43.09  7.59 47 1 .09  .2  .5 ALU   2.0
93 MAY 13 1244 19.77 38 34.05 122 38.88  6.00 11 2 .08  .4 1.1 NAP   1.1
93 MAY 13 1257 39.82 38 47.73 122 46.82  4.15  9   .02  .3  .7 GEY   1.2

93 MAY 13 1405 53.25 38 49.67 122 47.95  3.99  8   .02  .4  .9 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 13 1426 14.94 38 47.78 122 44.52  0.61  7   .06  .3 1.3 GEY   1.0
93 MAY 13 1528 52.03 36 16.83 120 24.11 10.29 33 2 .13  .3  .5 COA   2.3
93 MAY 13 1548 49.55 37 30.38 118 47.96 11.96 35 2 .12  .3  .7 MOR   3.0
93 MAY 13 1550  9.82 36 49.31 121 32.84  6.27 35   .19  .3  .6 SJB   2.0

93 MAY 13 1757 16.54 36 24.01 120 58.20  1.45 25 1 .12  .4  .8 BIT   1.7
93 MAY 13 2027 25.92 36 12.82 120 13.91  8.16 50   .21  .6 2.2 COA   3.0
93 MAY 13 2038 16.10 38 49.31 122 48.34  4.20  8   .01  .4  .7 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 13 2124 57.47 38 47.20 122 45.20  3.14 12   .11  .4  .9 GEY   1.6
93 MAY 13 2208 22.82 38 48.20 122 48.98  1.34  9   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.4

93 MAY 13 2246 30.91 37 39.36 118 57.18  8.98 13 2 .09  .9  .6 SMO   1.6
93 MAY 14   41 17.20 36 31.83 121  4.69  8.92 23 2 .06  .3  .6 BVL   1.2
93 MAY 14  255 57.15 35 54.43 120 27.21  6.45 37 6 .10  .3  .3 GOL   2.1
93 MAY 14  326 27.04 40 47.12 121 58.16 16.88 12 1 .10  .5  .8 SHA   1.8
93 MAY 14  414 43.07 36 59.83 121 45.46 13.48 20   .10  .4  .7 LOM   1.1

93 MAY 14  450 53.81 37  0.94 121 44.07  8.00 25   .08  .3  .6 LOM   1.1
93 MAY 14  843  7.54 36 32.19 121  7.20  3.24 21 1 .06  .2  .6 PIN   1.2
93 MAY 14 1016 50.95 39 21.75 123  6.58  6.43 10   .05  .4 3.0 BAR   1.4
93 MAY 14 1059  4.60 38 48.11 122 47.94  2.84 34   .12  .2  .5 GEY   2.4
93 MAY 14 1247 58.28 36  7.97 120 40.90  6.11 27 2 .08  .3  .4 SLA   2.7

93 MAY 14 1248  2.64 36  7.51 120 40.79  6.35 38 2 .19  .4 1.0 SLA   2.5
93 MAY 14 1415  3.07 38 46.86 122 42.98  3.79 34 1 .12  .2  .5 GEY   2.4
93 MAY 14 1416 53.71 38 45.49 122 42.16  2.32 15   .17  .4  .8 GEY   1.7
93 MAY 14 1557 40.75 40 17.95 124 30.98 21.19 10   .09 1.6  .7 MEN   2.5
93 MAY 14 1605 11.76 37 38.60 118 52.60  7.88 11   .05  .6  .7 SMO   1.5

93 MAY 14 1606 15.72 37 39.00 118 52.68  7.42 11   .05  .6  .8 SMO   1.8
93 MAY 14 1607 38.71 37 38.66 118 52.57  9.38 17 1 .11  .5  .8 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 14 1621 14.10 37 38.96 118 52.18  8.93 11   .05  .6 1.0 SMO   1.3
93 MAY 14 1624 28.85 37 35.91 118 50.11 12.24 24   .14  .5  .9 MOR   1.7
93 MAY 14 1706 22.01 37 30.31 118 39.99 12.44 15   .08  .5 1.3 WCS   1.1

93 MAY 14 1746 52.09 36 45.60 121  3.32  1.29 33   .23  .4 6.7 ORT   1.9
93 MAY 14 1955 23.65 38 49.48 122 49.69  2.19 11   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.3
93 MAY 14 2036 47.68 40  1.73 121 15.04  6.64 11 1 .11  .8 4.2 ALM   2.1
93 MAY 14 2043 52.96 36 45.65 121 28.24  9.82 29   .17  .4  .7 SJB   1.4
93 MAY 14 2045 36.57 37 38.42 118 52.39  8.53 14   .07  .4  .8 SMO   1.6

93 MAY 14 2058 21.08 41 26.93 126 19.86 18.99 25   .18 5.617.4 PON - 2.8
93 MAY 14 2211  4.00 37 25.88 118 20.51  4.67  8   .10  .5 1.9 CHV   1.0
93 MAY 14 2254 31.79 37 52.30 122 14.70 10.32 55 2 .18  .2  .5 HAY   2.0
93 MAY 14 2345 25.67 36 56.38 121 26.12  8.14102 4 .19  .2  .4 HOL   3.1
93 MAY 14 2353 50.78 35 44.60 118 14.89 12.05  8   .02  .5 1.0 WWF   1.4

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 15    3 54.40 40 16.45 120 34.18  3.44 14   .24 5.615.6 MOD - 2.1
93 MAY 15   31 49.43 36 56.56 121 26.18  7.62 84 4 .18  .2  .5 HOL   3.0
93 MAY 15   39 46.58 36 56.34 121 25.96  4.39 14   .09  .3  .9 HOL   1.1
93 MAY 15   43 21.61 36 56.48 121 26.03  6.91 53 1 .13  .2  .7 HOL   2.1
93 MAY 15   52 39.86 36 56.52 121 26.11  5.16 25   .08  .3  .9 HOL   1.5

93 MAY 15  101 38.10 36 56.46 121 25.97  5.10 21   .08  .3  .8 HOL   1.2
93 MAY 15  101 56.85 36 56.45 121 25.98  5.72 43 1 .10  .2  .7 HOL   2.0
93 MAY 15  114 48.60 36 56.42 121 26.02  5.10 12   .07  .3 1.2 HOL   1.3
93 MAY 15  115 39.64 36 56.41 121 25.94  5.97 58   .12  .2  .7 HOL   2.3
93 MAY 15  228 37.21 38 47.10 122 27.44  7.26  7   .10  .4  .8 GVL   1.2

93 MAY 15  447 54.56 36 56.25 121 25.96  5.15 28   .08  .2  .7 HOL   1.1
93 MAY 15  528 57.63 38 50.42 122 29.70  6.98 12   .21  .7 1.2 GVL   1.3
93 MAY 15  554  0.31 36 56.18 121 25.84  5.42 30   .09  .2  .7 HOL   1.2
93 MAY 15  615 59.69 38 48.52 122 45.38  2.02 10   .04  .3  .7 GEY-  1.2
93 MAY 15  650 41.08 37 39.49 118 54.35  8.09 11   .05  .7 1.0 DOM   1.0

93 MAY 15  727 18.39 36  0.84 120 33.82  4.91 12 1 .08  .4  .9 SLA   1.1
93 MAY 15  807  8.56 38 27.83 122 41.60  7.97 17   .07  .3  .8 ROG   1.3
93 MAY 15  808 20.26 37 38.63 118 56.76  6.97 15   .10  .5  .8 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 15  818 34.09 37 38.54 118 57.51  7.90 34   .16  .4  .5 SMO   3.3
93 MAY 15  821 46.93 37 38.72 118 57.01  7.21 15   .12  .5  .9 SMO   1.5

93 MAY 15  826 18.87 37 38.87 118 56.35  8.48 14   .09  .5 1.1 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 15  830 53.66 38 47.35 122 44.72  1.00 12 1 .04  .2  .6 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 15  905  5.59 37 39.06 118 56.55  8.75  7   .09 1.0 1.7 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 15 1037  5.27 37 33.29 118 26.13  7.24 15   .07  .3  .7 CHV   1.1
93 MAY 15 1103 49.47 40 23.69 124 15.59 10.34 17 1 .10  .3  .4 MEN   1.7

93 MAY 15 1107 39.74 37 39.14 118 56.66  8.26  9   .11 1.1 1.4 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 15 1243 43.98 37 30.53 118 48.07 12.62 27   .11  .4 1.1 MOR   1.6
93 MAY 15 1324 25.19 40 18.42 124 24.59 18.07 12 1 .10  .8  .4 MEN   1.9
93 MAY 15 1343 35.06 37 38.57 118 52.35  9.59  8   .06 1.0 2.0 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 15 1343 50.08 37 38.20 118 52.68  8.48  9   .05  .6 1.1 SMO   1.1

93 MAY 15 1503 54.94 40 25.75 124 25.46 10.64 13 1 .08 1.0  .4 MEN   1.7
93 MAY 15 1533  0.72 38 48.60 122 45.21  1.74 10   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.0
93 MAY 15 1613 10.99 38 49.51 122 47.77  0.59  9   .08  .3  .9 GEY   1.0
93 MAY 15 1646 46.02 38 55.00 122 37.37  4.05  8   .11  .6 1.5 KON   1.5
93 MAY 15 1737 33.19 36  1.43 120 34.16  5.44 22 2 .07  .3  .3 SLA   1.3

93 MAY 15 1833 41.04 38 48.83 122 48.57  3.64 12 1 .06  .5  .6 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 15 1849 55.42 36 56.33 121 26.02  4.62 29 1 .09  .2  .7 HOL   1.5
93 MAY 15 2128  4.46 38 48.77 122 48.38  4.01  8   .02  .3  .8 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 15 2132 11.15 37 38.51 118 56.68  8.17 16   .12  .6  .7 SMO   1.6
93 MAY 15 2135 30.85 37 36.42 118 56.15  8.85  9   .19 2.0 2.6 SHE   1.0

93 MAY 15 2139 21.82 37 11.81 122  3.08  8.21 24 2 .11  .3  .6 BLM   1.2
93 MAY 15 2249 31.34 37 38.51 118 56.60  8.48 19   .11  .4  .6 SMO   1.7
93 MAY 16  101 17.04 37 38.68 118 56.58  7.84 10   .07  .6 1.1 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 16  127 53.25 38 48.86 122 48.60  3.93 14   .06  .3  .7 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 16  300 14.13 38 47.03 122 44.40  2.15 17   .12  .3  .7 GEY   1.6

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 16  314  0.70 35 58.41 120 31.35  7.32 16 1 .04  .3  .4 MID   1.0
93 MAY 16  326 35.93 37 29.91 118 52.14 11.03 31 2 .13  .4 1.1 MOR   1.8
93 MAY 16  504  8.10 38 48.20 122 47.01  1.57 19   .08  .2  .4 GEY   1.7
93 MAY 16  546 33.72 37 12.57 118 14.34  8.01  7 2 .06  .9 1.2 DEV   1.0
93 MAY 16  720  2.07 37 38.56 118 51.88  4.89 30   .13  .3  .4 SMO   2.3

93 MAY 16  749  5.71 38 45.27 122 42.23  2.42 17   .11  .3  .6 NAP   1.6
93 MAY 16  749 38.73 38 44.97 122 41.65  1.79 14   .13  .4  .9 NAP   1.4
93 MAY 16  749 54.40 38 47.62 122 46.87  6.26  7 3 .14  .9 1.6 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 16  913 38.29 38 47.16 122 46.79  4.73 23   .08  .2  .6 GEY   2.1
93 MAY 16 1112 16.44 37 29.79 118 56.45  9.92 11   .09 1.0 2.9 SIL   1.6

93 MAY 16 1206 22.95 36 12.94 120 45.14  8.26 10 1 .08  .4  .7 BIT   1.0
93 MAY 16 1231 44.08 37 38.69 118 56.68  7.16 15   .11  .5  .9 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 16 1408 47.34 38 47.81 122 47.46  0.10  7   .07  .3  .8 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 16 1410  5.32 37 38.48 118 57.11  8.00 22   .15  .5  .7 SMO   2.1
93 MAY 16 1414 52.68 37 38.69 118 56.77  6.83  7   .01  .6 1.1 SMO   1.0

93 MAY 16 1434 15.12 38 47.08 122 45.51  1.34 16   .05  .2  .6 GEY   1.8
93 MAY 16 1437 25.17 40 19.67 124 37.14 19.60 18 1 .16 1.6  .4 MEN   2.6
93 MAY 16 1931 49.60 40  3.46 122 54.25  0.25 25   .35  .6 4.8 KLA   2.0
93 MAY 16 2000 47.29 37  1.35 121 28.46  7.83 65 1 .12  .2  .5 CYS   1.5
93 MAY 16 2104 34.74 38 48.87 122 50.52  1.73  9   .06  .4  .8 GEY   1.3

93 MAY 16 2109 56.22 37 28.66 118 51.07 10.24 28 1 .10  .3 1.0 MOR   1.6
93 MAY 16 2139  3.71 38 47.85 122 44.92  2.30 27   .15  .3  .7 GEY   1.8
93 MAY 16 2203 58.43 36 48.20 121 30.73  8.97 18 1 .15  .5  .8 SJB    .9
93 MAY 16 2228 25.18 37 38.17 118 52.83  8.52 27 2 .12  .4  .5 SMO   1.8
93 MAY 17  246 50.64 37 38.54 118 56.68  8.00 16 1 .14  .6  .6 SMO   1.2

93 MAY 17  329 37.09 35 34.78 120 46.56  9.10  7   .11 1.1 8.8 ROB - 1.2
93 MAY 17  422 30.55 36 56.58 121 26.10  5.83 40 2 .09  .2  .6 HOL   1.3
93 MAY 17  630 46.86 37 25.14 119  3.60  9.31 33 2 .12  .3 1.5 SIL   2.2
93 MAY 17  631 51.65 38 47.85 122 44.95  0.53  8   .07  .3 1.2 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 17  809 34.79 38 46.71 122 44.63  1.07 15   .05  .2  .6 GEY   1.5

93 MAY 17  811 19.90 37 32.01 118 49.85  8.95 13   .07  .5 1.0 MOR   1.7
93 MAY 17 1047 58.71 37 25.32 119  3.62  9.24 25   .13  .4 1.8 SIL   1.7
93 MAY 17 1058  0.72 36 56.68 121 26.22  5.80 45 2 .10  .2  .6 HOL   1.6
93 MAY 17 1101 37.74 37 38.70 118 56.90  7.26 16 2 .08  .5  .7 SMO   1.1
93 MAY 17 1225 24.29 37 38.68 118 56.60  7.23 14 1 .07  .4  .7 SMO   1.1

93 MAY 17 1431 54.04 40 28.03 124 29.03 17.53 21 1 .11  .9  .2 MEN   2.3
93 MAY 17 1505 40.16 37 38.50 118 56.41  6.64 10   .03  .3 1.0 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 17 1815 46.39 36 40.45 121 17.64  3.85 22   .09  .3  .5 STN   1.9
93 MAY 17 1918 27.31 37 10.61 121 56.71  3.05  7   .06  .5  .6 LOM   1.1
93 MAY 17 2309 33.36 37 16.74 121 39.20  5.61  9   .02  .7  .4 SFL   1.1

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 18   49 22.90 38 48.77 122 47.88  0.00  9   .09  .3 1.9 GEY * 1.4
93 MAY 18  102 15.23 37 38.21 118 53.10  6.47  7   .06  .9  .7 SMO   1.7
93 MAY 18  145 15.35 37 31.03 118 41.95 15.06 19   .09  .5 1.1 WCN   1.2
93 MAY 18  245  8.60 38 47.32 122 46.27  2.46  8   .05  .3  .8 GEY   1.3
93 MAY 18  250 37.24 38 49.01 122 48.53  4.41 11   .03  .3  .7 GEY   1.6

93 MAY 18  342 49.60 37 33.91 118 28.71 11.38 21   .08  .4  .8 CHV   1.8
93 MAY 18  540 11.29 38 48.15 122 48.32  0.00 22   .17  .3 1.3 GEY * 1.9
93 MAY 18  945 31.09 38 57.06 123 11.69  5.60  8   .06  .5  .7 PAR   1.4
93 MAY 18  958 32.63 38 57.11 123 12.17  6.01 47   .16  .3  .6 PAR   2.9
93 MAY 18 1650 23.15 36  9.44 120  8.23  7.48 12   .11  .5 1.0 COA * 2.0
93 MAY 18 1739 30.17 38 48.94 122 47.32  0.44 16   .09  .3  .5 GEY   1.6

93 MAY 18 2132 52.18 37 39.06 118 50.39  6.35 14   .12  .5  .7 HCF   1.5
93 MAY 18 2136 52.78 38 46.93 122 43.22  2.66  8   .03  .3  .5 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 18 2355 32.25 38 49.55 122 47.81  0.03  8   .06  .4 1.5 GEY * 1.1
93 MAY 19    3 52.19 38 49.77 122 47.92  0.98 13   .06  .2  .7 GEY   1.7
93 MAY 19  424 35.12 36  9.48 120  8.05  7.93 27   .21  .4  .9 COA   2.3

93 MAY 19  614 45.33 38 50.84 122 47.33  0.11  7   .07  .4 1.7 GEY * 1.1
93 MAY 19  653 38.57 38 49.68 122 47.03  3.06 15   .11  .3  .9 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 19  852 22.02 39 15.35 122 43.01  9.93 23   .22  .7 2.0 BAR   2.1
93 MAY 19  853 32.73 38 47.91 122 45.80  1.31 13   .07  .3  .7 GEY   1.6
93 MAY 19  855 36.80 38 47.76 122 45.85  0.02  7   .03  .3 1.9 GEY * 1.4

93 MAY 19  856 38.61 38 47.80 122 45.86  1.50  9   .03  .2  .7 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 19  956  6.75 38 48.67 122 49.62  0.95 14   .09  .3  .8 GEY   2.0
93 MAY 19  959 57.65 38 50.30 122 46.21  0.19  9   .09  .3 1.5 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 19 1435 28.51 36 15.85 120 24.77  8.20 12   .10  .8  .9 COA   2.0
93 MAY 19 1810 59.39 38 49.00 122 49.75  1.16  9   .10  .3 1.1 GEY   1.0

93 MAY 19 1811 10.95 38 49.33 122 49.89  0.00 40   .24  .3 1.2 GEY * 2.5
93 MAY 19 1812 48.02 38 49.21 122 50.16  0.14  9   .06  .3 1.2 GEY * 1.1
93 MAY 19 1942 50.15 37 35.09 118 47.04  4.06 12   .09  .4 1.0 MOR   1.4
93 MAY 19 2007  2.45 37 38.39 118 55.18  4.70 13   .12  .5  .7 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 19 2105 26.51 38 47.68 122 44.60  0.77  7   .06  .3 1.2 GEY   1.2

93 MAY 19 2137 39.03 38 49.49 122 47.85  0.98 16   .12  .3  .8 GEY   1.9
93 MAY 19 2138 51.35 38 49.67 122 47.96  1.39 25   .08  .2  .6 GEY   2.2
93 MAY 19 2221 57.07 37 32.98 118 47.63  9.24  9   .11  .9 2.0 MOR   1.0
93 MAY 20  110 26.60 37 33.69 118 48.72  8.31 11   .17  .9 2.4 MOR   1.0
93 MAY 20  237  7.70 37 38.71 118 56.95  6.51 12   .09  .5 1.0 SMO   1.4

93 MAY 20  406 12.79 38 49.04 122 49.69  0.19  8   .05  .3  .9 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 20  407 11.10 38 48.99 122 49.14  1.36 33   .16  .3  .7 GEY   2.4
93 MAY 20  408  8.89 38 49.48 122 49.62  0.06  7   .19  .8 3.0 GEY * 1.0
93 MAY 20  408 34.45 38 49.03 122 49.02  1.94  9   .03  .3  .6 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 20  409 38.25 38 49.37 122 48.96  1.61 21   .08  .2  .6 GEY   2.3

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 20  410 27.49 38 49.68 122 49.27  0.09  7   .08  .4 2.2 GEY * 1.5
93 MAY 20  411 11.11 38 49.83 122 48.82  0.20  7   .08  .6 1.2 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 20  411 26.51 38 49.73 122 48.78  1.24  9   .05  .3 1.1 GEY   1.3
93 MAY 20  519  4.92 38 49.64 122 47.37  0.02 14   .07  .2 1.0 GEY * 1.5
93 MAY 20  651 31.55 37 40.35 118 50.01  4.95  9   .04  .8 1.5 HCF   1.3

Table 2.  Eureka Valley Earthquakes(M>3.0)
      Preliminary Locations 

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 17 2320 49.22 37 10.24 117 46.47  6.75 35   .15 1.2 2.1 DEVD  6.1
93 MAY 17 2325 38.96 37  7.76 118 11.20 10.60  8   .11 6.2 9.8 DEVD  3.9
93 MAY 17 2342  5.14 37  2.86 117 47.52  0.38 25   .17 8.110.0 DEVD  4.0
93 MAY 17 2351 56.55 37  9.04 117 42.63  0.15 22   .29 5.2 7.2 DEVD  4.1
93 MAY 17 2354 11.24 37 10.77 117 57.13  9.20 15   .07 4.1 1.3 DEVD  3.4

93 MAY 18    0  7.74 37 10.28 117 51.06  8.80 24   .12 4.6 2.0 DEVD  3.6
93 MAY 18    9 42.61 37  7.90 117 45.14  0.70 30   .15 1.9 5.5 DEVD  3.2
93 MAY 18   13 55.75 37  7.09 117 48.48  9.06 18   .16 2.6 2.2 DEVD  3.6
93 MAY 18   18 12.24 37 10.09 117 50.03  5.49 24   .13 3.9 2.0 DEVD  3.5
93 MAY 18   24 43.04 37 10.62 117 49.07  6.78 23   .15 8.9 2.6 DEVD  3.1

