Do you think scientists will be able to predict an earthquake more precisely and give people several hours advance warning?
An earthquake prediction is a prediction that an earthquake in a specific magnitude range will occur in a specific region and time window. Predictions are considered as such to the extent that they are reliable for practical, as well as scientific, purposes. Although there is evidence that at least some earthquakes in some tectonic regimes are predictable with useful accuracy of time and space, the reliability and reproducibility of prediction techniques have not been established and are therefore generally not accepted by seismologists. Can we expect significant progress in the next 10 to 20 years?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
9 Answers
I would hope so, but I’m not exactly counting on it. I’m no scientist so I’m not sure how close the scientific community is to a breakthrough in plate techtonics research, but I would think with the current budget shortfalls being felt all around the world, this kind of research might be cut back a little bit in favor of more pressing needs.
Good point about the budget cuts. However, the potantial cost of a massive earthquake might justify the investments whether there’s a recession or not. And we should consider the lives that could potentially be saved.
I agree about the huge benefits of being able to predict an Earthquake, but until Al Gore gets behind that cause, I don’t know if it is going to be able to garner enough public support to gain additional government funding (or to avoid losing funding). But, once again, I am no expert on this issue. I’m just kind of shooting from the hip here.
I think in general earthquakes are difficult to predict simply because they are so sudden. All scientists can really do is plot past earthquakes and guess (based on the information that they gather from studying previous EQs) when the next one will happen, roughly where, and roughly how strong. My guess is that it would be hard to do much more than that.
I think what we need to do is make sure we are (or those people in EQ territory are) prepared for an earthquake if one were to happen, because they will happen.
seeing as how I live in ak, I think that would be great!
I really, really do!!!
@Allie – Yes far more difficult than volcanoes. But both are related to plate tectonics.
@mattbrowne True. If we’re talking about other natural hazards besides EQs, let’s not forget tsunamis, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires and landslides. (Some of which are the product of earthquakes.)
@Allie – EQ’s and volcanic eruptions go hand in hand
the activity around redoubt was the result/or caused the EQ’s and Tsunami’s have a direct link w/EQ’s, so you see, this would have a great impact on the study, it would. yep, like Matt said, it all has to do w/plate tectonics
@Allie – Yes, and for most tsunamis we’ve got the warning time. As long as there’s a warning system. The Indian Ocean got one too now, but it’s still missing for the Atlantic.
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
