Reply to `A Second Opinion on “Operational Earthquake Forecasting: Some Thoughts on Why and How,” by Thomas H. Jordan and Lucile M. Jones,' by Stuart Crampin
Reply to `A Second Opinion on “Operational Earthquake Forecasting: Some Thoughts on Why and How,” by Thomas H. Jordan and Lucile M. Jones,' by Stuart Crampin
复制标题
DOI:
10.1785/gssrl.82.2.231
复制
发表时间:
2011-03
影响因子:
3.3
通讯作者:
T. Jordan;L. Jones
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
T. Jordan;L. Jones
In folklore, a “silver bullet” is an effective weapon against were-wolves and witches. In earthquake prediction, a silver bullet is a diagnostic precursor —a signal observed before an earthquake that indicates with high probability the location, time, and magnitude of the impending event (Jordan 2006). In his comment, Crampin (2010) claims that shear-wave splitting (SWS) observations provide a silver bullet. He asserts that seismology is thus capable of raising earthquake forecasting out of the low-probability environment to which we assigned it in our recent opinion piece (Jordan and Jones 2010). We find his arguments unconvincing. His conceptual basis is the notion that changes in shear-wave anisotropy are sensitive to changes in tectonic stress—a respectable hypothesis. But he burdens this concept with a thick pile of more dubious assumptions to somehow conclude that SWS observations can yield diagnostic precursors of large earthquakes. This is not the appropriate forum for a critical analysis of the prediction methodology he has advocated for several decades ( e.g. , Crampin et al. 1984). Suffice it to note that Crampin's …