93 MAY 18   56 12.99 37  7.03 118  0.30  0.00 18   .3117.9 8.0 DEVD  3.8
93 MAY 18  103  6.43 37  9.13 117 45.72  2.78 22   .12 1.3 2.9 DEVD  4.8
93 MAY 18  110 36.47 37 14.06 117 48.97  1.32 28   .20 4.4 5.2 DEVD  3.6
93 MAY 18  122  1.40 37 11.59 117 43.37  0.12 23   .19 2.5 5.3 DEVD  3.0
93 MAY 18  125 34.23 37  5.05 117 48.84  4.77 30   .14 1.3 2.3 DEVD  3.1

93 MAY 18  127  4.67 37  8.27 117 51.16  0.01 26   .28 5.213.8 DEVD  3.3
93 MAY 18  129 18.45 37  8.34 118  1.02  6.60 18   .12 6.9 5.6 DEVD  3.8
93 MAY 18  151 18.14 37  9.04 117 47.21  0.00 20   .21 5.7 6.8 DEVD  3.0
93 MAY 18  157 53.67 37 13.66 117 50.26  0.00 24   .17 7.4 5.3 DEVD  3.1
93 MAY 18  224 19.32 37  6.90 117 51.00  9.51 24   .15 3.5 2.3 DEVD  3.0

93 MAY 18  232 33.25 37 14.90 117 59.95  3.95 20   .14 5.5 3.5 DEVD  3.2
93 MAY 18  307 48.89 37  4.57 117 49.14  3.80 29   .14 1.3 2.0 DEVD  3.5
93 MAY 18  316 54.02 37  7.57 117 50.77  6.87 25   .18 2.0 2.6 DEVD  3.0
93 MAY 18  351 34.43 37  8.55 117 49.42  7.11 29   .16 1.5 1.8 DEVD  3.9
93 MAY 18  410 28.41 37 11.87 117 49.44  0.00 23   .22 5.7 6.6 DEVD  3.1

93 MAY 18  417 50.18 37 13.44 117 49.32  7.38 25   .18 5.1 2.9 DEVD  3.0
93 MAY 18  439  8.91 37 14.69 117 57.86  7.64 21   .14 5.1 2.4 DEVD  3.0
93 MAY 18  510 47.29 37 10.02 117 47.94  5.74 25   .14 2.0 1.6 DEVD  3.7
93 MAY 18  703 25.81 37  3.63 117 43.51  0.28 18   .1610.1 6.2 DEVD  3.1
93 MAY 18  819 24.89 37  5.53 117 49.32  5.63 29   .16 1.0 2.0 DEVD  3.8

93 MAY 18  904 43.06 37  0.08 117 44.86  0.00 10   .07 1.6 6.8 DEVD  3.1
93 MAY 18 1028 59.22 37  6.73 117 54.00  6.65 21   .15 6.7 2.7 DEVD  3.7
93 MAY 18 1056 15.57 37  1.14 117 45.03  0.00 24   .23 2.5 9.6 DEVD  3.7
93 MAY 18 1104 54.73 37  8.68 117 46.89  0.00 28   .16 1.6 5.7 DEVD  3.2
93 MAY 18 1439 46.24 37  6.65 117 51.99  5.00  9   .1613.4 4.6 DEVD  3.4

93 MAY 18 1453 13.32 37 13.98 117 49.71  6.61 24   .15 4.6 2.7 DEVD  3.3
93 MAY 18 1554 34.78 37 11.10 117 45.58  0.21 25   .20 2.2 8.0 DEVD  3.2
93 MAY 18 2057 49.78 37  8.53 117 54.80  6.51 26   .14 5.1 1.9 DEVD  3.1
93 MAY 18 2348 53.91 37  3.86 117 46.59  3.03 36   .15 1.0 2.4 DEVD  5.0
93 MAY 18 2357 42.67 37  8.05 117 54.08  0.50 63   .46 2.2 5.5 DEVD  4.4

93 MAY 19   12 18.02 37  6.84 117 52.04  5.26 32   .14 1.7 2.0 DEVD  3.1
93 MAY 19  317 48.28 37  8.21 117 46.95  2.33 29   .17 1.7 3.0 DEVD  3.6
93 MAY 19  320 58.06 37  8.84 117 47.37  6.07 28   .17 1.2 2.4 DEVD  4.4
93 MAY 19  442 49.57 37  8.97 117 48.27  7.31 28   .16 1.3 2.2 DEVD  3.3
93 MAY 19 1413 22.58 37  8.22 117 46.06  0.00 29   .16 1.6 4.6 DEVD  4.9

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 19 1448 30.93 37  4.57 117 45.13  0.37 25   .22 3.4 7.9 DEVD  3.1
93 MAY 19 1624 50.13 37  8.16 117 50.07  0.08 30   .18 1.8 7.8 DEVD  3.2
93 MAY 20  117 54.51 37 11.41 117 45.71  1.59 32   .18 1.4 3.9 DEVD  4.0
93 MAY 20  123  6.06 37 12.10 117 46.13  0.67 25   .19 3.0 6.9 DEVD  3.4
93 MAY 20  614  5.08 37 12.28 117 50.10  4.69 22   .17 5.5 3.5 DEVD  3.0
          
	    . . .

    [Explanatory Info same as before]

Seismicity Report for Northern California,
the Nation, and the World for the week of
   May 20 - 26, 1993

San Francisco Bay Area  
    
   It's been a quiet week in the Bay Area with nothing larger than a few
M1.5's.  For the 7-day period ending at midnight on Wednesday, May 26,
1993 the U.S. Geological Survey office in Menlo Park recorded 20
earthquakes of magnitude one (M1) and greater within the San Francisco Bay
area shown in Figure 1.  None were as large as M2.0.  This compares to 27
earthquakes during the previous week (May 13-19), seven of which were as
large as M2.0, including one M3.0 on the Calaveras. 
   About the only thing out of the ordinary were a trio of M1's on the
San Gregorio fault.  Two occurred just outside Monterey Bay about 10
miles southwest of Santa Cruz (#1 in Figure 1), the third occurred about 4
miles south of the town of Half Moon Bay (#2/1).  
   One of the M1.5's occurred early Monday morning on the northern Hayward
fault, beneath the hills of eastern Berkeley (#3/2).  This is about the
same location as a M2.6 that occurred on May 10.  Later that morning a
slightly smaller earthquake was recorded north of the Carquinez Strait
beneath northern Vallejo (#4/1).   
      
Northern & Central California

    Eureka Valley 

    The most active area in California was the Eureka Valley area
southeast of Bishop where aftershocks continue from the May 17th M6.1
earthquake.   During the past week, 75 aftershocks larger than M2.0 were
recorded including eight M3's (see Table 1), the largest a M3.9 that
occurred just after noon on Wednesday (#3/4).  Only the larger of these
aftershocks were felt in this remote region of eastern California. 
   
    The outer Mendocino Fracture zone was also active at the M3 level,
producing a M3.1 last Thursday morning and a M3.3 early Monday afternoon
(#1/2).  The nearshore fracture zone was active at the M2 level producing
a trio of M2's, the largest a M2.4 last Friday morning 6 miles west of
Petrolia (#2/2).  
    The Geysers geothermal area also produced one M3 earthquake:  a M3.3
early Monday morning (#3/2).  The only other event of note in the Coast
Range was a M2.0 Sunday morning about 35 miles west of Red Bluff (#4/2). 
    Two other M2 earthquakes occurred in the northern Sierra Nevada:  a
M2.2 Sunday morning about 4 miles south of Markleeville (#5/2) and a M2.4
Wednesday morning 10 miles southeast of Quincy (#7/2). 
     The only earthquakes of note in central California were a M2.4
Wednesday evening about 5 miles northeast of Coalinga (#8/2) and a M2.4
85 minutes later on the Parkfield segment of the San Andreas (#9/2).  The
depth of this Parkfield earthquake was only about 6 km, too shallow to
affect the alert levels. 

Long Valley Caldera
    
   Activity within the caldera declined during the past week with only a
few earthquakes as large as M1.5, all near the west end of the south moat
(Fig.3).  This was the first week since late February that there were no
earthquakes as large as M2 within the caldera. 
   The Sierra Nevada terrane south of the caldera was nearly as quiet with
scattered M1's, one M2.0 near the central part of the Hilton Creek fault
(#2/3), and a M2.4 south of Silver Peak (#1/3).  

	. . .

Table 1.  Eureka Valley Earthquakes (M>3.0)
Preliminary Locations

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 21  457 16.26 37  5.59 117 49.15  6.14 29   .14 1.6 1.8 DEVD  3.3
93 MAY 21 1912 15.03 37  9.78 117 43.65  2.19 32   .16 2.3 3.3 DEVD  3.2
93 MAY 23  601 57.22 37  9.45 117 48.87  2.68 28   .15 2.1 2.6 DEVD  3.0
93 MAY 23  605 21.65 37  8.28 117 47.41  0.00 28   .15 6.2 4.2 DEVD  3.0
93 MAY 23  611  3.53 37 14.44 117 49.58  4.44 29   .14 2.3 2.9 DEVD  3.1

93 MAY 26  855 44.39 37  7.03 117 46.61  0.14 30   .17 3.7 3.4 DEVD  3.2
93 MAY 26 1911 23.35 37  7.29 117 44.18  0.00 31   .20 3.1 5.6 DEVD  3.9
93 MAY 26 2035 32.16 37  0.09 117 45.65  0.76 27   .14 1.3 4.4 DEVD  3.4

 Table 2. Northern & Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 20 1207 50.03 38 46.98 122 44.80  0.79  7   .02  .3  .9 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 20 1247 22.85 40 22.91 125 20.28 24.39 26 2 .23 2.417.5 MEN-- 3.1
93 MAY 20 1409  9.09 36  8.22 120 12.21  6.96 17   .19  .6 1.7 COA   1.0
93 MAY 20 1431  2.89 37 25.21 119  3.70  9.70 24   .16  .6 2.2 SIL   2.4
93 MAY 20 1505 39.58 40 32.11 124 10.59 21.72 10 3 .09 1.1  .6 EUR   1.6

93 MAY 20 1526 32.25 36 33.94 121  3.78  8.82 20 2 .10  .4  .9 BVL    .8
93 MAY 20 1747 41.83 36 50.05 121 33.35  5.80 28   .17  .4  .5 SJB   1.3
93 MAY 20 1812 13.58 37 38.37 118 53.70  6.70 12   .08  .5  .7 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 20 1856 26.32 39  3.14 123  7.78  5.28 13   .05  .3 1.1 MAA   1.5
93 MAY 20 2020  6.72 37 38.48 118 56.41  6.66  9   .04  .4  .8 SMO   1.4

93 MAY 20 2028 58.45 36 50.23 121 33.19  6.39 23   .15  .4  .6 SJB   1.2
93 MAY 20 2103 55.98 38 47.17 122 45.22  2.63 19   .12  .3  .8 GEY   1.9
93 MAY 20 2148  5.66 40 20.80 124 32.58 24.02 14 1 .09  .9  .6 MEN   2.5
93 MAY 20 2240 45.35 38 48.73 122 48.14  0.93 12   .09  .3  .4 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 21   19  3.17 36 54.04 121 25.36  5.17 21   .12  .3 1.3 HOL    .9

93 MAY 21  308  5.17 37 29.84 118 43.22  5.16 16   .12  .6 1.4 WCN   1.7
93 MAY 21  442 55.93 40 17.52 124 20.22  7.79 17 1 .08  .5  .3 MEN-  1.7
93 MAY 21  454 20.87 38 50.06 122 46.86  2.24 22   .11  .3  .8 GEY   1.8
93 MAY 21  633 39.39 37 19.08 122 10.90  8.23 14 1 .10  .4  .7 BLM    .8
93 MAY 21  725 13.49 38 49.87 122 49.02  2.24 16   .06  .2  .7 GEY   1.3

93 MAY 21 1104 24.97 38 15.35 122 12.84  5.75 13   .22  .7 1.0 GVL   1.3
93 MAY 21 1221 57.74 37 10.24 121 34.49  3.05 16   .05  .4  .8 CYN   1.0
93 MAY 21 1235  2.45 38 38.36 122 43.40  8.84 12   .07  .3 1.0 NAP   1.0
93 MAY 21 1252 23.12 37 27.73 118 49.28 10.95 28   .12  .4 1.5 MOR   1.6
93 MAY 21 1335 28.85 38 49.49 122 46.64  2.91 17   .05  .2  .7 GEY   1.4

93 MAY 21 1408 50.10 39 15.09 122 42.57 12.84  8 1 .11 1.0 2.1 BAR   1.5
93 MAY 21 1422  8.28 37  5.36 121 30.41  7.27 14   .04  .3  .7 CYS   1.0
93 MAY 21 1601 32.01 38 58.32 122 32.32  2.14 11   .16  .611.8 BAR - 1.2
93 MAY 21 1704 38.49 40 17.21 124 24.14 21.27 11   .11 1.7  .4 MEN   2.4
93 MAY 21 1749 20.28 38 47.61 122 48.70  3.33 14   .10  .3  .7 GEY   1.4

93 MAY 21 1850 47.99 37  8.65 121 33.01  2.92 18   .08  .4  .7 CYN   1.0
93 MAY 21 1948 50.48 38 47.78 122 48.59  4.68 15   .08  .3  .6 GEY   1.3
93 MAY 21 2122 35.89 38 48.39 122 48.04  1.92 29   .12  .3  .4 GEY   2.1
93 MAY 21 2123 30.80 38 48.28 122 48.00  1.73 22   .11  .3  .4 GEY   1.8
93 MAY 21 2237 49.46 37 34.80 118 51.46  9.02 24 2 .11  .3  .5 MOR   1.4

93 MAY 21 2256  6.36 37 38.26 118 56.00  5.92 27 3 .13  .4  .4 SMO   1.7
93 MAY 21 2257  6.78 37 38.44 118 55.92  5.74 25 3 .14  .4  .5 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 21 2314 45.84 37 39.08 118 55.65  6.28 11   .07  .6  .9 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 21 2337 54.17 39  2.82 122 40.14  4.89  8   .26 1.8 3.3 BAR   1.5
93 MAY 22  319 53.99 38 48.56 122 45.28  1.24 11   .05  .3  .7 GEY   1.2

93 MAY 22  349 42.66 37 38.14 118 56.30  6.45 23 3 .13  .4  .5 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 22  408 14.08 36 52.18 122  9.80  5.76 20 1 .10  .9 1.4 MON   1.5
93 MAY 22  624  7.88 39 38.12 123 26.17  9.48 17 2 .11  .3  .6 MAA   1.2
93 MAY 22  633  1.63 38 48.55 122 46.10  2.90 19   .11  .3  .6 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 22  647 35.36 40 22.79 124 17.65  8.10 16 1 .10  .3  .4 MEN   1.3

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 22  648 27.39 37 27.42 118 50.66  8.33 29 1 .12  .5 2.0 MOR   1.6
93 MAY 22  658  2.32 38 47.22 122 45.51  2.55 12   .03  .2  .6 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 22  757 48.44 37 38.76 118 56.02  7.00 12   .11  .6 1.0 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 22  912 11.87 36  6.56 120 39.09  8.24 18 1 .17  .7  .9 SLA   1.2
93 MAY 22  959 50.13 40  7.91 123 47.57 22.37 12 1 .20  .9  .8 MEN   1.4

93 MAY 22 1037 33.69 38 21.63 122 33.48 10.21 12   .07  .5 1.3 ROG   1.2
93 MAY 22 1055 23.27 36 40.34 121 17.58  4.35 38 1 .06  .2  .4 STN   1.5
93 MAY 22 1152 12.19 38 49.28 122 47.77  2.94  7   .12  .5 4.9 GEY   1.0
93 MAY 22 1240 27.18 37 38.50 118 52.75  6.88  9   .05  .6 1.1 SMO   1.1
93 MAY 22 1331 34.03 38 47.28 122 46.26  3.29  7   .05  .4 1.1 GEY   1.0

93 MAY 22 1348 53.33 37 38.45 118 55.81  6.98 15   .10  .5  .6 SMO   1.3
93 MAY 22 1510  5.88 37 39.97 118 55.13  8.16 11   .11 1.2 1.4 DOM   1.0
93 MAY 22 1524 37.49 38 50.20 122 47.95  1.06 10   .04  .3  .9 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 22 1533 57.78 36  6.35 120 39.07  8.02 29 3 .08  .3  .5 SLA   2.3
93 MAY 22 1553  6.24 38 47.76 122 48.50  4.39  7   .02  .4  .9 GEY   1.2

93 MAY 22 1729 21.87 36 40.30 121 17.76  4.01  9   .05  .5  .9 STN   1.3
93 MAY 22 1754 47.01 37 18.38 118  6.19  0.60 15   .4711.933.7 DEV - 2.3
93 MAY 22 1915 47.36 40  2.53 122 52.66  4.65  7 1 .08 1.1 3.2 KLA   1.1
93 MAY 22 1946 41.58 37 30.86 118 23.72  6.33  9   .13  .6 1.4 CHV   1.3
93 MAY 22 2222 21.02 37 34.75 118 47.04  5.22 10   .05  .4  .7 MOR   1.3

93 MAY 22 2317  1.74 37 36.44 118 54.03  6.62 17   .12  .5  .9 SHE   1.5
93 MAY 23   24 36.67 37 32.09 118 47.35 12.11 34 2 .11  .3  .7 MOR   2.1
93 MAY 23  400 21.41 38 50.06 122 48.88  0.27  8   .05  .3 1.5 GEY   1.0
93 MAY 23  428 55.84 37 22.86 122 26.33  5.05 11 2 .06  .9 1.0 ANN   1.4
93 MAY 23  550 54.97 38 50.19 122 49.51  2.88  9   .03  .3  .8 GEY   1.3

93 MAY 23  552 53.45 37 31.98 118 50.00  8.96 17 1 .12  .5 1.2 MOR   1.2
93 MAY 23  707 45.69 37 39.75 118 52.07  3.45  9   .10  .5 1.2 DOM   1.1
93 MAY 23  815  0.61 37 34.61 118 51.22  9.34 12   .10  .6 1.0 MOR   1.4
93 MAY 23  825 41.78 40 30.68 124 15.76  7.33 17 1 .11  .3  .5 EUR   1.7
93 MAY 23  913 13.73 36  0.19 120 56.08  4.49 20 3 .10  .3  .5 ROB   1.6

93 MAY 23  924 51.99 38 47.43 122 54.34  4.46 13   .10  .4 1.3 GEY   1.3
93 MAY 23 1029 57.96 38 48.22 122 46.51  2.17  8   .03  .3  .6 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 23 1030 10.19 38 48.10 122 46.38  2.27 52 2 .15  .2  .5 GEY   3.4
93 MAY 23 1034 13.90 38 47.09 122 45.37  1.59 10   .03  .3  .7 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 23 1034 29.21 38 47.62 122 44.90  0.69  8 1 .03  .3  .8 GEY   1.4

93 MAY 23 1036 28.53 38 46.05 122 42.67  1.16 13   .07  .3  .4 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 23 1038 56.34 38 48.19 122 46.28  2.53 26   .11  .3  .6 GEY   2.1
93 MAY 23 1043 37.54 38 48.40 122 46.27  2.07  7   .03  .3  .7 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 23 1123 23.63 38 47.24 122 46.45  2.02  8   .01  .3  .7 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 23 1312 32.44 40 25.56 124 27.58 29.58  9 2 .09 1.1 1.5 MEN   1.5

93 MAY 23 1354  2.41 37 36.92 118 53.79  8.64  8   .06  .8 1.7 SHE   1.0
93 MAY 23 1434 51.71 40  3.71 122 54.13  0.03 27   .41  .6 4.6 KLA   2.0
93 MAY 23 1541 33.79 37 34.75 118 50.20  7.95 12   .11  .6 1.1 MOR   1.0
93 MAY 23 1602 20.17 38 38.47 119 48.20  9.16 19 2 .12  .9 6.3 WAK   2.3
93 MAY 23 1654  1.95 38 48.45 122 46.28  2.16 13   .03  .2  .5 GEY   1.6

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 23 1722 51.39 37 33.24 118 52.43  5.59 28 2 .14  .4  .8 MOR   1.9
93 MAY 23 2020 22.95 37 33.88 118 51.51  7.22  8   .07 2.2 2.7 MOR   1.0
93 MAY 23 2026 36.08 40 17.30 124 28.90 20.61  9 1 .12 1.1  .9 MEN   1.3
93 MAY 23 2354 25.12 38 48.98 122 47.57  1.57  8   .10  .4  .9 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 24  214  2.45 37 33.71 118 48.53  7.61  9   .09  .9 1.3 MOR   1.6

93 MAY 24  222  5.18 38 48.30 122 46.41  2.51 26   .13  .3  .6 GEY   2.1
93 MAY 24  314 52.32 37 37.74 118 55.41  6.01  9   .20  .9  .9 SMO   1.3
93 MAY 24  351 57.51 38 49.23 122 49.62  2.76 10   .03  .3  .7 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 24  452 56.43 37 25.39 121 40.98  8.92  8   .08  .6 1.8 ALU   1.0
93 MAY 24  545 16.28 36 50.18 121 29.00  9.76 21   .19  .6 1.1 SJB   1.0

