The clock runs out on Jim Berkland's earthquake prediction for California

This post follows on the March 19 and March 25 posts.

The "major window" Berkland cited was between March 19 and 26. It's now 3:37 Pacific Time on Sunday morning, the 27th. There was a small earthquake on the 26th in Baja California, Mexico, which is on the Mexico-California border. While the quake was technically not in California I suppose diehard supporters of Berkland's earthquake prediction model would say that it counts. Yet my understanding of Berkland's prediction is that it was specific to a major earthquake in California.

If it should turn out that the small quake was a precursor to a major one in California during the coming week, then I'd say the quake on the 26th conceivably breathed oxygen into Berkland's model. And it's always possible that a part of the model, if hooked up with other factors, could generate predictions that are accurate and consistent enough to rule out chance.

As it stands now, however, Berkland needs to go back to the drawing board. I wish him luck in the endeavor; anyone who makes it a calling to attempt to predict earthquakes deserves thanks, not derision.

3.6 earthquake rattles Baja California
by Ann M. Simmons
March 26, 2011, 3:38 pm (PT)
Los Angeles Times

A small earthquake struck Baja California on Saturday afternoon, but there were no reports of damage or injuries, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

The magnitude 3.6 tremor occurred around noon, with its epicenter about 32 miles south-southeast of Calexico, Calif., and Mexicali, Mexico, on the U.S.- Mexico border, said Leslie Gordon, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Geological Survey, which reports and monitors earthquakes.

Gordon said that the quake was felt “very weakly” in Calexico, Mexicali and El Centro, Calif., and that there was no reports of it being felt in San Diego, about 100 miles west.

“This makes sense,” said Gordon. “Something this small, I wouldn’t have expected it to be felt.”