| Revision as of 07:51, 4 May 2005 editRockBandit (talk | contribs)153 edits History of Earthquake Prediction← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:21, 6 May 2005 edit undoRockBandit (talk | contribs)153 edits Controversy in trying to predict earthquakes.Next edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| I think a new section entitled "The History of Earthquake Prediction" would be pretty nice to have. Detailing ancient Chinese observations on how animals acted (and how they met with both success and failure at using this method) and onward to modern predictions (Japan/Taiwan, Parkfield, Dr. K-B, modeling they are doing at UC Davis). ] 07:51, May 4, 2005 (UTC) | I think a new section entitled "The History of Earthquake Prediction" would be pretty nice to have. Detailing ancient Chinese observations on how animals acted (and how they met with both success and failure at using this method) and onward to modern predictions (Japan/Taiwan, Parkfield, Dr. K-B, modeling they are doing at UC Davis). ] 07:51, May 4, 2005 (UTC) | ||
| == Controversy in trying to predict earthquakes. == | |||
| I removed the following: | |||
| <blockquote><i>For example the loss of Space Shuttle Challenger during a cold weather launch would not be the sort of scientific experiment that one would want to "repeat" as many times as necessary to be "sure" before taking action or drawing conclusions. In such a case, a single data point is more than sufficient to draw conclusions thereby.</i></blockquote> | |||
| I think it really has nothing to do with this article and the way it is written is especially confusing. It is my opinion that we should leave it out, especially since it really doesn't contribute to the article in a meaningful way. | |||
| I also think the ending of this section should be rewritten somehow when talking about controversy in trying to predict earthquakes. ] 07:21, May 6, 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:21, 6 May 2005
I'll put the external links in later. This is a controversial topic and there are sooo many! Zeizmic 14:18 21 May 2003 (UTC)
History of Earthquake Prediction
I made some MAJOR edits to this page to clean it up and simply it for the average reader. This is an encyclopedia afterall, not a classroom text. I also felt a lot of the stock market information did not contribute much to this article. If one would like it put back in, I suggest a massive rewrite to clarify it.
I think a new section entitled "The History of Earthquake Prediction" would be pretty nice to have. Detailing ancient Chinese observations on how animals acted (and how they met with both success and failure at using this method) and onward to modern predictions (Japan/Taiwan, Parkfield, Dr. K-B, modeling they are doing at UC Davis). RockBandit 07:51, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
Controversy in trying to predict earthquakes.
I removed the following:
For example the loss of Space Shuttle Challenger during a cold weather launch would not be the sort of scientific experiment that one would want to "repeat" as many times as necessary to be "sure" before taking action or drawing conclusions. In such a case, a single data point is more than sufficient to draw conclusions thereby.
I think it really has nothing to do with this article and the way it is written is especially confusing. It is my opinion that we should leave it out, especially since it really doesn't contribute to the article in a meaningful way.
I also think the ending of this section should be rewritten somehow when talking about controversy in trying to predict earthquakes. RockBandit 07:21, May 6, 2005 (UTC)