93 MAY 24  602 37.34 36 50.07 121 29.71  9.10 14   .13  .8 1.0 SJB   1.0
93 MAY 24  951 57.27 37 51.60 122 14.31  9.69 38 2 .19  .3  .7 HAY   1.4
93 MAY 24 1018 48.75 38 47.46 122 47.39  0.02  7   .08  .5 2.5 GEY * 1.1
93 MAY 24 1132 31.61 37 34.70 118 50.51  7.07 32 3 .12  .4  .5 MOR   1.6
93 MAY 24 1203  4.18 38 50.57 122 48.49  1.57  9   .03  .3  .8 GEY   1.1

93 MAY 24 1319 46.83 36 46.13 120 52.36  1.20  7   .07  .4 8.4 ORT - 1.4
93 MAY 24 1537 11.12 38  7.27 122 15.08  8.45 32 3 .24  .4  .7 NAP   1.5
93 MAY 24 1547 30.75 38 48.35 122 46.45  2.56 20 1 .09  .2  .4 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 24 1716 37.92 36  2.27 120 35.38  3.06 11   .14  .6 1.6 SLA   1.6
93 MAY 24 1909 41.24 35 35.13 118 23.22  6.80  8   .12  .6 2.3 WWF   1.2

93 MAY 24 1951 30.89 40 26.87 125 33.47 16.00 24   .12 4.613.2 MEN-- 3.3
93 MAY 24 2017 36.57 38 48.07 122 46.73  1.42  7   .02  .3  .6 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 24 2209 37.63 40 24.92 124 35.38 14.41 14 1 .11 1.7  .5 MEN   2.2
93 MAY 25   17 39.75 38 48.60 122 46.41  1.38  8   .03  .3  .5 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 25  113  0.12 40 20.05 125 31.29 15.00  7   .1614.615.0 MEN - 2.0

93 MAY 25  113 11.58 40 41.74 124 36.30 26.37 13 1 .11 1.4 3.6 EUR   2.0
93 MAY 25  256 15.17 35 58.27 120 31.51  7.36 10   .04  .7  .6 MID   1.3
93 MAY 25  611 25.76 37 29.93 118 51.75  1.23  9   .10  .811.8 MOR - 1.2
93 MAY 25  620 51.41 35 55.32 120 28.85  6.86 14   .12  .5  .8 MID   1.6
93 MAY 25  813 36.65 38 47.86 122 48.46  4.39  8   .03  .3  .8 GEY   1.1

93 MAY 25 1115 54.60 36 43.58 121 22.27  2.29 11   .15  .4 1.0 STN   1.6
93 MAY 25 1137 15.45 36 52.12 122  9.93  5.80 20 2 .09  .9 1.5 MON-  1.4
93 MAY 25 1324 54.84 36 30.09 121  4.35  3.94  7   .08  .6 2.5 BIT   1.4
93 MAY 25 1338 33.28 37 39.49 118 55.73  8.85  8   .04  .8 1.8 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 25 1339 33.21 35 49.00 121 19.68  2.31 26 2 .13  .6 1.1 SSM   1.8

93 MAY 25 1510 48.92 38 49.53 122 49.89  1.14  9   .02  .3  .7 GEY   1.3
93 MAY 25 1655 34.16 38 49.94 122 48.81  2.07 28 1 .10  .2  .9 GEY   2.3
93 MAY 25 1751 46.88 38 50.59 122 51.32  0.78 10   .03  .3  .8 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 25 1906 33.19 38 50.42 122 49.59  3.23 19   .07  .2 1.3 GEY   1.9
93 MAY 25 1918 31.33 37 32.08 118 26.22  8.23  8   .04  .4  .7 CHV   1.2

93 MAY 25 1956 12.15 37 38.50 118 55.11  5.17  8   .10  .8 1.2 SMO   1.0
93 MAY 25 2008 18.82 38 47.93 122 46.40  1.27  9   .03  .3  .6 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 25 2015 41.02 37 36.99 118 48.84  5.14  9   .10  .5  .9 HCF   1.4
93 MAY 25 2119 15.48 37 37.54 118 49.76  5.13  9   .07  .5  .7 HCF   1.2
93 MAY 25 2305 29.86 37 34.12 118 48.97  5.11 10   .09  .9  .8 MOR   1.0

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 25 2326 46.56 36 44.98 121 35.61  3.43 11   .18  .7 2.0 SAL   1.3
93 MAY 26  706 10.57 37 39.27 118 56.88  7.70 10   .09  .9 1.4 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 26  730  2.52 37 39.21 118 57.06  7.29 13   .10  .7 1.0 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 26  734 18.23 37 39.18 118 57.04  7.43 11   .08  .8 1.0 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 26  802 45.72 36  4.70 120 37.00  3.69  7   .04 1.3 1.2 SLA   1.0

93 MAY 26  819  5.98 37 38.79 118 56.93  7.38 14   .09  .5  .7 SMO   1.7
93 MAY 26  906 25.94 37 39.09 118 56.95  7.16  9   .09  .9 1.3 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 26  956  3.72 36 39.21 121 16.17  5.95 16   .05  .3  .9 STN   1.7
93 MAY 26 1059 27.78 40 23.12 124 15.89 11.60  7 1 .11  .9 1.1 MEN   1.3
93 MAY 26 1137 40.91 40 49.69 119 36.23  0.03 30 5 .50 8.0 5.2 NEV * 3.1

93 MAY 26 1205 28.99 38 47.19 122 45.28  2.61 28   .19  .3  .9 GEY   2.2
93 MAY 26 1412 22.23 37 38.37 118 57.00  7.26 18   .13  .5  .7 SMO   1.6
93 MAY 26 1555 28.64 39 50.73 120 47.50  8.06  9   .15 1.711.1 WAK - 2.4
93 MAY 26 1556 15.13 38 47.77 122 46.53  4.44 11   .03  .3  .7 GEY   1.3
93 MAY 26 1603 51.52 36 19.46 121 46.03  5.39 10   .12  .9 2.7 SUR   1.8

93 MAY 26 1835 22.98 37 38.83 118 57.25  6.42  8   .01  .8 1.4 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 26 2322 20.55 36 44.89 121 22.57 10.92 14   .16  .7 1.4 SJB   1.2
93 MAY 27    6 30.75 36  0.73 120 34.17  3.71 16   .10  .4  .8 SLA   1.8
93 MAY 27   28 18.00 37 39.07 118 52.34  3.89  9   .04  .3  .7 DOM   1.2
93 MAY 27  407  0.99 36 11.86 120 19.77 10.54 41   .16  .3  .8 COA   2.4

93 MAY 27  531  9.46 35 55.58 120 28.81  6.00 35   .10  .2  .3 MID   2.4
93 MAY 27  550 12.17 36 46.45 121  8.30  0.88  7   .15 1.613.6 PAN - 1.3
93 MAY 27  616 18.46 38 49.07 122 48.49  3.60 10   .07  .3  .8 GEY   1.5

		. . .

Unless there is a space problem or somebody objects, I would really like to see
these reports each week at least through the end of July, just to compare them
with the GMS predictions.

I would also point out that the part of the report which mentioned seismic
activity around the world had several 6.0 or larger quakes.  The point is that
I could predict that if there were  6 or more 6+ quakes in the last week of June, 
then the world would end by mid-July and I would be pretty sure of getting the 
first half of my prediction right.

80)

From: andy@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Andy Michael USGS Guest)
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology,ca.earthquakes
Subject: N. CA, USA, and World Quake Report 5/27-6/2/93
Date: 4 Jun 1993 01:31:52 GMT
Organization: Stanford Univ. Earth Sciences
Lines: 444

    << Same explanatory matter>>

San Francisco Bay Area  

   Seismicity remained low throughout the Bay area during the past week. 
For the 7-day period ending at midnight on Wednesday, June 2, 1993 the
U.S. Geological Survey office in Menlo Park recorded 15 earthquakes of
magnitude one (M1) and greater within the San Francisco Bay area shown in
Figure 1.  Two were as large as M2.0.  This compares to 20 earthquakes
during the previous week (May 20-26), none of which were as large as
M2.0. 
  The largest earthquakes in the Bay Area were a pair of M2's that
occurred early last Friday morning on the creeping section of the San
Andreas fault about 6 miles south-southeast of San Juan Bautista (#1 in
Figure 1).  The most recent notable earthquake in this area was a M3.7
that occurred on April 3 of this year.  
   The Calaveras was nearly as quiet with only a half dozen M1's
scattered along the southern and central part of the fault.  A pair of
M1's also occurred in the Mt. Lewis area about 14 miles northeast of San
Jose.
   The only other earthquake of note occurred late Monday morning:  a M1.6
that occurred on the coast about 11 miles northwest of Santa Cruz (#2/1). 

      
Northern & Central California

   The Mendocino Triple junction was once again the most active area in
northern and central California.  While the total number of earthquakes
showed no great change from recent weeks, four M3 earthquakes were
recorded in the area, the highest weekly total of M3's since last August
when five M3's occurred in the vicinity of Cape Mendocino.  The past
week's M3's were more widely distributed with only one occurring in the
Cape Mendocino area (#2/2).  Two occurred east of Eureka (#4/2) and,  
with focal depths of 25 and 30 km, were clearly within the subducted Gorda
Plate that underlies much of northern California.  The fourth M3 also
occurred in the Gorda Plate, this time in the central part of the plate
that is seaward of the oceanic trench/continental margin (#6/2).  
   Other earthquakes in northern California include a pair of M2's near
the northern end of the Maacama fault zone, about 30 miles north of
Willits (#3/2), and a M3.0 at the Geysers geothermal area (#5/2).  Central
California saw only three earthquakes as large as M2.0, the largest a M3.3
that was felt in the Coalinga area (#1/2).  Similarly, eastern California
was largely quiet except for a M3.1 in the northern Owens Valley, about 8
miles northeast of Big Pine (#7/2). 

Long Valley Caldera
    
   Activity increased markedly throughout much of the south moat area of
the caldera during the past week.  Activity began last Thursday at both
the west end of the south moat, near Mammoth Lakes (#1/3) and near the
southern edge of the resurgent dome (#2/3).  The resurgent dome
experienced three more M2 earthquakes as of Wednesday, June 2 while the
west end saw a M3.1 early Sunday morning that was felt locally.  The
eastern end of the south moat was also active with M2.1 events on Saturday
and Monday (#3/3).  
   The only activity of note south of the caldera was a pair of M2.1
events east of the Hilton Creek fault, near the south end of Lake Crowley
(#4/3).   


 Table 1. Northern & Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 27  812  8.83 35 55.56 120 28.72  5.92 27 1 .07  .2  .3 MID   1.4
93 MAY 27  839 36.78 36  8.66 120 16.03 10.86 73 2 .17  .2  .4 COA   3.4
93 MAY 27 1057  8.75 37  8.39 121 32.97  2.43  8 1 .07  .4 1.4 CYN   1.1
93 MAY 27 1116 54.48 38 50.33 122 49.34  2.82 15 1 .04  .3  .8 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 27 1140  6.83 37 38.67 118 56.96  6.16 15   .09  .4  .5 SMO   2.1

93 MAY 27 1212 21.64 37 39.33 118 56.80  7.31  9   .12  .9 1.6 SMO   1.3
93 MAY 27 1230 43.18 37 38.78 118 57.19  5.97 10   .04  .5 1.0 SMO   1.3
93 MAY 27 1306 54.63 40 23.83 124 15.31 10.62 12 1 .08  .3  .5 MEN   1.1
93 MAY 27 1309  5.55 36 29.43 121  3.62  2.67 31 1 .07  .2  .4 BIT   1.9
93 MAY 27 1323 29.81 36 29.36 121  3.72  2.45 23 1 .06  .2  .6 BIT   1.9

93 MAY 27 1337 39.51 35 55.76 120 28.61  5.38  8 1 .03  .5 1.0 MID    .9
93 MAY 27 1423 58.78 37 38.25 118 57.27  7.66 20 1 .14  .5  .7 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 27 1510 27.66 37 38.40 118 57.06  6.33 12   .09  .4  .8 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 27 1602 22.28 37 39.01 118 56.96  6.98  9   .08  .7 1.2 SMO   1.1
93 MAY 27 1752 24.45 37 28.99 118 48.56  9.76 19   .09  .5 1.0 MOR   1.6

93 MAY 27 2010 40.82 37 38.67 118 56.76  7.22 13   .11  .5 1.0 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 27 2105 35.73 38 49.29 122 47.99  3.95  8   .02  .4  .8 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 28   32 13.79 37 39.01 118 57.34  7.26  8   .09 1.0 2.0 SMO   1.4
93 MAY 28  353 21.50 37 33.43 118 47.53  2.21 10   .11  .6 2.0 MOR   1.8
93 MAY 28  444 43.13 37 38.73 118 57.14  6.07  9   .05  .6  .9 SMO   1.0

93 MAY 28  612  3.58 36 57.33 121 33.84  4.79 19   .15  .4  .8 SAR   1.0
93 MAY 28  617 13.32 37 39.79 118 51.91  5.51  9   .09  .6 1.5 DOM   1.4
93 MAY 28  627  0.49 37 39.40 118 52.32  3.76 10   .10  .4 1.2 DOM   1.3
93 MAY 28  628  0.71 37 39.27 118 52.31  3.88 11   .15  .6 1.6 DOM   1.7
93 MAY 28  631  3.91 37 39.04 118 52.72  5.06 28   .16  .4  .7 DOM   2.6

93 MAY 28  812  8.81 36 46.09 121 29.68  9.45 71   .23  .3  .6 SJB   2.3
93 MAY 28  819  2.67 37 39.72 118 55.84  3.46 13   .18  .6 1.1 SMO   1.5
93 MAY 28  858 24.38 36 13.60 120 47.01  5.45  8   .10  .5  .8 BIT   1.2
93 MAY 28  942 24.72 36 46.02 121 29.80  9.15 66   .23  .3  .6 SJB   2.2
93 MAY 28  956 49.74 38 48.12 122 47.84  1.85 11   .12  .4  .6 GEY   1.4

93 MAY 28 1018 52.26 38 50.07 122 48.90  1.10 13   .06  .3  .7 GEY   1.5
93 MAY 28 1028 18.11 37 14.93 121 37.99  3.79 28   .05  .2  .6 SFL   1.5
93 MAY 28 1033 41.47 36 23.16 120 57.33  1.26  7   .08  .4 1.3 BIT   1.7
93 MAY 28 1139 54.85 37  7.56 122  5.63  6.16  7   .09  .6 1.4 ANN   1.0
93 MAY 28 1237 49.20 37 38.91 118 52.48  4.72  9   .04  .3  .6 SMO   1.2

93 MAY 28 1245  1.95 37 38.93 118 52.60  4.93 20   .14  .4  .6 SMO   2.2
93 MAY 28 1708 52.72 37  4.02 121 29.46  9.30 36   .06  .2  .5 CYS   1.2
93 MAY 28 1856 22.08 38 49.35 122 48.09  3.90 10   .04  .4  .6 GEY   1.2
93 MAY 28 1942 50.79 37 22.34 121 43.86  6.45 18 1 .05  .2  .5 ALU   1.0
93 MAY 28 2109 12.19 37 38.08 118 52.18  8.04  8   .13  .9 1.1 SMO   1.1

93 MAY 28 2257 44.95 37 39.80 118 51.91  5.68  8   .03  .6 1.2 DOM   1.0
93 MAY 28 2354 40.56 36 27.27 121  0.46  8.48 19 1 .08  .3  .9 BIT   1.2
93 MAY 29  118 58.75 38 45.81 122 43.53  2.29 12   .06  .3  .4 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 29  204 50.96 36 19.84 120 31.26 13.49 53   .19  .3  .8 COA   2.1
93 MAY 29  315 58.67 40 27.25 124 42.27 21.95  8   .06 2.7  .8 MEN   2.6

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 29  341 16.39 36 36.42 121 12.76  2.35 23 1 .07  .2  .6 PIN   1.4
93 MAY 29  437  5.88 39  1.62 123  4.49  0.37 14   .07  .2 1.5 MAA   1.5
93 MAY 29  520 59.97 39 37.09 123  7.48  3.10  9   .05  .4 2.6 BAR   1.7
93 MAY 29  626 54.60 37 28.04 121 41.01  8.39 22 1 .04  .2  .5 HAM   1.0
93 MAY 29 1358  6.43 39 50.31 123 29.76  5.78 20   .14  .4  .7 MAA   2.2

93 MAY 29 1549 51.11 40 48.00 123 53.77 24.67 19   .12  .5  .8 EUR   3.2
93 MAY 29 1603 51.54 36 27.18 120 11.81 15.50 25   .15  .6  .4 JQN   2.5
93 MAY 29 1611 52.15 36 33.36 121  7.20  4.70 24 3 .11  .3  .9 PIN   1.5
93 MAY 29 1613 27.04 38 47.57 122 46.57  4.93 16   .04  .2  .5 GEY   1.6
93 MAY 29 1646  3.65 39 50.30 123 29.53  6.54 15   .18  .6 1.0 MAA   2.1

93 MAY 29 1755 13.17 37 37.91 118 51.96  4.06 18   .16  .5 1.2 SMO   2.2
93 MAY 29 2034 52.62 37 38.42 118 57.15  7.33 23 1 .18  .5  .8 SMO   1.9
93 MAY 29 2225  6.35 37 38.11 118 51.04  7.98 10   .10  .5  .8 SMO   1.2
93 MAY 29 2302 21.66 38 50.17 122 52.73  3.12 12   .04  .5 1.4 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 30  202 14.83 40 40.28 123 26.09 29.45 26   .13  .4 1.2 KLA   3.4

93 MAY 30  316 41.98 39 19.74 122 53.01  6.39 11   .04  .3 2.3 BAR   1.6
93 MAY 30  407 14.38 37 39.88 118 50.74  2.98  8   .10  .5 1.1 HCF   1.3
93 MAY 30  531 38.45 37 38.17 118 56.90  4.22  9   .06  .6 1.2 SMO   1.1
93 MAY 30  855 32.88 37 38.26 118 56.55  8.20 27   .14  .4  .6 SMO   3.1
93 MAY 30 1041 11.97 38 49.02 122 49.84  1.26  7   .05  .6  .8 GEY   1.0

93 MAY 30 1209 54.31 38 49.41 122 46.55  2.83 18   .05  .2  .6 GEY   1.4
93 MAY 30 1243 47.83 38 47.93 122 46.51  1.50  7   .04  .3  .7 GEY   1.0
93 MAY 30 1515  9.27 40 24.82 124 11.83 30.55 17   .09  .6 1.0 MEN   2.3
93 MAY 30 1839 37.92 40 16.96 124 29.94  2.05 16   .26 2.4 2.7 MEN   3.2
93 MAY 30 2107  3.05 38 53.25 123  0.32  3.74 29   .12  .3 1.2 MAA   2.2

93 MAY 30 2108 20.76 38 53.00 123  0.14  6.22 16   .11  .3 1.2 MAA   1.8
93 MAY 31  209 53.72 38 50.04 122 48.91  1.71 37   .16  .3  .9 GEY   3.0
93 MAY 31  212 43.73 38 49.76 122 49.28  1.19 29   .12  .2  .8 GEY   2.4
93 MAY 31  214  3.24 38 49.57 122 49.32  0.52  9   .05  .3  .9 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 31  214 53.93 38 49.80 122 49.37  1.16  9   .04  .3  .8 GEY   1.5

93 MAY 31  436 13.06 38 49.55 122 47.47  1.50  8   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 31  515 30.64 37 38.48 118 50.13  6.31  7   .07  .7 1.7 HCF   1.0
93 MAY 31  538 28.50 36 40.74 121  4.69  6.69  7   .17 2.8 3.6 PAN   1.3
93 MAY 31  709 30.39 38 47.80 122 45.81  1.87 16   .07  .2  .6 GEY   1.8
93 MAY 31  738 43.57 37 26.14 121 40.73  6.45  8   .01  .4 1.0 HAM   1.0

93 MAY 31 1124 47.94 37 36.69 118 48.15  4.35 18   .12  .4  .6 HCF   1.9
93 MAY 31 1156 38.38 38 48.72 122 47.02  1.72 18   .07  .2  .4 GEY   1.7
93 MAY 31 1253 13.99 37 38.22 118 56.67  9.42 15   .11  .4  .8 SMO   1.9
93 MAY 31 1430 55.97 38 48.42 122 48.43  1.02  7   .07  .5  .4 GEY   1.1
93 MAY 31 1536 32.31 37 38.07 118 54.66 10.06  8   .17 1.6 4.0 SMO   1.4

93 MAY 31 1800 44.37 37  0.73 122 13.02  6.88 12   .12 1.5 1.7 MON   1.6
93 MAY 31 1851 16.53 38 47.50 122 46.67  0.03  9   .11  .5 1.0 GEY * 1.7
93 MAY 31 1911 22.37 37 33.52 118 51.42  8.95 19   .15  .4  .9 MOR   1.8
93 MAY 31 1921 47.41 37 36.46 118 48.85  7.10 10   .10  .6  .9 HCF   1.4
93 MAY 31 1956 16.47 38 47.61 122 46.74  2.92  7   .04  .3  .7 GEY   1.0

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 MAY 31 2141  5.34 37 38.88 118 52.59  5.15 20   .14  .4  .6 SMO   2.1
93 JUN  1   51 51.04 39 29.02 122 59.72  8.87 23   .11  .3  .7 BAR   1.8
93 JUN  1  141 21.36 36 11.46 120 19.27  8.83 33 3 .12  .2  .4 COA   2.1
93 JUN  1  319 20.96 40 13.71 124 10.21 11.72 27 1 .17  .3  .3 MEN   2.8
93 JUN  1  359 10.94 36 27.89 121  0.59  2.33  8   .06  .4 1.0 BIT   1.6

