3 ms·

> as much credibility as astrology If this sort of scientific astrology ends up providing precursor signals for future earthquakes, why would geologists have a

• jvanderbot 3y ago
  You're assuming an a priori bias. Astrology didn't lose favor because of some societal decree, it lost favor because it had no predictive power. It seems to be the same with analysis of precursor signals, and the subfield apparently went a little nuts and started to sound like quackery and data fudging.
  • musicale 3y ago
    Were geologists skeptical of the actual data from your sensor network?
    • jvanderbot 3y ago
      (editing to hit a moving target) We started the study with a good faith survey and intent to use space and ground signals in sync to detect impending earthquakes on nearish term. We had good technologists and scientists. As the study went on it became clear that all the scientists were completely unconvinced. Sure we could have built out the network but it wouldn't have done much. Most the scientists either lost faith or write dissenting opinions as part of the report. We did our job putting out the report but it was clear there was nothing to do after.