[Rockhounds] Yellowstone revisited

[Kay Davis]

Kay said:

>> Well the National Parks service sounds real concerned
>>
>> http://www.nps.gov/yell/conditions.htm
>>
>> NOT!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Alain Replied
> This is eerily reminiscent of the fictional but plausible pre-eruption
> scenario detailed in the recent novel, "Yellowstone Farewell".  I don't
> recall the details, but basically there were political motivations and
> Doubters in the chain of command such that no warning was given, when
> one geologist smelled trouble brewing.

> Of course in real life, the authorities would...  Hmm...  :-)

> Seriously, I like to keep an open mind, absorbing the data without being
> quick to mock or discount any sources.  Even "kooks" are human beings
> with points of view and feelings...

> Cheers,

> Alan Silverstein
-- 
_______________________________________________

While in theory I would agree, unfortunately the signal to noise ratio from
kooks is so high that unless one wants to go nuts you have to basically
discount them. Look at wine, one year it's good for you then next not and
the year after it's good again.

The way I see it is first look at the person saying something's track
record, In this case Google turned up a couple of citations from Australia
related to geology and cc saunders. I then look at the site said information
is posted on (http://www.worldwidewaterplan.com/). While they have a
relatively good marketing speak, the scientific basis for the claims made
are even more dubious, and to be frank they fall into what I consider the
"Air headed tree hugger, until the coconut falls out and brains them camp"
  
Like any "REAL" scientific research one has to take a step back and ask is
it repeatable by other reputable scientists / originations? In this case the
answer is no.

While I agree that there have been many documented cases where governments
and quasi governmental organizations have tried to stonewall information,
one must look at the number of times individuals have made wild claims vs
the number of times that those claims came true. Thus signal to noise ratio.


It's like earthquake forecasting, you can find lots of reputable people who
will say that San Francisco and LA is going to get it one day...  but that
the odds of it being today are negligible. However if you go looking you
will find a couple of people with boards held aloft saying it's going to be
today or tomorrow....   The difference is that with the internet, the kooks
can reach a wider audience, look more official and not offend my nose with
their general lack of hygiene......

In any case looking at his statements they don't pass the smell test IMO

Kay

<Thinking> If I get laid off I should found a site warning that the Vorlons
are coming.....