93 JUN  1  541 55.44 38 49.41 122 49.87  0.01  9   .12  .5 2.8 GEY * 1.8
93 JUN  1  558  1.82 37 38.86 118 52.76  9.34  7   .02  .9 3.0 SMO   1.5
93 JUN  1  704 10.71 36 56.67 121 41.06  9.84 28   .12  .3  .7 SJB   1.2
93 JUN  1  828 29.70 37 38.96 118 52.26  4.90 17   .13  .5  .7 SMO   2.6
93 JUN  1  834  7.75 36 48.01 121 31.26  6.07 46   .25  .4  .8 SJB   1.9

93 JUN  1  849 43.26 38 48.18 122 47.02  0.03  9   .09  .3 1.4 GEY * 1.5
93 JUN  1  907  3.02 37 39.53 118 52.12  3.54 12   .09  .4  .9 DOM   1.7
93 JUN  1  917 26.05 37 39.73 118 51.94  5.24  8   .01  .6 1.1 DOM   1.3
93 JUN  1  928 56.46 37 39.80 118 51.96  5.10  8   .02  .5 1.1 DOM   1.4
93 JUN  1  931 24.30 37 39.16 118 50.40  9.20  8   .12 1.3 2.8 HCF   1.5

93 JUN  1  944 34.69 37 39.41 118 52.29  3.40 14   .11  .4 1.0 DOM   2.0
93 JUN  1 1008  7.66 37 39.54 118 51.95  5.52  7   .06 1.2 2.2 DOM   1.1
93 JUN  1 1019 41.33 38 47.80 122 48.47  4.43 13   .02  .3  .6 GEY   1.6
93 JUN  1 1024 18.47 37 39.85 118 51.62  5.97  9   .03  .6 1.2 DOM   1.5
93 JUN  1 1112 47.95 37 39.86 118 51.95  5.42  8   .03  .6 1.1 DOM   1.1

93 JUN  1 1120 23.32 37 39.89 118 51.87  4.57  8   .03  .5 1.3 DOM   1.1
93 JUN  1 1307 58.78 39 50.66 123 29.20  6.83 17 1 .12  .3  .5 MAA   1.3
93 JUN  1 1415 24.42 37 39.38 118 52.13  4.02 12   .11  .4  .8 DOM   1.7
93 JUN  1 1612 13.63 38 49.67 122 49.91  1.60 14   .04  .2  .6 GEY   1.9
93 JUN  1 1612 39.94 37 35.03 118 44.99  6.46 23   .09  .3  .9 CAS   2.1

93 JUN  1 1621  0.04 35 47.11 120 20.30  8.98 23 2 .12  .3  .8 GOL   1.5
93 JUN  1 1922 11.85 41 46.99 125 44.98 23.04 26 1 .32 4.119.4 PON * 3.1
93 JUN  1 1949 49.22 37 39.87 118 51.92  5.11  8   .04  .6 1.0 DOM   1.3
93 JUN  1 1955 20.86 38 47.64 122 45.07  1.73  7   .03  .3  .9 GEY   1.1
93 JUN  1 2007 40.77 37 39.03 118 56.49  6.03 12   .06  .4  .6 SMO   1.2

93 JUN  1 2048 42.91 37 38.89 118 56.10  7.21 11   .10  .6 1.3 SMO   1.3
93 JUN  1 2213  2.46 37 39.07 118 56.37  6.26 13   .12  .5  .8 SMO   1.6
93 JUN  1 2226 47.73 37 38.75 118 55.78  7.49 10   .08  .5  .9 SMO   1.1
93 JUN  1 2250 52.30 37 38.80 118 52.54  5.41 14   .08  .3  .6 SMO   1.7
93 JUN  2  113  8.70 37 35.16 118 50.66  6.07  7   .19 1.3 1.5 MOR   1.1

93 JUN  2  310 49.24 37 39.57 118 55.87  8.06  8   .05  .9 1.1 SMO   1.0
93 JUN  2  351  9.43 38 49.99 122 46.60  1.35 17   .06  .2  .6 GEY   1.9
93 JUN  2  354  5.78 35 36.70 118 21.55  7.29  9   .14  .6 1.9 WWF   1.6
93 JUN  2  356 49.16 38 49.66 122 49.94  1.21  9   .06  .3  .8 GEY   1.4
93 JUN  2  506  3.39 37 39.58 118 51.86  4.48 11 1 .10  .5 1.0 DOM   1.6

93 JUN  2  652 16.97 38 47.29 122 44.02  0.05  8   .06  .4 1.1 GEY * 1.5
93 JUN  2  716  1.75 37 39.14 118 52.44  5.07 17   .15  .5  .7 DOM   1.8
93 JUN  2  716 30.09 37 37.93 118 52.83  0.03 15   .18  .5  .3 SMO * 2.2
93 JUN  2  744 29.27 37 39.24 118 52.50  4.16 31 2 .11  .3  .5 DOM   2.9
93 JUN  2  745 57.54 37 39.26 118 52.53  4.48 24 1 .09  .3  .5 DOM   2.3

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN  2  747 25.58 37 39.57 118 52.34  3.41  9   .11  .5 1.5 DOM   1.4
93 JUN  2  750 42.70 37 39.83 118 51.61  6.44  8   .07  .7 1.8 DOM   1.1
93 JUN  2  751 13.96 37 39.38 118 52.38  4.79 12   .04  .4  .6 DOM   1.5
93 JUN  2  755 13.82 37 39.32 118 52.26  3.63 11   .11  .5 1.0 DOM   1.5
93 JUN  2  756  2.07 37 39.14 118 52.46  4.29 18   .13  .4  .7 DOM   1.9

93 JUN  2  756 53.00 37 39.76 118 52.23  4.13 10   .11  .6 1.2 DOM   1.4
93 JUN  2  801 21.17 37 39.02 118 52.35  5.28 15   .13  .5  .6 DOM   1.8
93 JUN  2  836 19.56 37 39.76 118 51.97  3.28  9   .16  .8 2.1 DOM   1.4
93 JUN  2  859  2.57 37 39.80 118 52.22  4.82  9   .07  .5 1.1 DOM   1.6
93 JUN  2  902 58.81 37 40.00 118 52.20  5.18  8   .03  .6 1.1 DOM   1.2

93 JUN  2  907 31.03 37 39.95 118 52.18  4.47  8   .06  .5 1.4 DOM   1.0
93 JUN  2  911  6.86 39 24.24 121 29.93  2.77 19 2 .13  .4 1.5 ORO-  1.9
93 JUN  2  928  6.00 37 35.20 118 50.18 10.93  8   .06 1.0 1.2 MOR   1.0
93 JUN  2  955 42.90 38 47.83 122 43.92  3.34 39   .14  .3  .6 GEY   2.5
93 JUN  2 1003 48.58 37 39.53 118 51.96  3.89 10   .08  .5 1.2 DOM   1.5

93 JUN  2 1013 27.13 37 39.09 118 52.46  3.96  8   .04  .4  .7 DOM   1.2
93 JUN  2 1032 57.11 37 17.66 121 40.25  2.41 13   .07  .4 1.5 SFL   1.3
93 JUN  2 1035 36.78 37 38.81 118 51.32  5.65  8 2 .16 1.1 1.1 HCF   1.1
93 JUN  2 1132 28.58 37 39.56 118 52.31  4.18 11   .11  .5  .9 DOM   1.6
93 JUN  2 1158 53.98 37 39.94 118 51.84  6.70  8   .03  .6 1.7 DOM   1.2

93 JUN  2 1218 28.20 37 39.39 118 52.33  3.75 10   .11  .5 1.0 DOM   1.4
93 JUN  2 1227  3.15 37 39.96 118 52.17  5.65  9   .05  .6 1.2 DOM   1.3
93 JUN  2 1301 25.08 37 14.40 118 10.51 10.19 20   .13 3.2 1.3 DEV   3.1
93 JUN  2 1452 47.79 35 59.17 120 54.03  5.82  9 1 .05  .4 1.9 ROB   1.6
93 JUN  2 1712 17.28 38 49.14 122 46.73  0.94 17   .08  .3  .6 GEY   1.9

93 JUN  2 1806 49.05 37 39.71 118 52.22  4.28  9   .09  .6  .9 DOM   1.5
93 JUN  2 1808 44.06 37 40.19 118 52.52  5.05  7   .04  .6 1.6 DOM   1.0
93 JUN  2 2159 31.23 36 26.21 121  0.78  5.73 10   .06  .3  .7 BIT   1.9
93 JUN  3   29  0.92 35 57.46 120 30.69  5.31  8   .03  .6  .7 MID   1.1
93 JUN  3   43 34.57 36 56.57 121 26.29  4.61 18   .07  .3  .8 HOL   1.2

93 JUN  3  556 37.19 37 34.02 118 45.76  4.05 18   .10  .4 1.1 WCN   2.1
93 JUN  3  558 16.82 37 33.33 118 45.49  6.76 11   .24 1.0 2.7 WCN   1.5
93 JUN  3  656 46.34 38 48.49 122 48.70  3.92 12   .08  .3  .8 GEY   1.6

  Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but, just out of
  curiosity, does anyone know whether the Richter scale is linear,
  logarithmic, or something else? And is it based on power, energy,
  displacement, or what? I.e, what is the definition of a M<n> quake?
  And how many Richter units equals one Scoville unit?

    Its a logrithmic scale.  It was originally defined in terms of readings
    on a standard seismograph at a standard distance from the epicenter --
    which probably means wave amplitude times time.  There is a pragmatic
    formula for conversion to energy:  If M is the magnitude:

	log E = 11.4 + 1.5M

    where E is energy in ergs.  Quakes below 2 generally go unnoticed
    without instruments, quakes below 6 are rarely destructive.

    I don't know what a Scoville unit is, and I couldn't find it in the
    references I checked.

				    Topher

Subject: N. CA, USA, and World Quake Report 06/03-06/09/93
Date: 11 Jun 1993 01:38:25 GMT

    <<explanatory material as before>>

San Francisco Bay Area  
    
    Activity increased somewhat during the past week with two of the
earthquakes large enough to have been felt.  For the 7-day period ending
at midnight on Wednesday, June 9, 1993 the U.S. Geological Survey office
in Menlo Park recorded 34 earthquakes of magnitude one (M1) and greater
within the San Francisco Bay area shown in Figure 1.  Three were as large
as M2.0, including one M3.0 on the central Calaveras fault.  This total
compares to 15 earthquakes during the previous week (May 27 - June 2), two
of which were as large as M2.0. 
  The first of the felt events was a M3.0 last Thursday evening that
occurred on the central Calaveras about 11 miles north of Morgan Hill
(#2/1).  The location is about one mile southeast of the epicenter for the
1984 Morgan Hill earthquake, a M6.2 event that ruptured a 25 km-long
segment of the Calaveras and produced about $10 million in damage. 
Several small aftershocks followed Thursday's shock, the largest a M1.8
less than a minute after the M3.
  The other felt earthquake, early Sunday morning, was on the Hayward
fault beneath the east Oakland Hills (#4/1).  The magnitude was only M2.4,
near the threshold below which earthquakes are generally not felt. 
However, since this earthquake occurred in a heavily populated area and
during a quiet time of the week when people would be just wakening or
having breakfast, it was widely felt in the Oakland/Piedmont/Berkeley
area.  First reports mentioned two separate shocks, suggesting that there
were two closely-spaced earthquakes.  Analysis of the seismogram however
indicates there was only one earthquake and the two reported shocks were
most probably the P- and S-waves.  The most recent earthquake of
comparable size in this area was a M2.2 on May 31, 1991.  
   The East Bay also experienced several other small earthquakes worth
noting.  Early last Thursday morning, a M1.7 occurred on the Green Valley
fault about 8 miles north of Antioch (#1/1).  Early Sunday morning a M1.5
occurred south of the Carquinez Strait and about 7 miles south of Vallejo
(#3/1).  Finally, a trio of M1's occurred in the northern Diablo range 7
to 10 miles southeast of Livermore (#6/1).     
      
Northern & Central California

   Northern California was fairly quiet during the past week with nothing
larger than a M2.7 in the Petrolia area southeast of Cape Mendocino
(#7/2).  A slightly smaller M2.3 occurred about 37 miles east of Eureka
(#3/2); with a focal depth of 24 km it was clearly within the subducted
Gorda plate that underlies this part of the state.  Other events in the
north state worth mentioning include a M2.0 24 miles east of Redding
(#9/2), a M2.1 19 miles southwest of Quincy (#1/2), and a M2.3 on the
Bartlett Springs fault about 20 miles north of Clear Lake.  
   Central California was also fairly quiet, although the San Andreas did
manage a M3.1 along the creeping segment about 6 miles southeast of San
Benito (#2/2).  The only other earthquake in this area worth noting was a
M2.7 about 9 miles east of Coalinga (#6/2).  
   The eastern Sierra Nevada was marginally more active.  A pair of M2's
occurred in the Owens Valley area, the largest a M2.9 33 miles south of
Lone Pine (#8/2).  To the north, in the Mono Lake area, a M3.2 occurred
late Sunday night about 12 miles north of Lee Vining (#5/2).  This
location is several miles northeast of the epicenter of a M5.7 event that
occurred in October, 1990.  
   
Long Valley Caldera
    
   There was a noticeable drop in activity in the south moat area and in
the resurgent dome over that of the previous week.  Seismicity in the east
part of the south moat and on the southeast side of the resurgent dome
declined during the past week to about a half dozen M1's.  Activity in the
west end of the south moat stopped completely, at least at magnitudes
greater than M1.0.  A couple earthquakes did occur in the Mammoth Mountain
area however, the largest a M2.0 early Monday evening (#3/3).  
   South of the caldera, activity was up slightly with three earthquakes
as large as M2.0 including a pair of M2.7's in the Mount Morrison area
(#1/3).   

	. . .
   
       Table 1. Northern & Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)
          
--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN  3  810 44.12 39 12.01 122 40.27  1.75  7   .06  .7 9.1 BAR - 1.3
93 JUN  3  946 24.85 37 30.98 118 50.23 10.34 30   .10  .3  .9 MOR   2.0
93 JUN  3 1053 20.07 40 18.92 124 29.99  0.06  9 1 .24 2.3 3.0 MEN * 1.2
93 JUN  3 1105 16.25 35 59.80 120 33.21  5.52 13 3 .05  .5  .5 MID   1.2
93 JUN  3 1225  4.33 38 45.14 122 41.81  1.34 25 1 .15  .3  .8 NAP   1.8

93 JUN  3 1319 29.28 36 35.49 121  7.42 11.36 33 2 .10  .2  .5 BVL   1.4
93 JUN  3 1344 55.40 35 51.75 120 24.27  4.39 16 2 .04  .3  .4 GOL   1.6
93 JUN  3 1432 10.30 36 38.76 121  5.85 11.11 30 2 .20  .4  .9 PAN   1.4
93 JUN  3 1437 11.82 37 35.44 118 51.94  6.88 30   .10  .3  .5 MOR   1.6
93 JUN  3 1520 52.12 37 37.84 118 51.31  9.60 32 2 .11  .3  .5 SMO   1.7

93 JUN  3 1850 30.47 38 49.18 122 49.87  1.17 24   .14  .3  .8 GEY   1.8
93 JUN  3 1916  1.85 37  2.17 121 47.28  6.21 13   .05  .3  .7 LOM    .8
93 JUN  3 1917 46.89 38  7.46 121 51.29 21.22 22 1 .22  .8  .5 JQN   1.8
93 JUN  3 1919  3.03 39 41.46 121  6.38 11.47 17 1 .12 1.2 1.9 WAK   2.3
93 JUN  3 2015 22.33 36 26.33 121  0.66  7.28 78 2 .11  .2  .4 BIT   3.2

93 JUN  3 2112  0.49 37 24.62 121 43.71  2.96 11 1 .05  .3 1.3 ALU   1.0
93 JUN  3 2326  2.20 37 38.87 118 56.69  6.56  7   .09 1.2 2.2 SMO   1.2
93 JUN  4   13 43.21 40 17.99 124 20.93  8.55 16 3 .10  .7  .3 MEN-  1.4
93 JUN  4  125 46.32 37 20.50 121 42.35  9.22 14 1 .05  .4  .9 ALU   1.0
93 JUN  4  128 40.45 37 20.51 121 42.31  8.06 35 2 .06  .2  .4 ALU   1.1

93 JUN  4  137  4.02 38 46.80 122 45.30  0.98 21   .13  .3  .7 GEY   1.8
93 JUN  4  211 15.89 36 57.31 121 43.12 13.19 60 1 .10  .2  .4 SJB   1.7
93 JUN  4  546 13.02 40 22.70 124 28.98 17.01 11 2 .10 1.3  .6 MEN   1.2
93 JUN  4  546 23.40 40 33.21 124 30.95 17.15  7 1 .09 1.8  .6 EUR   1.6
93 JUN  4  550 29.82 37 17.44 121 39.95  6.81123 3 .12  .1  .3 SFL   3.1

93 JUN  4  551 13.94 37 17.51 121 39.89  6.28 19 2 .06  .3  .6 SFL   1.7
93 JUN  4  623 33.77 36 10.71 120 49.24 10.90 11 1 .24 2.3 2.7 BIT   1.2
93 JUN  4  642 29.37 36 26.25 121  0.71  6.15 23 1 .06  .3  .6 BIT   1.3
93 JUN  4  745 12.51 35 55.55 120 28.52  5.58 25 6 .05  .2  .3 MID   1.2
93 JUN  4  946 57.62 40 40.60 121 43.03 14.45 11   .15  .7 2.8 SHA   1.9

93 JUN  4 1003 15.47 36 43.80 121 19.50  9.19 15   .09  .4  .7 PAI   1.7
93 JUN  4 2209 15.10 37 18.23 121 40.66  5.86  7   .01 2.5 2.9 SFL   1.4
93 JUN  4 2251 13.91 38 48.29 122 48.81  0.08  8   .05  .3 1.3 GEY * 1.6
93 JUN  5  211  1.26 36 38.70 121 15.42  4.67 47 3 .08  .2  .4 STN   2.0
93 JUN  5  223 52.33 38 47.70 122 44.69  0.00 15   .37  .7 2.0 GEY * 1.7

93 JUN  5  233  3.29 36 38.70 121 15.40  4.30 25   .08  .2  .6 STN   2.0
93 JUN  5  305 22.66 36 30.04 121  4.77  5.13 11   .04  .3 1.5 BIT   1.9
93 JUN  5  542 10.94 40 19.23 124 26.49 19.19 14 1 .09 1.0  .3 MEN   1.8
93 JUN  5  622  9.71 38 50.82 122 48.91  1.32 10   .04  .3  .9 GEY   1.3
93 JUN  5  840 21.99 38 49.37 122 48.14  3.66 13   .06  .3  .6 GEY   1.6

93 JUN  5  844 16.15 37 29.28 118 51.96  1.75 14   .12  .610.1 MOR - 1.7
93 JUN  5  916 50.29 37 40.23 118 50.32  7.14  8   .04  .9 1.8 HCF   1.5
93 JUN  5 1128 27.06 37 33.62 118 51.37  9.59 31 2 .13  .3  .7 MOR   2.8
93 JUN  5 1153 40.16 37 31.10 118 45.52  0.98  9   .07 1.1 9.6 WCN-- 1.3
93 JUN  5 1156 12.92 37 31.63 118 52.39  1.31  8   .15 1.214.7 MOR - 1.0

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN  5 1343 23.99 37  8.93 121 58.87 12.41 13   .07  .5 1.1 LOM   1.0
93 JUN  5 1540 36.09 38 14.92 119 19.15 14.48  9 1 .26 2.619.1 WAK -    
93 JUN  5 1659 14.10 37 32.29 118 26.70  8.03  9   .12  .6 1.0 CHV   1.2
93 JUN  5 1803 56.43 40 31.79 124  1.63 27.36 16 1 .11  .6 1.0 EUR   1.1
93 JUN  5 1813 26.41 38 45.27 122 41.22  4.50  7   .08  .7 2.8 NAP   1.5

93 JUN  5 1843 10.72 40 24.84 124 21.72  8.43 13 1 .08  .7  .3 MEN   1.2
93 JUN  5 1918  1.41 38 47.28 122 44.99  0.84 10 1 .04  .2  .7 GEY   1.3
93 JUN  5 1918  8.78 40 43.82 123 43.98 28.26 19 1 .12  .5  .9 EUR   1.8
93 JUN  5 1922 15.98 40 24.63 124 27.91 11.14 16 1 .08  .9  .4 MEN   1.9
93 JUN  5 1954 51.37 38 49.92 122 50.27  1.08  9   .07  .4  .8 GEY   1.2

93 JUN  5 2010 35.70 37 30.13 118 52.55  6.29 35 2 .12  .3 1.0 MOR   2.8
93 JUN  5 2016 34.61 37 30.33 118 25.66  8.14  8   .05  .8  .8 CHV   1.0
93 JUN  5 2056 57.12 36 32.45 121  7.95  8.10 22 2 .06  .3  .7 PIN   1.1
93 JUN  5 2113 31.80 37 31.89 118 26.10  8.65 26 1 .09  .3  .6 CHV   1.9
93 JUN  5 2118 33.70 36 33.60 121  9.37  6.58 11 1 .02  .4  .8 PIN   1.0

93 JUN  5 2357 53.00 38 47.54 122 46.64  3.86 21   .12  .3  .9 GEY   1.6
93 JUN  6    3 24.07 37 36.84 118 59.23  3.42 14   .06  .4  .6 MAM   1.7
93 JUN  6  344 51.41 36 34.40 121  7.33  4.74 27 2 .10  .2  .9 BVL   1.4
93 JUN  6  345 15.77 36 34.25 121  7.25  4.21 18 1 .08  .3 1.1 BVL   1.2
93 JUN  6  419 31.26 36 40.86 121 29.72 14.46 59 3 .22  .3  .6 SAL   1.7

