Astronomer accurately predicts Tokyo earthquake

I found this to be incredibly interesting.

From this CNN report on 9/15

Followed by this story, from the AP, released today.

I suppose he could have just made an extremely lucky educated guess, but on the other hand, he may be onto something revolutionary in the field of earthquake prediction.

Heh, perhaps this agency…

…would benefit from changing their belief that they know everything, to a more realistic view that they understand very little. A closed mind is a dangerous thing.

Considering that the quake did not hit Tokyo, and did not happen in the week of September 15 (as he predicted) I don’t think you can say he called this one.

He predicted Japan would have an earthquake? What next? Violence in the Middle East?

Oh, come on guys, be fair. Getting a big one like this within a week and a few hundred miles in the absence of volcanic activity would be a pretty stunning advance in earthquake prediction.

If. If his results are reproducible and reliable. I’d be curious to see the 8-level quakes he predicted which didn’t happen, for one. After a market crash, there are always people who “predicted” it; it usually turns out that they “predicted” 12 of the last two crashes.

But let’s see what else there is to say on this, hmm?

I’m with Manhattan on this one.

Scientists have been trying to figure out how to predict a tremblor for some time now, with very little in the way of concrete results to show for their efforts. When I see someone come very close with a prediction while using a novel and presumably untried approach, I can’t help but sit up and take notice.

If your definition of accurate is narrowing it down to a city block and time of day then no, he did not predict it by any stretch of the imagination. However, given the current state of the art of earthquake prediction, I would have to say that he nailed it quite well. You have to admit that even a loose margin of accuracy in this field could prove to be very useful.

Unfortunately, the naysayers always jump to the forefront clamoring to discredit someone like this and often can hamper any advancement of the science.

He may very well have just been lucky. He may also be on to something meaningful that can be fine tuned and used to save lives. At least give the man the benefit of a doubt until he either proves his ideas to have merit or shows his methodology to be inaccurate.

Sheesh! It never ceases to amaze me how quick people are to discount evolving science as flat out quackery. Just look at history, it’s rife with examples. Many of the pioneers who made great advances to our understanding of science were laughed at and persecuted, only to be later vindicated by further study. Some were driven completely out of their fields and riduculed by the world at large. Let’s not forget, the world is round. Unfortunately, there were many who vehemently stood in the way of allowing this quackball theory to become accepted.

I’m afraid it’s human nature, and it will always stand in the way of progress. Not much has changed. Have you not noticed how quick the scientific community is to form a pile-on in reaction to new methods and ideas? Many times, rightfully so. But in many, many cases, they were wrong and simply fighting to cling to their incorrect belief system. Sometimes I think the scientific community is it’s own worst enemy.

At any rate, if this guy has merit, it will be observable over time. It not, he will prove his own self wrong (no help from the peanut gallery needed). Just wait it out and see. Why are there not more attitudes of “Hmmm…could very well be. I sure hope it pans out, guess we’ll have to wait and see.” I simply suggest that an open mind to any subject can facilitate progress. A closed mind simply has nothing to offer. No sense to make up your own minds so abruptly (unless of course you enjoy your closed minds just the way they are).