. . . i found that some blog hoster claiming that they have been fooled by Li Shihui with his fake story, one said he has logged on the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS)’s website and found there is no staff nor scientist called ‘Li Shihui’.

Posting hearsay anecdotes and gossip?? I also found some blog hoster that claimed you had brain damage from drinking too much bad milk. I immediately dismissed that as a rumor but then made me wonder . . .

Living in Southern California – this is of great interest to me. I wish we could predict these.

The standards of building here and the retrofitting still leave a lot to be desired and I hope we have nothing to test in anytime soon. Retrofitting is taking far too long after our Northridge quake.

I was wondering when this stuff was going to make it in to wikipedia. Fake or not, it made it in there several days ago in the “Earthquake Prediction” section. Check under the “Earthquake prediction in China” subsection. Just thought you might be interested in it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake_prediction

Anyhow, I appreciate your honesty in your response to my query above.

The reason I posted the query above is that drought is not a unique earthquake precursor. That is, drought can occur through a multiplicity of reasons. So there isn’t a straight forward (one-to-one) correspondence between drought and earthquake.

That kind of makes it a bit hard to use drought as a reliable earth quake predictor. So, I was kind of curious as what other variables / parameters besides drought were used. I don’t have access to those articles, but I was hoping may be you or one of reader might.

Also, whenever people make strong claims about anything when the evidence or detail is kind skimpy , we have to look at it with a certain degree of skepticism.

At the same time, I am not arguing that the claim that the 5.12 earthquake was predicted well in advance is complete false. It is just that it’s an unsubstantiated claim. It should remain so until there is evidence showing otherwise.

So, I kind of share the same sentiment as Li above —”有本事现在把余震的时间和级别预测出来让大家看看.”

Again, thank you for your honesty.

Best
Kain

Agreed, and of course, not only houses but schools and other public buildings. The images of students being pulled out of the rubble of collapsed schools is heart-wrenching.

So, what is the most effective way to deal with earth quake? Simple, make sure all the houses to be earth quake proof. That will prevent the disaster more effectively.

In manufacturing, we believe in preventive actions instead of check or inspection.

It is a gamble either way whether or not to take precautions. In the Qinglong case, the first precaution was to educate citizens on staying safe in an earthquake and looking for natural signs of an impending quake, a low cost measure. When seismology readings and unusual natural phenomena like well water turning muddy and animals moving bizarrely suggested that a quake was imminent, then tents were set up about two days before the quake. Only 60% of residents moved into the tents, so the safety tips themselves, such as keeping doors and windows open for easy escape, seemed to have helped. In fact, that is how a visiting doctor from Qinglong managed to survive the collapse of a house in Tangshan where he was staying. Thirty years ago, even in a large city like Tangshan, people probably could have left their doors open and felt safe, but nowadays, that is an option only for villages.

I recall reading that all the doors but one were locked in one school which collapsed with high casualties during the recent earthquake. I’d guess the doors were chained and weren’t the kind of that are locked on the outside but able to be opened from the inside. Fires are a more likely risk than earthquakes, and chaining doors in buildings where there are people inside is unsafe anywhere anytime.

The key thing is for citizens to have access to information and make their own choices.