93 JUN  6  506 58.75 38 49.36 122 48.48  4.27 14   .03  .3  .6 GEY   1.3
93 JUN  6  513  9.74 38 47.44 122 45.80  2.43 21   .13  .3  .8 GEY   1.8
93 JUN  6  608 14.40 39 49.78 123 28.01 10.23 16 1 .09  .3 1.0 MAA   1.5
93 JUN  6  804 24.85 36 51.55 121 21.03  8.24 50   .10  .2  .4 QUI   1.2
93 JUN  6  823  1.87 38  1.03 122 14.14  6.53 24 1 .15  .3  .5 CON   1.3

93 JUN  6  849  0.37 39 18.37 122 46.34  0.00 41   .20  .4 2.2 BAR   2.2
93 JUN  6  912 32.38 38 48.21 122 48.77  4.47 11   .02  .3  .6 GEY   1.0
93 JUN  6  943 13.67 40 48.40 123 27.55 23.96  9   .11  .6 1.2 KLA   2.3
93 JUN  6  943 13.79 37 39.29 118 51.06  6.22 34 2 .13  .3  .4 HCF   1.9
93 JUN  6  957 12.97 37 17.63 121 40.46  2.10 41 1 .06  .2  .6 SFL   1.8

93 JUN  6 1003 33.04 37 39.86 118 50.59  6.47  8   .05  .7 1.4 HCF   1.0
93 JUN  6 1027 16.28 37 39.29 118 50.91  6.30 22 2 .12  .4  .6 HCF   1.5
93 JUN  6 1108 53.87 37 39.43 118 51.01  4.61 11   .08  .4  .8 HCF   1.3
93 JUN  6 1120 53.49 38 37.72 122 45.53  4.21 24   .13  .3 1.4 NAP   1.4
93 JUN  6 1125  0.71 38 37.59 122 45.41  5.84  9   .10  .5 1.7 NAP   1.1

93 JUN  6 1131 55.16 39 19.22 123 13.49  1.75 11   .08  .3 9.7 MAA - 1.3
93 JUN  6 1216 24.02 36 50.67 121 34.44  6.49 43 1 .17  .3  .5 SJB   1.0
93 JUN  6 1315 12.60 38 49.09 119 45.11  0.03 17 2 .10  .6 1.3 WAK * 2.9
93 JUN  6 1544 50.50 37 49.10 122 11.64 10.35 76 3 .16  .2  .5 HAY   2.6
93 JUN  6 1548 59.03 37 48.66 122 11.96  8.24 24 3 .16  .3  .7 HAY   1.0

93 JUN  6 1623 46.84 37 48.77 122 11.89  8.73 30 2 .15  .3  .7 HAY   1.6
93 JUN  6 1646 45.96 37 39.82 118 51.62  5.85  8   .03  .6 1.3 DOM   1.1
93 JUN  6 1931  6.05 37 13.88 118  3.84  1.98  9   .06 7.4 5.9 DEV - 2.4
93 JUN  6 1946 27.87 37  7.58 121 31.60  8.49 85 2 .09  .2  .4 CYN   2.5
93 JUN  6 1955 14.00 37 32.09 118 52.71  1.97 10   .09  .710.7 MOR - 1.0

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN  6 2058 19.06 38 47.08 122 54.93  3.79 15   .09  .3 1.4 GEY   1.5
93 JUN  6 2338 21.85 38 49.28 122 48.45  4.14  8   .02  .4  .9 GEY   1.1
93 JUN  7    2 45.51 40 18.53 124 32.99  9.25 12 1 .12 1.6  .9 MEN   1.8
93 JUN  7   39 42.08 38 50.12 122 48.42  1.58 10   .10  .3 1.0 GEY   1.4
93 JUN  7  144  3.66 38 48.27 122 46.75  2.04 10   .03  .3  .5 GEY   1.5

93 JUN  7  305 28.39 37 38.86 118 50.47 11.52  8   .05  .8 2.4 HCF   1.1
93 JUN  7  326 29.77 37 39.80 118 50.31  6.87  9   .03  .7 1.3 HCF   1.1
93 JUN  7  402 26.21 40 12.75 124  8.60 16.23  8 1 .06  .9 1.1 MEN   1.4
93 JUN  7  613 26.39 38  7.28 119  4.64 12.56 33   .13  .9 2.9 MOL-  3.2
93 JUN  7  640 39.52 38 47.85 122 44.94  1.15  8   .05  .3 1.2 GEY   1.1

93 JUN  7  707 55.76 40 24.76 124 34.40 13.49 13 1 .16 1.9  .8 MEN   1.6
93 JUN  7  734 24.03 37 21.70 121 44.84  2.00 10   .12  .8  .5 ALU   1.3
93 JUN  7  831 30.74 38 47.15 122 46.44  1.52 12   .10  .3  .8 GEY   1.5
93 JUN  7  905  1.19 37  4.11 121 53.17 13.73 27   .10  .4  .7 LOM   1.3
93 JUN  7 1204 29.56 38 47.47 122 46.60  1.62 11   .04  .2  .6 GEY   1.4

93 JUN  7 1223  5.68 37 33.51 118 51.39  9.69 35 2 .13  .3  .7 MOR   2.8
93 JUN  7 1236 13.71 37 33.56 118 51.28  9.67 34 3 .12  .3  .6 MOR   2.1
93 JUN  7 1623 28.05 37 48.57 122 12.27  7.24  7   .10 1.3 1.1 HAY   1.6
93 JUN  7 1900 27.67 37 39.84 118 52.59  5.44 19 1 .15  .5  .7 DOM   1.3
93 JUN  7 1934  2.89 38 49.03 122 48.43  4.75 19   .10  .3  .7 GEY   1.5

93 JUN  7 2015 16.78 38 49.29 122 47.53  0.75 15   .09  .3  .6 GEY   1.7
93 JUN  7 2018  8.88 38 48.98 122 47.30  1.34 21   .11  .3  .5 GEY   1.9
93 JUN  7 2158 42.80 37 32.20 121 41.47  5.75 15   .03  .3  .6 HAM   1.6
93 JUN  7 2215 13.50 38 48.92 122 48.35  4.23  8   .06  .5  .8 GEY   1.2
93 JUN  8  109 52.97 38 49.39 122 46.63  2.78 13   .05  .3  .6 GEY   1.4

93 JUN  8  110 33.08 38 49.31 122 46.74  2.95 19   .14  .3  .9 GEY   1.8
93 JUN  8  112 22.77 37 39.08 119  1.31  1.76 10   .06  .6  .7 MAM   2.0
93 JUN  8  115  7.12 37 39.12 119  1.29  1.53 13 1 .05  .3  .2 MAM   1.3
93 JUN  8  115 14.71 37 39.13 119  1.23  1.56  8   .04  .3  .2 MAM      
93 JUN  8  633 46.15 38 49.12 122 48.31  4.94 17   .12  .4  .8 GEY   2.0

93 JUN  8  645 57.43 38 49.61 122 49.77  0.05 19   .14  .3 1.0 GEY * 2.0
93 JUN  8  711 44.84 35 52.89 120 25.72 10.34 13   .05  .4  .7 GOL   1.1
93 JUN  8  715 26.19 37 30.87 118 41.54  9.03 14   .08  .4 1.3 WCN   1.1
93 JUN  8  726 19.36 38 48.31 122 48.97  4.03  8   .12  .5 1.2 GEY   1.2
93 JUN  8  845 34.68 38 50.44 122 49.61  2.32 11   .05  .3  .8 GEY   1.3

93 JUN  8  857 19.27 37 37.30 118 48.95  4.13  8   .11  .8 1.0 HCF   1.2
93 JUN  8 1109 16.54 38 44.95 122 42.58  0.34 30   .14  .3 2.1 NAP   2.3
93 JUN  8 1142  6.20 38 25.66 118 20.58  1.77 32   .12 3.210.8 NEV-- 2.5
93 JUN  8 1302 43.08 36  5.35 120 12.72  9.06 40   .17  .3  .6 COA   2.7
93 JUN  8 1539 54.93 38 47.54 122 46.29  3.08  8   .02  .3  .7 GEY   1.1

93 JUN  8 1545 26.83 36 51.67 121 17.57  6.43 38   .16  .3  .6 QUI   1.8
93 JUN  8 1814 31.60 38 47.65 122 45.54  0.84  9   .04  .3  .9 GEY   1.3
93 JUN  8 1925 59.71 37 35.05 121 42.85  6.80 46 2 .08  .2  .3 HAM   1.9
93 JUN  8 2031  5.39 37  0.47 121 55.63  4.14 10   .08  .6  .7 MON   1.0
93 JUN  8 2146  8.02 40 28.89 123 54.14 28.13 14 1 .10  .6 1.4 EUR   1.7

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN  8 2157 59.37 37 29.47 121 50.40  9.36 31 1 .09  .2  .4 MIS   1.3
93 JUN  8 2258 28.28 37 28.81 118 48.59  7.64 10   .04  .5 1.5 MOR   1.2
93 JUN  9   13 59.14 37 34.79 118 51.48  8.68  7 1 .10 1.4 2.5 MOR   1.1
93 JUN  9  126 24.53 40 17.12 124 12.38 11.47 26 2 .15  .3  .3 MEN   2.6
93 JUN  9  552 14.40 36  7.15 118  3.57  5.43 14 1 .12  .6 1.9 WWF   2.9

93 JUN  9  636 26.50 40 17.53 124 31.30 20.44  9 1 .08 1.7  .6 MEN   1.6
93 JUN  9  846 36.25 35 47.73 121 18.02  1.10 25 2 .13  .5 1.3 SSM   1.5
93 JUN  9 1055 57.40 37 15.80 121 38.64  5.40 10   .02  .3 1.0 SFL   1.2
93 JUN  9 1113 55.69 37 34.40 121 41.39  6.86  7 1 .06  .5  .7 HAM   1.1
93 JUN  9 1414 36.63 36 35.40 121  2.50  8.51 11   .17  .6 1.6 PAN   1.4

93 JUN  9 1430 55.18 36 56.11 121 31.10  2.65 23   .20  .4 1.1 SAR   1.4
93 JUN  9 1547 24.26 36 45.73 121 21.36  7.79  8   .06  .5 1.5 HOL   1.0
93 JUN  9 1638 22.58 37 39.40 118 52.05  4.92  8   .01  .5 1.0 DOM   1.1
93 JUN  9 1651 12.52 37 39.03 118 52.08  4.40 14   .09  .4  .6 DOM   1.7
93 JUN  9 1711 11.98 37 39.64 118 52.06  3.90  8   .11  .7 1.0 DOM   1.0

93 JUN  9 1803 38.00 37  2.64 121 47.05  6.58 27   .08  .2  .4 LOM   1.6
93 JUN  9 1915 10.31 37 39.19 118 52.07  3.84 11   .10  .4  .9 DOM   1.4
93 JUN 10   54  4.00 37  2.70 121 47.10  6.52 17   .07  .3  .6 LOM   1.3
93 JUN 10  135 41.17 37 37.03 118 51.27  3.66 10   .12  .5 2.3 SMO   1.5
93 JUN 10  317 10.20 37 37.29 118 51.36  5.00 13   .11  .4  .7 SMO   1.5

93 JUN 10  505  4.74 37 38.04 118 52.07  9.13 11   .11  .7  .9 SMO   1.5
93 JUN 10  552 40.61 40 38.84 121 55.82 20.13  8   .04  .8 1.5 SHA   2.0

Re .355, thanks very much for the explanation, Topher. It's useful to
know that it's a log scale.

Re Scoville units, I was razzing you, there. The Scoville is a log
scale used to measure concentration of capsicum, the compound
responsible for the heat in hot peppers.

Subject: N. CA, USA, and World Quake Report 6/10-16/93
Date: 19 Jun 1993 01:07:00 GMT

<<Explanatory Material As Before>>

San Francisco Bay Area  
    
    During the 7-day period ending at midnight on Wednesday, June 16, 1993
the U.S. Geological Survey office in Menlo Park recorded 23 earthquakes of
magnitude one (M1) and greater within the San Francisco Bay area shown in
Figure 1.  Two of these were as large as M2.0.  This total compares to 34
earthquakes during the previous week (June 3 - 10), three of which were as
large as M2.0. 
   The largest of the two M2's was a M2.5 Wednesday morning that occurred
on the San Gregorio fault about 2 miles east of the Pigeon Point
Lighthouse (#2 in Figure 1).  The remaining M2 was a M2.0 Tuesday morning
that occurred near the southern end of the Antioch fault about 6 miles
south of Antioch (#1/1).  
   The remainder of the earthquakes were smaller than M2, most on the
southern and central Calaveras fault and the creeping segment of the San
Andreas.  
      
Northern & Central California

   Cape Mendocino was once again the most active area in the state.  A
pair of M3 earthquakes occurred here, the first a M3.3 on Monday that was
located near the Cape approximately 9  miles west of Petrolia (#1/2), the
second a M3.2 on Tuesday that was located in the Gorda Plate about 66
miles west of Eureka (#7/2).  An additional five M2 events occurred here,
four in the vicinity of the Mendocino fracture zone and one offshore of
Eureka (#5/2).  
   A couple of M2 earthquakes were recorded beneath the Coast Ranges
southeast of the Cape Mendocino area.  The first was a M2.3 on the
northern Bartlett Springs fault 23 miles north-northeast of Willits
(#4/2).  The second was a M2.0 beneath the southern Klamath Mountains
about 28 miles west of Red Bluff (#8/2).  
   The Mono basin was the most active area in the Sierra Nevada region
with a M3.5 earthquake early Monday morning and two M2's earlier in the
week (#3/2).  Additional activity in the Sierra Nevada was limited to a
M2.4 in the Markleeville area (#2/2) and a M2.0 about 20 miles south of
Quincy.  
    The only earthquake in central California worth noting was M3.0
beneath the Ciervo Hills 28 miles northwest of Coalinga (#6/2).

Long Valley Caldera
    
    Activity within the caldera remained low with only a half dozen events
as large as M1.5, the largest a M2.4 early last Thursday morning (#1/3). 
All were located in the west end of the south moat area.  


 Table 1. Northern & Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 10  835  4.80 38 48.22 122 48.71  4.03  8   .06  .4  .8 GEY   1.0
93 JUN 10  953 33.07 39 40.30 121  7.87 14.46 25 2 .12  .5 1.0 WAK   2.2
93 JUN 10 1008 41.89 37 38.51 118 57.57  6.74 28 1 .12  .4  .5 SMO   1.8
93 JUN 10 1011 19.99 37 38.63 118 57.50  6.61 13 1 .10  .5  .8 SMO   1.2
93 JUN 10 1024 28.73 36 33.74 121  9.38  2.83 22 1 .06  .2  .5 PIN   1.3

93 JUN 10 1035 27.61 37 38.59 118 57.75  6.70 34   .13  .3  .4 SMO   2.7
93 JUN 10 1147 52.59 37 33.82 118 51.09  9.73 14 1 .12  .6 1.1 MOR   1.3
93 JUN 10 1434 30.68 36 38.36 121 15.44 10.20 31 1 .07  .2  .5 STN   1.6
93 JUN 10 1502 50.69 40 17.93 124 21.32  7.32 10 1 .13  .9  .6 MEN   1.5
93 JUN 10 1537 49.38 40 24.99 124 31.46 23.60 17 2 .11  .9  .6 MEN   2.5

93 JUN 10 1606 42.03 37 20.54 121 42.90  1.02 37 2 .07  .2  .8 ALU   1.8
93 JUN 10 1659 42.98 35 55.96 120 28.92  5.08  7 1 .02  .6  .7 MID    .9
93 JUN 10 1852 15.02 38 38.81 119 36.36  0.00 13 1 .42 3.3 6.0 WAK * 2.4
93 JUN 10 1920  1.44 36 32.04 121  7.39  7.11 11 2 .05  .4  .9 PIN   1.1
93 JUN 10 2050 18.19 38 50.21 122 49.31  3.28  7   .04  .5 1.2 GEY   1.3

93 JUN 11   46 28.76 37 34.66 118 53.82 11.19  9 3 .11 2.4 2.4 SIL   1.0
93 JUN 11  146  0.39 38 46.08 122 36.20  4.29  8   .06  .5 2.7 GVL   1.3
93 JUN 11  450 24.99 38 49.35 122 50.35  0.60  8   .09  .6 1.1 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 11  454 21.85 37 39.46 118 51.20  4.44 10   .10  .6 1.0 DOM   1.1
93 JUN 11  506 30.37 37 39.73 118 50.80  5.52  7   .05  .6 1.8 HCF   1.1

93 JUN 11  506 44.25 40 20.60 124 33.55 25.18 10 1 .06 2.2 1.2 MEN   1.6
93 JUN 11  511 25.34 38  4.89 119  4.76 16.24 27 2 .19  .8 1.6 MOL-  2.5
93 JUN 11  554 48.08 40 42.10 123 56.15 23.02 13 2 .14  .8 1.1 EUR   1.6
93 JUN 11  556 10.87 37 37.69 118 50.25  5.14  8   .04  .5  .9 HCF   1.1
93 JUN 11  727 22.80 38 48.81 122 51.26  0.52 10 1 .10  .4 1.0 GEY   1.2

93 JUN 11  742  5.42 38 49.91 122 52.80  1.43  7   .03  .4  .9 GEY   1.0
93 JUN 11  746 44.90 36 52.05 121 35.56  5.21 26   .13  .3  .5 SJB   1.4
93 JUN 11 1202 26.77 38 49.40 122 47.93  5.04 44 1 .11  .2  .4 GEY   2.7
93 JUN 11 1210  0.80 38 49.55 122 46.92  3.48 18   .05  .2  .6 GEY   1.8
93 JUN 11 1340 17.67 38 50.48 122 49.40  2.90  7   .03  .4 1.0 GEY   1.0

93 JUN 11 1535 53.94 38 49.22 122 46.08  1.05  9   .03  .3  .7 GEY   1.3
93 JUN 11 1545 36.86 37 33.36 118 41.73 14.37 15 1 .12  .5 1.1 CAS   1.4
93 JUN 11 1700 46.03 39 43.70 123 11.01  0.01 28 1 .12  .2 2.1 BAR   2.3
93 JUN 11 1734 35.45 37 22.00 120  1.15 22.41  7 1 .12  .9 1.1 KAI   1.6
93 JUN 11 1800 15.36 40 57.72 123 21.86 34.94 10 2 .12  .8 2.3 KLA   1.9

93 JUN 11 1924  8.10 38 46.45 122 44.76  2.23 10   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 11 1939 25.91 38 48.13 122 47.82  3.14 34 1 .09  .2  .4 GEY   2.2
93 JUN 11 1945 37.65 37  7.09 121 51.81  3.95 16   .11  .4  .9 LOM   1.0
93 JUN 11 2016 41.76 36 35.50 121  7.03  7.02 11   .07  .4 1.4 BVL    .7
93 JUN 11 2059  9.35 38 49.48 122 48.00  3.93 12   .05  .4  .6 GEY   1.3

93 JUN 11 2158  3.16 40 37.64 123 27.01 30.89 12 1 .10  .6 1.2 EUR   1.9
93 JUN 11 2255 46.56 37 20.77 121 42.45  7.98 33   .05  .2  .4 ALU   1.5
93 JUN 12   47 45.07 37 36.86 119  0.47  4.23 11   .05  .7  .5 MAM   1.2
93 JUN 12  129 46.72 37 40.31 118 52.72  4.00  9   .06  .6  .9 DOM   1.3
93 JUN 12  218  1.76 37 34.30 118 48.69  3.53  9   .08  .6  .8 MOR   1.4

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 12  438 38.64 36 51.09 121 18.80  8.20 57 2 .12  .2  .4 QUI   1.9
93 JUN 12  506 36.75 37 40.13 118 50.20  7.21  7   .02  .9 1.6 HCF   1.1
93 JUN 12  707 54.82 40 24.98 124 40.08 14.46 11 1 .18 1.4 1.0 MEN   1.9
93 JUN 12  754 31.97 39 32.31 122  0.34 27.44  8   .06 1.4 2.8 SAC   1.5
93 JUN 12 1005 48.81 38 46.36 122 54.21  4.15  7   .05  .6 1.5 GEY   1.0

93 JUN 12 1022 36.91 40 27.10 124 31.70 19.62 14 1 .11 1.6  .4 MEN   2.1
93 JUN 12 1034 34.07 37 21.04 121 43.42  2.18 16   .03  .2  .6 ALU   1.1
93 JUN 12 1243  1.13 36 43.86 120 49.77  0.21 11 1 .08  .4 1.6 ORT    .9
93 JUN 12 1259 20.72 36 34.93 121 10.75  3.83 13 1 .04  .3  .5 PIN    .7
93 JUN 12 1336  7.48 36 15.24 120 48.85  8.93  8 1 .05  .5  .6 BIT   1.0

93 JUN 12 1447 29.27 38 39.33 122 43.58  6.66 15 1 .05  .3  .8 NAP   1.3
93 JUN 12 1638 48.04 36 30.03 121  4.78  5.24 21 1 .05  .3  .6 BIT   1.4
93 JUN 12 1714  2.62 38 49.33 122 47.75  3.82  9   .05  .3  .9 GEY   1.1
93 JUN 12 1801 34.11 38 49.31 122 48.11  4.07  9   .06  .4  .9 GEY   1.1
93 JUN 12 1803 29.95 40 17.51 124 31.87 21.26 11 1 .20 2.1 1.0 MEN   1.6

93 JUN 12 1854 25.87 38 51.53 122 49.51  1.59  7   .04  .5 1.0 GEY   1.0
93 JUN 12 1941 18.05 40 20.92 124 28.54 16.19 11 1 .10 1.5  .6 MEN   1.6
93 JUN 12 2113 24.18 38  1.04 118 35.43  6.42 29   .09 1.3 5.9 MOL   2.4
93 JUN 12 2132 29.66 37  5.14 121 30.33  8.83 33 1 .09  .3  .6 CYS   1.3
93 JUN 12 2157 12.14 38 53.63 122 47.92  2.84  7   .10 1.2 2.2 GEY   1.0

93 JUN 13  105 32.35 38 46.67 122 43.19  2.39 12   .05  .3  .3 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 13  110 35.71 38 47.92 122 48.36  4.42  8   .02  .3  .7 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 13  220 55.23 36 15.97 120 49.61  9.31 12 1 .04  .3  .6 BIT   1.0
93 JUN 13  327 16.83 38 19.13 122 33.83  7.83 12 1 .17  .5 1.4 ROG   1.0
93 JUN 13  428 14.08 37 19.93 121 42.00  8.22 10   .03  .4  .9 SFL    .9

93 JUN 13  429  1.05 37 19.96 121 41.84  7.79 40 2 .06  .2  .5 SFL   1.7
93 JUN 13  430 24.21 37 19.91 121 41.82  7.33 30 2 .08  .2  .6 SFL   1.0
93 JUN 13  551 15.42 38 49.13 122 49.19  3.07 17   .09  .3  .7 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 13  624 47.64 38 51.20 122 49.96  1.41  8   .04  .4  .8 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 13  713  0.85 38 48.50 122 45.28  1.44 14   .06  .3  .6 GEY   1.4

93 JUN 13  723 24.19 37 38.59 118 56.51  7.73 27 1 .15  .5  .6 SMO   1.8
93 JUN 13  736  8.40 37 38.75 118 56.50  8.23 33 1 .13  .3  .5 SMO   1.9
93 JUN 13  741 56.78 37 39.01 118 56.14  8.36 18 1 .09  .5  .6 SMO   1.4
93 JUN 13  808 28.92 37 33.95 118 45.66  4.74 16   .09  .4 1.1 WCN   1.4
93 JUN 13  824 51.22 37 29.83 118 52.78  1.61 10   .09  .7 8.8 MOR - 1.1

93 JUN 13 1123 18.19 37 28.49 121 50.41  4.17  8 1 .05  .6  .7 MIS    .7
93 JUN 13 1214 49.38 38 47.94 122 44.95  2.70  7   .02  .3  .9 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 13 1244 31.68 39 12.33 123  9.47  3.01 15 3 .10  .3 3.9 MAA   1.3
93 JUN 13 1300 55.15 40  6.50 124 19.07 11.68  8   .04 1.3  .6 PON * 1.5
93 JUN 13 1427  1.29 35 55.52 120 28.33  5.37 13 2 .05  .4  .8 MID    .9

93 JUN 13 1437 24.59 37 24.66 121 45.57  7.40 53 2 .09  .2  .5 ALU   2.0
93 JUN 13 1542 58.50 37 19.12 121 43.54  0.09 15   .11  .5 4.3 SFL * 1.4
93 JUN 13 1640 17.51 38 48.08 122 46.59  4.61 12   .02  .3  .6 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 13 1722 34.35 38 44.33 122 24.40  5.29 23   .14  .3 1.1 GVL   2.0
93 JUN 13 1727  0.21 38 47.19 122 45.49  2.49  9   .01  .3  .7 GEY   1.1

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 13 1845 15.35 40 45.92 124 23.59 20.96 11 2 .05  .6  .4 EUR   1.7
93 JUN 13 1902 33.75 40 45.50 124 24.33 23.36 18 2 .08  .7 1.7 EUR   2.2
93 JUN 13 2111 39.16 40 53.00 123 48.36 26.74 14 1 .08  .5  .7 EUR   1.9
93 JUN 13 2138 10.04 37 38.63 118 56.46  8.14 23   .13  .4  .6 SMO   1.7
93 JUN 13 2234 25.02 38 47.79 122 44.55  3.79 22   .11  .3  .7 GEY   1.6

93 JUN 13 2247 43.10 37 38.96 118 59.00  7.38 12   .06  .7 1.3 MAM   1.4
93 JUN 13 2349 29.66 40 25.85 124 36.06 15.21  8 1 .07 1.7  .6 MEN   1.5
93 JUN 14   26 44.93 37 46.55 121 53.96  9.54 27 3 .13  .3  .7 DAN   1.7
93 JUN 14   43 16.05 36 28.87 120 36.85 17.10 42 3 .17  .4 1.2 CRV   3.2
93 JUN 14  219 42.03 38 50.53 122 49.59  2.49 10   .01  .3 1.1 GEY   1.5

93 JUN 14  223  4.66 38 50.48 122 49.56  2.50  9   .01  .3 1.0 GEY   1.5
93 JUN 14  226 37.21 38 50.40 122 49.52  2.47 27   .15  .3 1.7 GEY   2.8
93 JUN 14  230  4.22 38 50.17 122 49.75  1.78  9   .07  .4  .8 GEY   1.1
93 JUN 14  235 14.10 37 39.11 118 55.44  7.83 14   .15  .6 1.2 SMO   1.7
93 JUN 14  257 57.39 37 38.97 118 55.61  6.81 12   .05  .4  .7 SMO   1.3

93 JUN 14  619 57.29 40 16.53 125 13.43 12.56 10 1 .2011.012.8 MEN - 2.5
93 JUN 14  654 53.88 38 49.37 122 48.33  4.18  8   .02  .4  .8 GEY   1.1
93 JUN 14  715  0.85 36 34.15 121  9.51  3.54 18   .06  .2  .6 PIN   1.3
93 JUN 14 1007  0.83 37 38.22 118 57.27  9.79  7   .05 1.0 2.0 SMO   1.1
93 JUN 14 1021 40.05 36 38.51 121 15.24  4.53 24   .06  .2  .6 STN   1.7

93 JUN 14 1051 34.06 38  7.18 119  4.66 12.30 34   .13  .9 2.7 MOL   3.4
93 JUN 14 1107  3.82 40 12.78 124  7.78 13.41 13 1 .12  .8  .8 MEN   1.2
93 JUN 14 1204 56.73 40 22.14 124 34.50 24.04 10 1 .08 1.8  .9 MEN   1.6
93 JUN 14 1215 29.21 39 19.93 123 11.09  7.75 23 3 .12  .3 1.5 MAA-  1.5
93 JUN 14 1326 55.94 40 36.30 124 20.94 20.45  7 1 .07 2.4  .6 EUR      

93 JUN 14 1354 48.69 39 14.67 123  9.79  1.65 15 1 .14  .5 4.7 MAA-  1.6
93 JUN 14 1642 44.01 40 18.82 124 27.90  7.81 21 2 .09  .7  .3 MEN   3.3
93 JUN 14 1705 18.96 36 47.18 121 29.10  5.00 16   .19  .5  .8 SJB   1.2
93 JUN 14 1727 54.10 37 25.07 118 54.22  0.88 14   .09  .5 8.8 SIL - 1.3
93 JUN 14 1810 30.88 36 46.97 121 29.02  4.43 25   .20  .4  .7 SJB   1.6

93 JUN 14 2243  6.11 36 34.44 121  7.75 10.85  9 1 .02  .5 1.3 BVL    .9
93 JUN 15   35 55.52 37 16.98 121 39.82  3.67 21   .10  .3  .6 SFL   1.4
93 JUN 15   53 11.59 40 13.17 124  7.75 13.46 12   .10  .4  .6 MEN   2.5
93 JUN 15  613 14.84 38 50.24 122 49.72  2.62  8   .04  .4  .8 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 15  931 54.03 36 30.14 121  4.64  3.45 10   .03  .3  .3 BIT   1.1

93 JUN 15  933 15.21 37 38.28 118 51.05  7.66  7   .03  .7 1.4 SMO   1.0
93 JUN 15 1100 15.14 37 55.63 121 48.15 13.91 25   .15  .4  .7 GRN   2.0
93 JUN 15 1116 41.79 37 38.07 118 52.19  6.31  9   .10  .5  .9 SMO   1.0
93 JUN 15 1127 33.48 35 58.35 120 31.47  6.41 14 2 .06  .3  .5 MID-  1.0
93 JUN 15 1205 21.33 37 33.65 118 51.38 10.55 20 1 .13  .4 1.0 MOR   1.6

93 JUN 15 1405 16.77 37  4.00 121 53.48 14.48 15   .06  .5 1.0 LOM   1.1
93 JUN 15 1731 35.47 38 48.94 122 46.32  2.09  8   .04  .3  .5 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 15 1916 13.04 40 35.38 124 24.25  5.31 11 1 .08 1.0  .9 EUR   1.6
93 JUN 15 2040 42.65 40 41.84 125 26.11 15.08 31   .18 3.917.3 DEL-- 3.0
93 JUN 15 2237 16.31 37 37.56 118 49.58  8.89 13   .10  .5  .9 HCF   1.4

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 15 2251 12.03 37  1.53 121 28.67  9.17 16   .05  .3  .8 CYS   1.1
93 JUN 16  140 37.43 36 29.73 120 35.89 11.33 29 1 .21  .6 1.2 CRV   2.1
93 JUN 16  214 26.49 39 48.40 124  0.79  8.61 19 1 .24  .9 2.5 PAR-  2.0
93 JUN 16  234  4.84 35 59.84 120 32.93  3.30  9   .05  .6 1.2 MID   1.6
93 JUN 16  415 25.04 38  5.07 118 11.10 15.93 14   .14 8.5 4.2 NEV   1.9

93 JUN 16  501  0.63 37 33.04 118 51.13  8.39 11   .07  .6 1.1 MOR   1.6
93 JUN 16  631 22.70 36 28.93 121  3.47  5.67 11   .04  .4 1.5 BIT   1.7
93 JUN 16  656 15.64 39 43.05 122  2.94 16.41  8   .06 1.5 2.8 SAC   1.7
93 JUN 16  736 55.90 40 33.03 122 15.59 18.56 22 1 .14  .3  .9 SHA   2.1
93 JUN 16  741 17.52 38 47.55 122 46.65  3.06 11   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.4

93 JUN 16  819  6.18 38 49.70 122 48.09  1.12  9   .03  .3  .6 GEY   1.3
93 JUN 16  831 35.26 37 28.26 118 41.94 12.51  9 2 .07 1.0 1.5 WCS   1.2
93 JUN 16  945 25.45 36 51.31 121 34.91  4.92 19   .11  .3  .5 SJB   1.6
93 JUN 16  951 10.03 38 49.25 122 48.28  3.87 10   .04  .3  .8 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 16 1222 48.28 38 47.63 122 44.89  0.39  8   .09  .3 1.3 GEY   1.2

93 JUN 16 1257 19.20 38 33.37 122 16.24  6.23 19   .20  .4 2.1 GVL   1.6
93 JUN 16 1303 21.21 38 32.67 122 16.16  0.00 13 2 .23  .6 2.1 GVL * 1.1
93 JUN 16 1328 45.20 40  9.91 122 47.39 11.51 15 1 .38 1.1 1.5 KLA   2.1
93 JUN 16 1439 24.61 40 19.91 124 25.88 17.94  7 1 .02 1.1 1.1 MEN   1.2
93 JUN 16 1554  7.72 37  9.93 122 20.28 16.64 59 1 .15  .6  .4 ANN   2.6

93 JUN 16 1616 17.05 37  1.23 121 26.80 14.76 14 1 .14  .7 1.5 CYS   1.3
93 JUN 16 1850  3.09 37 30.65 118 25.59  8.69 11   .03  .3  .8 CHV   1.1
93 JUN 16 2104 12.64 35 52.77 120 25.65 10.42 26   .09  .4  .5 GOL   1.8
93 JUN 17    4 32.02 37 38.05 118 52.43  6.05  8   .04  .6 1.1 SMO   1.0
93 JUN 17  119 14.59 38 49.89 122 47.91  2.31  9   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.4

93 JUN 17  246 43.72 38 47.34 122 45.19  0.06  7   .06  .3 1.5 GEY * 1.3
93 JUN 17  254 46.10 38 53.26 123  0.62  4.25 10   .10  .4 2.2 MAA   1.6
93 JUN 17  711 47.29 37 33.46 118 50.96  9.49 15   .11  .5  .9 MOR   1.7

Subject: N. CA, USA, and World Quake Report 6/17-6/23/93

 <<Explanatory material as before>>

San Francisco Bay Area  
    
   Another quiet week in the Bay area.   During the 7-day period ending at
midnight on Wednesday, June 23, 1993 the U.S. Geological Survey office in
Menlo Park recorded 14 earthquakes of magnitude one (M1) and greater
within the San Francisco Bay area shown in Figure 1.  Two of these were as
large as M2.0.  This total compares to 23 earthquakes during the previous
week (June 10 - 16), two of which were as large as M2.0. 
   What little notable activity there was this past week occurred on the
San Andreas.  First, a small cluster of three M1 earthquakes occurred
early in the week on the Loma Prieta segment, about 12 miles west of
Morgan Hill (#1 in figure 1).  The largest of these was only M1.9.  
The only M2 earthquakes both occurred on the creeping segment of the San
Andreas.  The first of these was a M2.5 last Friday afternoon that was
located about 2 miles south of San Juan Bautista (#2/1), about the same
location as a M3.0 in November of last year.   The second was a M2.1 on
Wednesday that was located about six miles northwest of San Juan Bautista
(#3/1).  A M3.3 occurred in this same area in mid-February of this year.  
      
Northern & Central California

   Once again the Cape Mendocino area proved to be the most seismically
active region in the state, producing a pair of M3's and half a dozen
M2's.  Much of the activity occurred along the Mendocino fracture zone,
the boundary between the Pacific plate and the Gorda and North American
plates.  In this case most of the activity occurred earlier in the week
between Thursday and Saturday. Two zones were active during this time with
a trio of M2's located between 15 and 30 miles west of Petrolia (#1/2) and
a trio of slightly larger events, capped by a M3.2, between 75 and 100
miles west of Petrolia (#2/2).  Two earthquakes occurred on Saturday north
of the fracture zone, in the Eureka area.  The first was a M2.8 on
Saturday morning that was located about 30 miles southeast of Eureka.  It
was followed that afternoon by a M3.5 that occurred along the coast just
12 miles southwest of Eureka and that was felt in the Eureka area (#4/2).
As is often the case here, most of the earthquakes in this area had focal
depths of between 20 and 30km, reflecting a source within the subducting
Gorda plate. 
  The rest of the state was pretty quiet with only a few M2's worth
mentioning.  Among these were a M2.7 beneath of Sierra Nevada foothills
about 27 miles southwest of Yosemite Valley (#5/2), a M2.8 beneath the 
high Sierras about 16 miles southwest of Markleeville (#6/2), and a M2.3
on the San Andreas about 3 miles northwest of Parkfield (#7/2).  

Long Valley Caldera
    The western end of the south moat continued to be the most active area
within the caldera with a half dozen small earthquakes during the week,
the largest a M2.0 last Thursday morning (#1/3).  The south side of the
caldera in the vicinity of the Hilton Creek fault also experienced a few
M1 earthquakes. 
   South of the caldera there were a couple of small M2 events in the
vicinity of Mt. Morrison (#2,#3/3).  
 

Table 1. Northern & Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 17  809 41.19 40 24.36 124 38.51 24.86 12 1 .10 2.1 1.7 MEN-  2.0
93 JUN 17  839 40.57 40 25.05 125 41.70 21.86 21 1 .4110.323.6 MEN-- 2.6
93 JUN 17  922  1.47 37 38.54 118 55.13  8.48 30 4 .13  .4  .4 SMO   2.1
93 JUN 17  937 29.82 37 38.67 118 55.04  7.61  8   .02  .7 1.1 SMO   1.0
93 JUN 17 1017 21.86 37 33.30 118 50.52  3.56 18   .07  .3  .9 MOR   1.6

93 JUN 17 1334  3.76 37 38.47 118 55.10  6.09  8   .07  .6 1.3 SMO   1.4
93 JUN 17 1334 25.88 37 38.73 118 55.07  9.05 16 2 .11  .5  .9 SMO   1.7
93 JUN 17 1342 57.78 37 38.65 118 55.32  7.48 15 1 .04  .4  .6 SMO   2.0
93 JUN 17 1638 15.01 37  6.36 121 52.15  5.59 43 2 .09  .2  .3 LOM   2.1
93 JUN 17 1706 44.23 37 27.09 118 22.68 10.04 22 1 .09  .3  .7 CHV   1.8

93 JUN 17 1740 57.63 37  6.27 121 52.16  5.42 22   .08  .3  .5 LOM   1.2
93 JUN 17 2154 48.88 36 38.49 121 15.16  4.02 28   .08  .2  .6 STN   2.0
93 JUN 17 2213 53.62 37 47.08 118  9.91  2.85 14 2 .11 1.5 2.9 WHI-  1.7
93 JUN 17 2226 21.42 38 47.25 122 46.33  2.43  7   .03  .3  .8 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 18    6 32.64 37 45.54 118 11.12  0.43  9 1 .07 2.9 2.1 WHI-  1.4

93 JUN 18   26 26.82 36  2.50 120 35.03  4.63 21 3 .09  .4  .5 SLA   1.6
93 JUN 18  208  2.65 37  0.87 121 27.87  5.65 18 1 .06  .3  .5 CYS   1.1
93 JUN 18  255 28.28 37 25.05 118 33.34  7.74 24 3 .07  .3  .6 RVL   1.6
93 JUN 18  320 34.25 40 18.25 124 36.13 20.06 16 1 .13 1.4  .6 MEN   2.2
93 JUN 18  326 14.84 38 47.31 122 45.41  1.76 13   .03  .2  .6 GEY   1.3

93 JUN 18  344 12.26 38 50.46 122 49.37  2.22 10   .03  .3  .8 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 18  423 17.90 39 18.55 123 18.76  0.78 12 2 .08  .3 1.9 MAA-  1.2
93 JUN 18  443 13.24 37 47.92 118  8.51  0.35 29   .11 1.7 6.6 NEV-  2.6
93 JUN 18  626 12.23 36 28.15 121  2.70  6.40 15 2 .06  .3  .7 BIT   1.1
93 JUN 18  825 43.69 36 24.29 120 58.76  5.58 41 3 .08  .2  .6 BIT   2.0

93 JUN 18  916 36.14 38 47.57 122 45.20  1.97  7   .10  .5 1.2 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 18  925 11.99 38 49.74 122 47.94  2.19 18   .15  .4  .8 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 18 1210 38.71 37 37.28 119 25.35  9.08 42 4 .15  .6 2.7 KAI-  2.1
93 JUN 18 1218 36.13 37 37.38 119 25.75  8.37 10 2 .13  .811.9 KAI - 1.2
93 JUN 18 1240 22.81 37 37.21 119 25.15  7.28 16 4 .20  .712.5 KAI * 1.6

93 JUN 18 1316 39.55 37 37.41 119 25.63  7.27  9 2 .11 1.012.0 KAI - 1.7
93 JUN 18 1348 10.38 38 47.26 122 45.38  2.11 10   .04  .3  .7 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 18 1352 12.77 36 56.16 121 31.21  3.22 38 1 .19  .3  .7 SAR   1.5
93 JUN 18 1449  9.89 37 25.51 121 46.21  8.16 40 2 .05  .2  .4 ALU   1.8
93 JUN 18 1500 35.28 40 38.54 123 35.98 26.53 30 2 .12  .3  .6 EUR   2.9

93 JUN 18 1544 29.10 36 39.24 120 49.49  2.67 10 1 .07  .8 1.3 ORT   1.0
93 JUN 18 1547 15.32 40 38.62 123 34.91 24.48  9 1 .16  .9 1.7 EUR   1.9
93 JUN 18 1730 20.01 38 51.35 122 49.43  1.51  9   .05  .4  .8 GEY   1.5
93 JUN 18 1905 29.78 37 14.37 119 28.96 43.88  9 2 .12 1.1 1.1 KAI   2.2
93 JUN 18 2037 31.69 36  2.27 120 34.68  4.19 12 2 .09  .5  .9 SLA   1.2

93 JUN 18 2145 36.16 37 31.01 118 25.24  8.53 16   .03  .3  .6 CHV   1.4
93 JUN 18 2336 28.88 36 49.03 121 32.33  5.59 65 4 .20  .3  .5 SJB   2.6
93 JUN 19   52 24.06 40 40.35 124 20.14 24.81 25 2 .08  .5 1.2 EUR   3.6
93 JUN 19  119 32.11 38 49.16 122 48.76  3.79 11   .06  .4  .6 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 19  145  8.68 37  6.28 121 52.18  5.33 30 1 .10  .2  .5 LOM   1.5

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 19  426 23.00 40 25.82 125 46.62 16.36 28 1 .30 7.712.5 MEN-  3.1
93 JUN 19  637 51.65 37 39.21 118 56.29  4.49 13   .11  .5  .7 SMO   1.5
93 JUN 19  708 37.12 40 27.75 126 14.62  5.69 20 1 .27 7.5 7.2 PON   2.9
93 JUN 19  833 55.75 37 27.93 119 57.24 11.83 11 3 .19 1.0 3.3 KAI   3.8
93 JUN 19 1110 45.40 37  3.78 121 31.05  3.16 43 4 .10  .2  .5 CYS   1.2

93 JUN 19 1116 44.71 38 47.39 122 46.88  3.96 14   .06  .3  .6 GEY   1.1
93 JUN 19 1124 52.64 37  4.05 121 30.43  6.92 19 3 .15  .5 1.3 CYS   1.0
93 JUN 19 1232 50.06 37 28.87 121 37.78  6.47 16   .04  .2  .6 HAM   1.6
93 JUN 19 1507 33.22 38 49.45 122 46.25  1.05  9   .02  .2  .7 GEY   1.3
93 JUN 19 1613 35.89 38 49.01 122 48.56  3.67  8   .03  .4  .8 GEY   1.2

93 JUN 19 1631 20.80 38 49.57 122 46.74  3.22 10   .03  .3  .7 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 19 1650  8.05 37 42.57 118 49.47 16.30  8   .15 4.5 6.5 NMO   1.1
93 JUN 19 1802 52.52 37 38.67 118 52.81  7.03  9   .07  .7  .9 SMO   1.1
93 JUN 20   10  0.63 37 38.99 118 56.14  4.13 13   .08  .4  .7 SMO   1.5
93 JUN 20   24 28.88 36 36.54 121 12.33  3.87 14   .07  .3 1.3 PIN   1.9

93 JUN 20   35 43.37 37 39.02 118 54.85  7.93 11   .08  .7  .7 DOM   1.4
93 JUN 20  125 21.01 38 48.06 122 44.31  2.36 10   .05  .3  .8 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 20  214 54.17 40  0.30 123 28.15  0.11 10   .18 1.0 4.3 BAR * 1.7
93 JUN 20  550 50.84 38 49.36 122 46.90  3.07  7   .01  .3  .8 GEY   1.2
93 JUN 20  636 25.20 40 26.02 124 54.45 22.80  8   .11 6.212.3 MEN - 2.4

93 JUN 20  640 51.83 38 49.47 122 49.51  0.72 11   .08  .3  .9 GEY   1.5
93 JUN 20  742 36.19 37 29.78 118 48.42  8.20 23   .11  .5 1.5 MOR   2.0
93 JUN 20 1126 22.15 37 33.31 118 52.38  7.06 25   .11  .4  .9 MOR   2.1
93 JUN 20 1219 42.89 36  0.99 120 34.35  5.07 16   .11  .4  .7 SLA   1.7
93 JUN 20 1237 43.81 38 49.35 122 49.93  0.04  8   .14  .6 2.6 GEY * 1.5

93 JUN 20 1255 53.47 37 34.40 118 28.02  9.09 15   .06  .3  .8 CHV   2.1
93 JUN 20 1454 30.40 38 49.53 122 47.56  2.27 15   .05  .2  .4 GEY   1.6
93 JUN 20 1955 34.67 38 47.61 122 46.50  2.29  9   .02  .3  .6 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 20 2038 11.48 37 37.90 118 53.01  6.28 13   .08  .4  .6 SMO   1.4
93 JUN 20 2346 15.15 38 40.19 122 48.31  9.04 11   .13  .6 1.7 NAP   1.2

93 JUN 21  255 41.22 38 48.63 122 48.23  2.97 19   .06  .2  .5 GEY   1.9
93 JUN 21  439  0.66 37 21.41 118 23.15  9.01 12   .09  .5 1.5 OWV   1.8
93 JUN 21  444  1.59 38 50.91 122 49.05  1.58 11   .04  .3  .8 GEY   1.5
93 JUN 21  457 31.84 38 47.71 122 45.00  0.46 11   .06  .2  .8 GEY   1.6
93 JUN 21  458 45.85 38 47.68 122 45.01  0.83  8   .05  .3 1.0 GEY   1.2

93 JUN 21  817 53.59 37 38.44 118 52.76  6.65 11   .07  .6  .8 SMO   1.0
93 JUN 21  923  2.17 38 49.02 122 48.56  3.98 16   .02  .2  .6 GEY   2.3
93 JUN 21  924 32.18 37 39.72 118 50.95  5.76  9 2 .07  .6 1.7 DOM   1.1
93 JUN 21 1106 15.49 38 38.46 122 43.44  5.84 11   .10  .5 1.3 NAP   1.6
93 JUN 21 1137 36.30 37 36.86 118 48.99  5.20 16   .12  .4  .7 HCF   1.9

93 JUN 21 1348 24.15 37 36.83 118 48.91  5.17 17   .11  .4  .6 HCF   1.9
93 JUN 21 1555 57.00 37 38.62 118 57.04  7.04 10 2 .02  .7  .9 SMO   1.0
93 JUN 21 1622 42.70 37 37.01 118 49.39  5.67 17 1 .11  .4  .6 HCF   1.6
93 JUN 21 1639 37.50 38 48.07 122 47.33  1.10  7   .04  .3  .5 GEY   1.0
93 JUN 21 2059 14.59 38 49.29 122 48.43  3.86 14   .08  .3  .7 GEY   1.7

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 21 2131 58.56 38 47.04 122 45.38  1.25  7   .07  .3 1.0 GEY   1.0
93 JUN 21 2304  8.44 38 48.72 122 49.65  1.54 13   .11  .3  .8 GEY   1.7
93 JUN 21 2317  7.21 37 21.36 118 22.91 10.27  8   .07  .5 1.3 OWV   1.5
93 JUN 21 2357 38.06 38 49.29 122 48.33  4.14 29   .08  .2  .5 GEY   2.2
93 JUN 22  541  0.38 38 30.86 119 58.04 18.74  8   .1510.1 4.8 YOS - 2.8

93 JUN 22  742 18.08 37 38.73 118 55.25  6.81 12   .10  .6  .8 SMO   1.5
93 JUN 22  743 19.98 37 38.29 118 55.34  6.20  8   .03  .8 1.5 SMO   1.1
93 JUN 22  743 42.32 37 38.41 118 55.21  7.20 16   .09  .4  .6 SMO   1.8
93 JUN 22  744 19.54 37 38.11 118 55.15  6.85  7   .02  .7 1.0 SMO   1.1
93 JUN 22  752 36.82 37 38.43 118 55.20  6.89 14   .08  .4  .8 SMO   1.4

93 JUN 22  951 46.29 37 39.54 118 55.05  7.73  9   .12 1.0 1.8 DOM   1.0
93 JUN 22 1341 30.87 37  8.88 121 33.16  2.43 16   .04  .3  .7 CYN   1.4
93 JUN 22 1406 58.31 40 32.13 123 55.77 20.29  8   .09  .7  .7 EUR   1.9
93 JUN 22 1525 19.10 38 49.60 122 47.57  0.92  8   .08  .4  .8 GEY   1.9
93 JUN 22 1550  0.74 38 46.97 122 45.52  1.25 12   .05  .3  .6 GEY   1.5

93 JUN 22 1629  2.03 37 31.39 118 50.18  0.04  8   .05  .9  .5 MOR * 1.5
93 JUN 22 1758 49.65 38 48.58 122 48.59  3.78 16   .04  .2  .5 GEY   1.9
93 JUN 22 2031 34.80 38 48.04 122 47.05  0.46 10   .04  .3  .5 GEY   1.8
93 JUN 22 2032 13.15 38 48.16 122 47.14  0.06  8   .09  .3 2.1 GEY * 1.4
93 JUN 23   49 56.75 38 48.59 122 48.89  3.67 10   .11  .4 1.1 GEY   1.2

93 JUN 23  307 43.44 39 28.58 122 59.79  8.05 11   .03  .3  .8 BAR   1.9
93 JUN 23  337 15.69 37 40.41 118 52.24  6.06  9 1 .18 1.0 1.6 DOM   1.1
93 JUN 23  517 53.58 37 52.10 118 10.61  2.64 13   .10 2.4 4.9 NEV   2.2
93 JUN 23  540 10.38 37 18.63 121 40.84  6.14 19   .04  .2  .6 SFL   1.4
93 JUN 23  547 49.82 37 37.42 118 49.86  8.88 10 1 .09  .6  .9 HCF   1.5

93 JUN 23  910  0.52 35 55.44 120 28.68  5.43 40   .13  .3  .4 MID   2.3
93 JUN 23  930  8.59 35 55.56 120 28.45  5.34 11   .02  .5  .4 MID   1.3
93 JUN 23 1454 30.32 37 33.96 121 40.64  4.11 11   .07  .3  .5 HAM   1.3
93 JUN 23 1639 58.01 37 34.40 118 48.75  2.50 16 1 .10  .4 1.9 MOR   1.8
93 JUN 23 1848 56.51 38 47.22 122 45.43  0.04  9 1 .10  .3 1.1 GEY   1.6

93 JUN 23 2038 18.10 36 54.11 121 37.30  0.02 21   .11  .2  .8 SJB * 2.1
93 JUN 24  437 50.45 35 50.08 119 53.28  6.64 10   .10 1.6  .9 COA   2.0

Subject: N. CA, USA, and World Quake Report 6/24-6/30/93

<<Explanatory material as before>>

San Francisco Bay Area  
    
   Another quiet week in the Bay area, though there were a couple of
earthquakes worth mentioning.   During the 7-day period ending at midnight
on Wednesday, June 30, 1993 the U.S. Geological Survey office in Menlo
Park recorded 18 earthquakes of magnitude one (M1) and greater within the
San Francisco Bay area shown in Figure 1.  Four of these were as large as
M2.0.  This total compares to just 14 earthquakes during the previous week
(June 17 - 23), two of which were as large as M2.0. 
   A M2.4 earthquake occurred early Sunday morning in the Kentfield/Corte
Madera area of Marin county (#2 in figure 1).  No reports were received
that this earthquake was felt, due to its small size and early hour. 
Earthquakes in this area are somewhat unusual;  the only earthquake
recorded in this area during the past three years was a M1 event in May,
1992 that occurred some five miles to the northwest of Sunday's temblor. 
   The southern Peninsula also experienced a M2 during the week, a M2.2
last Thursday on the Black Mountain thrust fault about 4 miles southwest
of Mountain View (#1/1).  It was followed several days later by a M1.4. 
The most recent M2 earthquakes on this fault occurred in April, 1992 when
three M2's were recorded within a 2-week period.
   Finally, a pair of M2's occurred on the Quien Sabe fault Wednesday
afternoon (#3/1).  
  
      
Northern & Central California

  The past week was also pretty quiet throughout much of the state.  Cape
Mendocino led the list with one M3.0 and a pair of M2's (#1/2).  Two were
west of Petrolia along the Mendocino fracture zone, the third was
northeast of Petrolia and probably associated with one of the numerous
thrust faults that characterize the geology of this continental margin.  
A pair of M2's also occurred  beneath the Klamath Mountains about 40 miles
southeast of Eureka (#5/2).  
   Other activity in the northern part of the state included a pair of
M2's in the northern Coast Ranges (#2,#7/2), a pair of M2's in the
northern Sierra Nevada about 20 miles southwest of Quincy (#4/2), and a
M2.5 about 20 miles northwest of Truckee (#8/2).   The only notable
earthquake in the eastern Sierra Nevada region was a M3.0 in the northern
Owens Valley about 14 miles southeast of Mammoth Lakes (#6/2).  The lone
M2 earthquake in central California was a M2.3 six miles northeast of
Coalinga (#3/2).

Long Valley Caldera
    
   For the first time in over a month there were no earthquakes as large
as M2 inside the caldera.  Activity south of the caldera included a pair
of M2's west of Convict Lake (#3/3), a M2.3 southeast of Mt. Morrison
(#2/3), and a M2.3 on the Hilton Creek fault (#1/3).  

Table 1. Northern & Central California Seismicity (M>1.0)

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 24  910 33.67 40 18.11 124 35.78 20.07 14   .12 2.3  .4 MEN   3.0
93 JUN 24  919 22.85 38 47.87 122 46.71  0.00  7   .07  .4 1.5 GEY * 1.1
93 JUN 24 1151 37.30 37  9.02 121 33.69  1.98  8   .04  .5 1.3 CYN   1.1
93 JUN 24 1441 25.73 39 43.91 123 11.09  0.09 16   .09  .3 3.2 BAR * 2.1
93 JUN 24 1442 11.67 39 43.92 123 11.19  1.75  9   .10  .5 9.1 BAR - 1.8

93 JUN 24 1511 18.27 38 47.98 122 46.97  4.61 19   .04  .2  .5 GEY   2.0
93 JUN 24 1544 24.90 37  9.00 121 32.19  8.77 19   .06  .3  .6 CYN   1.3
93 JUN 24 1604 14.53 37 34.51 118 51.98  5.55 11   .09  .6 1.0 MOR   1.4
93 JUN 24 2058 49.22 37 19.98 122  6.60  0.11 16   .23 1.0 3.9 BLM * 2.2
93 JUN 25    1 34.30 38 47.40 122 46.39  2.91 11   .04  .3  .7 GEY   1.4

93 JUN 25  650 23.96 38 49.17 122 47.20  1.48 11   .06  .3  .6 GEY   1.6
93 JUN 25  704 11.62 38 49.24 122 47.20  1.45  9   .06  .3  .5 GEY   1.3
93 JUN 25  827 20.63 38 50.21 122 48.12  1.26 16   .09  .3  .9 GEY   1.9
93 JUN 25 1055  4.95 36  9.54 120 16.43  8.81 43   .21  .4  .9 COA   2.3
93 JUN 25 1352 42.28 35 59.75 120 32.98  5.26 13   .06  .3  .6 MID   1.6

93 JUN 25 1406 51.26 38 49.30 122 47.89  3.75 10   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 25 1535 50.46 36  0.03 120 32.81  5.21  9   .05  .6  .9 MID   1.3
93 JUN 25 1848 20.80 37 39.09 118 54.97  3.69 11   .05  .4  .6 DOM   1.6
93 JUN 25 1855 51.42 37 32.81 118 43.13 12.37 18   .11  .5 1.2 WCN   1.8
93 JUN 25 2206 27.60 36 51.82 121 19.55  5.81 29   .11  .3  .7 QUI   1.7

93 JUN 25 2317 33.94 38 47.93 122 47.93  2.11 20   .12  .3  .6 GEY   2.2
93 JUN 26   41 42.20 36 36.60 121 13.07  8.31 25   .10  .3  .9 PIN   1.8
93 JUN 26  615 30.77 40 23.51 124 15.37 11.55 17   .07  .4  .2 MEN   2.5
93 JUN 26  638 52.18 36 37.61 121  8.43  6.14  8   .11  .8  .9 BVL   1.2
93 JUN 26  705 43.26 36 46.08 121 28.76 10.30 11   .17  .7 1.3 SJB   1.0

93 JUN 26  733 52.91 36 33.54 121  9.24  5.86 23   .13  .3 1.7 PIN   1.9
93 JUN 26  916 10.99 37 34.65 118 50.66  8.82  7   .03  .8 1.0 MOR   1.0
93 JUN 26 1211  7.81 38 47.39 122 45.22  1.59 26   .13  .2  .7 GEY   2.4
93 JUN 26 1215 55.65 38 47.62 122 45.77  1.20  9   .05  .3  .8 GEY   1.3
93 JUN 26 1254 31.67 36 45.60 121 28.75  9.61 32   .20  .4  .8 SJB   1.8

93 JUN 26 1528 11.42 38 47.98 122 48.71  3.98 11   .04  .3  .6 GEY   1.6
93 JUN 26 1649  3.96 36 32.53 121  3.85  6.99 14   .11  .4 1.8 BVL   1.7
93 JUN 26 1709 30.14 38 47.96 122 48.79  4.12 18   .06  .2  .6 GEY   1.7
93 JUN 26 1836 34.56 38 47.98 122 48.69  4.42  7   .01  .4  .8 GEY   1.0
93 JUN 26 2220 34.27 39 41.55 121  6.54  9.27  8   .13 2.8 6.9 WAK   2.2

93 JUN 26 2341 38.94 40 54.40 123 28.25 21.84 12   .17  .6 1.2 KLA   2.4
93 JUN 27    4 23.67 38 48.08 122 48.85  2.02 10   .10  .4  .7 GEY   1.5
93 JUN 27   56 16.11 37 19.37 118 20.72  5.20 22   .08  .4 1.5 OWV   3.0
93 JUN 27  112 20.50 38 49.38 122 46.41  0.64  8   .05  .3  .8 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 27  154  2.60 35 43.22 118  3.48  3.57  7   .03  .6 2.6 WWF   1.4

93 JUN 27  303 38.73 37 38.49 118 56.94  7.69 14   .10  .5  .8 SMO   1.6
93 JUN 27  657 52.16 39 20.30 122 48.92  5.61 10   .07  .5 3.5 BAR   1.8
93 JUN 27  716  5.58 38 47.79 122 48.52  4.27 13   .06  .3  .6 GEY   1.6
93 JUN 27  910 53.29 38 47.82 122 48.11  1.74  9   .06  .3 1.6 GEY   1.6
93 JUN 27  926 35.47 38 49.09 122 48.71  4.20 17   .05  .2  .6 GEY   1.5

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 27  941  7.67 37 31.32 118 45.65  4.62 22   .12  .4 1.3 WCN   2.3
93 JUN 27 1023 38.73 39 54.94 122 54.14  0.05  8   .19  .7 8.6 SAC * 1.5
93 JUN 27 1144 59.97 37 56.73 122 33.00  6.73 58   .21  .3  .7 MAR   2.4
93 JUN 27 1233 59.20 37 34.90 118 52.07  2.99 12   .09  .5 1.1 MOR   1.6
93 JUN 27 1503  9.98 39 17.68 122 48.11  3.40 15   .05  .3 3.0 BAR   2.2

93 JUN 27 1606 31.37 38 45.37 122 42.25  2.03 13   .09  .4  .6 NAP   1.7
93 JUN 27 1726 28.68 39 36.25 120 21.26  8.28  7   .06 5.0 7.6 WAK - 2.5
93 JUN 27 1729 57.68 37 29.92 118 47.16  5.72 21   .13  .6 1.0 MOR   1.8
93 JUN 27 1752 24.19 37 33.07 118 49.92  5.83 21   .09  .3  .7 MOR   2.3
93 JUN 27 1756 47.22 37  6.01 121 30.15  7.86 16   .19  .6 1.2 CYN   1.1

93 JUN 27 1757 36.16 38 48.96 122 48.51  3.80  8   .05  .3  .8 GEY   1.1
93 JUN 27 1808 41.54 37 30.22 118 47.84 12.26 11   .11  .7 1.8 MOR   1.5
93 JUN 27 1856 33.06 37  8.47 121 32.95  2.90  8   .04  .5 1.1 CYN   1.1
93 JUN 27 2018  2.94 37 33.21 118 49.65  5.66  8   .01  .5  .9 MOR   1.2
93 JUN 27 2134  8.36 36  1.09 120 34.47  4.45 11 1 .15  .8 1.3 SLA   1.5

93 JUN 27 2222 31.80 38 47.66 122 44.85  0.16 11   .06  .3  .9 GEY   1.6
93 JUN 28  140 36.10 40 17.57 124 28.67 22.47  7   .07 1.8  .7 MEN   2.2
93 JUN 28  304 15.13 37  3.40 121 28.74  9.93 11   .05  .6 1.1 CYS   1.0
93 JUN 28  520 27.48 37 35.93 118 48.38  4.79  9   .11  .6  .9 MOR   1.5
93 JUN 28  549 24.93 38 47.71 122 46.96  4.74 16   .10  .3  .7 GEY   1.7

93 JUN 28  549 44.02 37 40.82 118 52.51  2.70  8 1 .09  .6 6.1 DOM   1.2
93 JUN 28  639 35.36 37 38.92 118 52.62  6.72  7 2 .06  .6 1.0 SMO   1.0
93 JUN 28  855 39.70 38 49.43 122 50.15  0.00  8   .05  .4  .9 GEY * 1.4
93 JUN 28  901 11.44 37 32.35 118 50.94  9.94 11   .08  .6 1.3 MOR   1.4
93 JUN 28  903 17.24 36  0.93 120 33.72  4.94  7   .08  .7 1.6 SLA   1.1

93 JUN 28  944 56.33 37 18.14 122  4.64  4.60 12   .08  .6 1.0 BLM   1.4
93 JUN 28 1214 57.71 37 36.82 118 50.32  9.64  8   .12  .9 1.5 SMO   1.2
93 JUN 28 1638 45.13 36 33.74 121  9.42  9.19  9   .04  .4 1.7 PIN   1.5
93 JUN 28 2135 18.31 37 38.36 118 51.51  5.38  7   .09  .6 1.2 SMO   1.3
93 JUN 29  258 33.91 39 42.26 121  4.28  2.11 10   .07 1.4 7.3 WAK - 2.2

93 JUN 29  408 20.72 37 33.42 118 26.46  6.08 14   .08  .4  .7 CHV   1.8
93 JUN 29  622 21.94 41  0.06 123 21.25 17.90  9   .18  .8 2.5 KLA   2.2
93 JUN 29 1020 27.77 36 34.40 121  6.27  7.93 39   .20  .4 1.1 BVL   1.9
93 JUN 29 1323 51.10 38 46.61 122 45.70  2.11 14   .06  .2  .8 GEY   1.7
93 JUN 29 1606  1.77 39 14.03 123 15.18  5.00 11   .10  .5 1.4 MAA   1.8

93 JUN 29 1724 54.03 36 53.50 121 36.66  3.76  9   .08  .4  .8 SJB   1.1
93 JUN 29 1726 40.43 38 48.28 122 49.30  1.71  7   .02  .3  .6 GEY   1.4
93 JUN 29 1733 57.48 37 34.26 118 52.00  7.39 17 2 .11  .4  .8 MOR   1.8
93 JUN 29 1846 12.68 39 14.07 123 14.87  1.75 11   .09  .510.8 MAA - 1.8
93 JUN 29 2041  0.10 38 49.35 122 50.47  0.37  7   .03  .5  .9 GEY   1.3

93 JUN 29 2051 18.15 37 46.77 122 13.45  1.97  9   .15  .612.6 HAY - 1.2
93 JUN 29 2059 56.91 37 19.05 121 42.05  0.03 22   .14  .3 4.4 SFL * 1.8
93 JUN 29 2205  4.02 37 38.06 118 49.84  9.25  8   .04  .6  .8 HCF   1.2
93 JUN 29 2213 20.81 37 36.82 118 52.44  3.82  7   .02  .5  .5 SHE   1.3
93 JUN 29 2259  4.88 37 26.48 121 40.81  6.77 10   .09  .4  .9 HAM   1.2

--ORIGIN TIME (UT)-- -LAT N-- --LON W-- DEPTH  N N RMS ERH ERZ       DUR
YR MON DA HRMN  SEC  DEG MIN  DEG  MIN    KM  RD S SEC  KM  KM REMKS MAG

93 JUN 29 2318 59.47 37 35.76 118 53.26  3.51 18   .11  .5  .7 MOR   2.2
93 JUN 30  106  7.09 37 37.43 118 51.41  3.97 12   .12  .5  .7 SMO   1.4
93 JUN 30  130 20.38 36 37.88 121 14.74  5.94 14   .03  .3  .9 STN   1.7
93 JUN 30  232 49.14 37 35.70 118 53.23  3.57 15   .11  .4  .7 MOR   2.0
93 JUN 30  322 22.78 37 35.45 118 53.31  2.75  8   .06  .6 4.0 MOR   1.5

93 JUN 30  531 37.21 38 47.79 122 46.59  2.30 10   .05  .4  .5 GEY   1.5
93 JUN 30 1304 31.36 37 34.17 118 51.91  4.96  8 1 .04  .6 1.1 MOR   1.0
93 JUN 30 1314 18.05 36  2.89 120 35.23  4.62 11   .08  .7  .6 SLA   1.4
93 JUN 30 1641 41.43 37 32.92 118 48.64  1.17  7   .09 1.3  .8 MOR   1.4
93 JUN 30 1654 32.24 37 37.26 118 49.32  5.69  8 1 .12  .9 1.5 HCF   1.1

93 JUN 30 2037 29.33 36 48.99 121 16.91  8.55 64   .18  .3  .4 QUI   2.5
93 JUN 30 2058 59.41 36 48.85 121 17.04  7.66  7   .01 1.3 1.1 QUI   1.0
93 JUN 30 2314  8.02 36 49.13 121 16.77  9.61 59   .15  .3  .3 QUI   2.7

    With that, I'll stop posting these reports.  They may be obtained
    through USENET, or, I believe you can sign up to receive them via
    email.  If anyone is interested, I'll be glad to help.

                                Topher

But before that let me say, Thanks Toper, how can I sing up to get the
reports by e-mail and would you consider posting through the week of 
July 17 (since that is supposedly the new date of the "big one" according
to the last I heard from Scallion).

Conditions look right for a really spectacular disaster in the Mississippi
Valley.  I thought of entering this as a prediction. but then decided that
it would be cheating.  The following speculation is based on background
knowledge and observation of current events.

With very little additional help (such as a minor tropical disturbance)
it looks like this might be the year that the Mississippi River leaves
New Orleans.  The river is notoriously unstable in it's course and has
only been kept there because of man's efforts for some time now.  With the
right conditions, which are just about what we have right now, the new course
could be throught the Atchafalaya and Morgan, Louisiana could be the new,
city at the moth of the Mississippi which would be a real disaster for New
Orleans both economically and health wise.  Morgan and other cities on
the new course would also have some major problems to deal with.

Time will tell.

80)

    >GMS>>>Japan - I see every imaginable type of Earth change activity occurring in
    >Japan  this year and beyond.
    And exactly what kind of "Earth change" activity does Japan *not*
    experience with some fairly regular frequency?
    
    >Major volcanic activity will begin this yr;
    Doesn't he mean continue?     ^^^^^
    
    >earthquakes   exceeding 7.5 will hit offshore in the Sea of Japan;
    >storms from the north, and  a major fire in the city of Tokyo.
    OK, 1 of these three predictions has happened.  1 of the other two is
    probably not too exciting (I don't know the weather patterns in that
    part of the world -- how likely are "storms from the north"?)
    
    Marcos, have you been getting the ECR?  Can you report how many
    predictions GMS has made in the last year, and how many (of those
    predicted for that year) "hit"?  (Since you seem to focus on the hits
    more than the misses, some might say you're being somewhat selective
    in your reporting.)
    
    As far as I can tell, GMS makes lots and lots of predictions.
    Amazingly enough, some of them come true.  But nobody can tell
    how many didn't, and thus, how reasonable the occurrence of that
    many true predictions was.
    
    Mark

I can't remember (and don't have time to search): did GMS predict the
flooding in the Midwest?

    >> Major volcanic activity will begin this yr;
    > Doesn't he mean continue?     ^^^^^

    Well if they continue then that is what he meant. On the other hand if
    it is a "one of" then you read something into what he wrote.

    If you take the most earthquake prone areas of the world and predict
    that there will be an earthquake in each of them in any given year,
    odds on you will get at least one right. Sorry but I am singularly
    underwhelmed by his hit rate.

    Jamie.

    Re .367:
    Marcos,
    
    I did not say you were completely overlooking the failures.
    I am merely questioning the *completeness* of your reporting.
    
    Can you post the subscription info (rates, address) for ECR?
    I couldn't find it in a brief scan of this topic.
    
    Thanks,
    >Mark
    P.S. I fail to see how my (and other critics') reactions to GMS'
    predictions could cause someone else's bad karma to increase.
    Mebbe I better visit a karma topic.
    

    Re .371:
>note 1727.237 has GMS's phone and address.
    Obviously my scan was too brief :-).  Thanks.
    
    In re why you post these things:
    
    As you say, GMS' predictions have relevance to this conference, and
    I'm not saying you shouldn't post any information.
    
    However:
>3. If GMS has indeed a high hit rate, then his predictions might be useful to
>whoever might be concerned.  
    If you wish to establish the hit rate, you must look at *all* the data,
    as rigorously as possible.  Otherwise, you may be picking and choosing
    data points to achieve results you may be predisposed to receive.
    
    That said, I will say something I think I said earlier, when this
    string got off the ground:  *I* don't know whether or not to take
    GMS seriously or not, since I haven't seen enough of the data.
    A relatively complete sequence of ECR's from, say, the last two years
    (or however long he's been publishing them, if shorter) would probably
    constitute "enough data."  Given that data, I can
      1. count the number of predictions
      2. count the number of successful predictions
      3. assess the statistical likelihood of each prediction, relative
         to chance and/or an expert's ability to predict the same thing
    
    Are you willing to undertake something like that with the data you
    have, Marcos?
    Mark (sending mail to GMS tomorrow)
    

    Pity the earthquake predictor had not chosen floods, he would have been
    on a winner.

    Jamie.

Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 12:53:54 PDT

	SAN FRANCISCO (UPI) -- Scientists studying a 1992 California
earthquake reported evidence Friday that the Pacific Northwest -- from
Cape Mendocino to British Columbia -- is at risk for catastrophic
temblors and sea waves.
	In the journal Science, 20 reseachers who spent a year analyzing data
from the April 1992 tremor in Humboldt County in Northern California
said this was not just any earthquake but the much-feared spasm in the 
``Cascadia subduction zone'' that tore the crust six miles under the
surface.
	The finding could provide conclusive proof that far larger shakers
may eventually jar territory stretching from Cape Mendocino -- already
among California's most seismically active areas -- into Canada, a region
historically devoid of strong tremors.
	The future earthquake ``could generate a tsunami, or sea wave,
powerful enough to inundate communities along much of the Pacific
Northwest coast within minutes of the main shock,'' said David
Oppenheimer of the U.S. Geological Survey regional center in Menlo Park.
	What is new about the scientists' findings, he said, ``is that this
is the first time we have seen a bona fide subduction earthquake in the
area.''
	In subduction earthquakes -- among the largest in the world -- plates
in the Earth's crust lunge sharply as they are shoved, or subducted,
under other plates.
	These temblors -- such as the jolt on the coast of Chile in 1960 that
measured 9.5 on the Richter scale, perhaps the largest in recorded
history -- generate tsunamis that can reach 30 feet or more, wreaking
havoc and destruction.
	The 7.1 1992 quake, which because it occurred at low tide set off
only a minor tsunami, occurred near a geologically complex formation
called ``the Mendocino Triple Junction.''
	Here, the infamous San Andreas Fault ends against a small slab of
crust called the Gorda Plate, which -- pushed by the larger Pacific Plate
-- is sliding under the edge of the North American continent.
	The Gorda Plate and the larger Juan de Fuca Plate to its north are
disappearing into the Cascadia subduction zone, named for the Cascade
Range of volcanoes that includes Mount Shasta, Mount Hood and Mount St.
Helens.
	While most of the region's earthquakes are linked to the sideways
motions of the San Andreas Fault and a series of offshore faults, the
scientists said last year's temblor struck on a huge ``thrust fault''
forming an almost horizontal boundary between the Gorda Plate and the
overlying North American Plate.
	The study concluded the Gorda Plate moved about eight feet farther
under North America during the quake. A 15-mile stretch of coastline
rose or dropped by several feet in places.
	A large subduction earthquake on California's far north coast could
send waves 30 feet to 100 feet high within 20 minutes and recurring for
many hours, the scientists said.
	They do not know when, or if, such a quake will shake the area.
	State emergency planners said the report will help them form a plan
of action in case of such a disaster.

    RTw  08/01 0733  EARTHQUAKE KILLS TWO IN SUDAN

    KHARTOUM, Aug 1 (Reuter) - A woman and her child died in an earthquake
    which struck the Sudanese capital Khartoum on Sunday, the official
    Sudanese news agency SUNA reported.

    The woman and her three-year-old child died when the balcony of a house
    collapsed in the al-Mamoura residential district 10 km (six miles)
    south of the centre of Khartoum, SUNA said, quoting an official source.

    Seven people were injured in the quake, it added.

    The magnitude of the quake was not known.

    The Egyptian news agency Mena said the quake struck at dawn and was
    followed by a tremor at 0715 a.m. local time.

    Sudanese Interior Minister Air Force Brigadier Abdel-Rahim Mohammad
    Hussein said there was no cause for panic, Mena, monitored by the
    British Broadcasting Corporation, reported.

    REUTER

    re: .380, Marcos,
    	While doing some research on the 'hundredth monkey phenomenon' for
    	another topic, I came across an interesting source, but it's
    	only loosely related to psychic phenomena.  South African
    	naturalist Eugene Marais in 1937, wrote _The_Soul_of_the_White_Ant_, 
    	which describes his impression of remarkable cooperation in 
    	african insects.  Lewis Thomas has also written some interesting
    	essays on the topic (see his books The_Lives_of_a_Cell_, and
    	The_Medusa_and_the_Snail) proposing that the usual notion of instinct
    	really doesn't do justice to amazing impression of 'mind' and
    	'design' that we get from watching such things in nature.
    
    	Whether that has anything to do with individual animals sensing
    	impending doom, or with mind-reading horses, I have no idea.
    
    							kind regards,
    
    							todd

    Todd and Marcos,
    
    I recall vaguely that lemmings fall into the sea and drown because
    of population pressure: in a very good year, there is a population
    explosion, then, food becomes harder to find, lemmings swarm
    everywhere, and a lot of them go over the cliffs.
    
    My speculation:  The mice in China have been forced out of their
    habitations by the flooding, which had eventually herded them in the
    direction of the sea.
    
    						Ann B.

Ann,

Although lemmings and I would presume mice can have such population 
explosions that they will have a massive migration, the lemmings over
the cliff number was actually staged by the Disney film crew for dramatic
effect.  There was actually somebody out of sight pushing them toward the 
edge in massive numbers until all they could do was fall.

Going into the sea, on the other hand, can be caused by population explosions
and natural disasters.  From a small rodent viewpoint it seems that it
would be very difficult to determine that the water one was facing was
more than a few feet across.

Just my $0.02.
80)

    Re: lemmings et al.
    
    In his fantasy series set on the"Discworld," Terry Pratchett describes
    a relative of the lemming, the verminne.  Like the lemming, it used
    to indulge in mass migrations and hurl itself into large bodies of
    water in great numbers.  However, since dead animals don't breed,
    natural selection has altered the behavior of the verminne.  Modern
    verminne are descended only from those verminne who, when presented
    with a cliff to leap over, squeaked the rodent equivalent of "Blow that
    for a game of soldiers!" and went home.   They now build small boats to 
    cross rivers and lakes.  When they come to an ocean, they hang about on 
    the shore, avoiding each other's eyes, then head back early to avoid 
    the rush.
    
    Earl Wajenberg

>===============================================================================
>Note 1727.324                  Natural Disasters                     324 of 383
>VERGA::STANLEY                                       2 lines  19-MAY-1993 12:38
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>   It won't make it until August... not at the rate it's building up.

 
    Well it did. Using my retrospect-o-scope I can see that everyone was
    working themselves into a panic around May this year. We were getting
    dire predictions, from all directions, about a massive earthquake that
    was due any minute. Why it was even backed up by "scientific" evidence
    of low frequency vibrations.

    While we were all looking at California for the natural disaster coming
    in the shape of an earthquake the real disaster was flooding on the
    other side of the USA.

    Colour me unimpressed.

    Jamie.
                                            

    
    There isn't a crayon in my crayon box that colour, Jamie.
    
    Whatever shall we do?               
    
    Btw, Mary is no longer with Digital.
    
    Cindy

	go to your local paint(er) store.
	get _River Sand_, it's fairly unimpressive.
	
	or try green wellies, or amber.
	
	You're welcome.
	Jay

    Right, Jay.  It's the shade of beige that you would paint your ceiling.
    
    Jamie, the flooding was in the middle, not on the right side.
    
    							Ann B.

    Spoken like an Easterner Ann.  It's much closer to the East than to
    the West coast.

                                            Topher

    Well it certainly wasn't in California, where the disaster was
    predicted to happen. 

    Like the "Red Alert" topic it was a load of rubbish.

    Jamie.

    Topher,
    
    Humpph.  If I were a *true* Easterner, I would have said the flooding
    was in the Far West, because the Mid-West is the area between the
    Connecticut River and the mouth of the Ohio.  (True Easterners, like
    True Anythings, are both ignorant and provincial about geography.)
    
    							Ann B.

    AP 09/30 01:02 EDT V0612

    Copyright 1993. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. 

    EARTHQUAKE  

    NEW DELHI, India (AP) -- A powerful earthquake toppled houses and
    devastated villages in southern India before dawn Thursday, burying
    hundreds of people under their collapsed homes. An officer of the state
    police control room also said 500 people were feared dead. The quake,
    which registered 6.4 on the Richter scale, occurred about 620 miles
    east of Bombay.  

    AP NewsBrief by ALLAN KREDA 
    
    RTw  09/29 2221  REUTER WORLD NEWS HIGHLIGHTS 0200 GMT SEPT 30

    NEW DELHI - A major earthquake may have caused many deaths in the
    western Indian state of Maharashtra, All India Radio reported. It did
    not give the size of the tremors, but said there had been "huge loss of
    life" in Kinari, a village in the district of Nagpur.

    REUTER

    On this morning's news, (US Eastern Daylight Time, I saw it at 5:00 AM)
    the death toll was at 4000 and climbing and the injuries were estimated
    at at least 8000. My prayers and thoughts with all affected by this
    disaster.
    
    PJ

    U.K. News Clips

    RTw  09/30 0637  WORST INDIA QUAKE IN 50 YEARS KILLS 4,000 PEOPLE

    By Jeremy Clift

    BOMBAY, Sept 30 (Reuter) - At least 4,000 people were crushed to death
    and thousands more injured by falling debris in India on Thursday when
    the region's most deadly earthquake in half a century flattened
    hundreds of homes, police said.

    Army and civilian rescue teams pulled out hundreds of bodies from
    beneath crumbled houses in the worst hit towns of Umbarga and Khilari,
    some 450 kms (280 miles) east of Bombay.

    "It looks like a human tragedy of unimaginable proportions," said S.V.
    Baraoker, director-general of police in the western state of
    Maharashtra, where most of the deaths occurred.

    "It started with a rumbling sound, followed by what sounded like an
    explosion," said Nandu Sutar, a resident in the town of Latur, close to
    the epicentre at the juncture of India's three southern and western
    states of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

    Russian, Swiss and British rescue teams were on standby after offering
    to help dig out buried survivors.

    The series of tremors, the strongest of which measured 6.4 on the
    open-ended Richter scale, were the deadliest in South Asia since
    independence from Britain in 1947.

    The region's worst earthquake this century was on May 31, 1935 when
    50,000 people were killed in the Quetta area of Pakistan. At least
    10,700 were killed in the Nepal/Bihar border region on January 15,
    1934, according to official records.

    Thursday's quake was so strong it was felt as far away as Madras, on
    India's opposite coast, and the southern city of Bangalore, where
    people rushed into the streets in panic in the middle of the night.

    Baraoker told Reuters that in a cluster of villages near the epicentre,
    many people were buried under mud and masonry.

    In New Delhi, army spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Anil Bhat said military
    relief and rescue teams were fanning out across the earthquake area
    from the surrounding cities of Pune, Ahmednagar and Secunderabad.

    Earth movers and cranes were being ferried in to spearhead rescue
    operations, and aircraft and helicopters were surveying the remote
    devastated area, he added.

    Tents were being flown in for the thousands of homeless and troops were
    setting up drinking water points.

    The Maharashtra police control centre in Bombay said worst hit was the
    town of Umbarga, in the Osmanabad district of the state where some
    3,000 people were reported killed and thousands more injured, many
    seriously

    At least 500 bodies had been removed from under collapsed houses in
    Khilari, a town of around 15,000 people some 450 km (280 miles) east of
    Bombay, where three-quarters of the homes were razed by a series of
    five powerful tremors, nearby residents contacted by telephone said.

    "The situation is very, very bad," said a resident in the nearby town
    of Latur.

    The Maharashtra state police control room said 1,000 people had died in
    Khilari, and at least 30 others were reported to have been killed in
    surrounding areas.

    But there were no reports of deaths in Bombay, India's commercial
    capital.

    Scores of wounded people were brought to Latur civil hospital by all
    available means of transport.

    "The hospital is full," one doctor said.

    The meteorological bureau said there was a succession of five tremors
    which shook western and southern India. The first at 3.56 a.m. (2226
    GMT) measured at least 6.4 on the Richter scale.

    A bureau spokesman said the vibrations were so severe, the data on
    seismic recorders was smudged.

    In Golden, Colorado, the U.S. Geological Survey described the
    earthquake as the largest in the area since December 11, 1967, when a
    shock of 6.5 magnitude was felt some 270 km (170 miles) west of the
    epicentre of Thursday's quake.

    S.N. Chatterjee, director-general of the India Meteorological
    Department, said the geological structure of the area meant
    considerable damage was likely.

    "In western and southern India, the earth formation is such, it
    releases a lot of energy, so the damage to property and life could be
    high," he said.

    REUTER

    
    For more information on the situation in India, along with addresses to
    contribute, see the VAXWRK::INDIA conference, notes 1038 and 3.* (notes
    toward the end of the string.
    
    Cindy

                                 
    Thanks Marcos!  
    
    VHP America is the organization I've been working with on their 
    Global Vision 2000 conference and programs, and I know for certain 
    that 100% of the funds donated to the India relief effort are indeed 
    going directly to India.  So, if you can spare some funds in this
    economically challenging time, please do consider donating.
    
    Cindy

    
         On the news this morning:
    
      A major earthquake hit L.A. this morning at 4:31 Pacific Time. 
    6.6 on the Richter scale.
    
    
          Marion

    AP 05/23 23:49 EDT V0884

    Copyright 1994. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. 

    SEATTLE (AP) -- Mount Rainier, silent for 150 years, is going to erupt
    sooner or later, and scientists want to be ready when it does.  

    A report released Monday recommends new scientific studies and
    monitoring to assess the threat posed by the 14,410-foot volcano.  

    "A major volcanic eruption or debris flow could kill thousands of
    people and cripple the economy of the Pacific Northwest," said Richard
    S. Fiske, a Smithsonian Institution geologist who led the report.  

    The idea is to bring technology, social science and the public together
    so they can "be ahead of the disaster," he said.  

    Among other things, the report, prepared by the U.S. Geodynamics
    Committee of the National Research Council, recommends:  

    -- Mapping the mountain's structure and determining which areas are
    most likely to collapse.  

    -- Identifying unusual signals that could serve as a warning of
    eruptions.  

    -- Improving communication among scientists, public officials and the
    public to make it easier to plan for a big-time disaster.  

    "Most of the geological work on Mount Rainier was done more than 20
    years ago," Fiske said. "Its history and stability are still poorly
    understood."  

    The mountain last erupted about 150 years ago. But "based on past
    history, there is good reason to believe that the volcano will erupt
    again," the report said.  

    Some 3.5 million people live near the volcano, including 2.5 million in
    the Seattle-Tacoma metropolitan area, about 25 miles northwest of the
    peak.  

    If the mountain erupts, the lava flows would likely stay within or near
    the boundaries of Mount Rainier National Park. Ash most likely would
    blow away from urban areas, but occasional easterly winds could send it
    into the heavily populated Puget Sound basin, disrupting life for
    millions of people.  

    The greater danger to populated areas would be from sudden bursts of
    glacial water or from debris flows, known as lahars, that enter river
    drainages flowing to Puget Sound.  

    Such flows clogged the Toutle, Cowlitz and Columbia rivers after the
    1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens. 

    
    Oh no...poor Richard Bradley (a former DEJAVUer.)  He just moved from
    Los Angeles to Seattle.                 
    
    From the frying pan into the....volcano.
    
    Cindy