While i appreciate the idea of getting alerts, seems like it needs some tweaking who gets the alerts. If you got it and didnt feel a thing, you will be less likely to believe it and act the next time it goes off
This is why you should always give feedback after you receive an alert even if you felt nothing. The more data they collect about the impact quakes have, the better they will be able to predict and notify people in the future.
It’s seems strange that an initial reading of a seismic event would be downgraded. When creating an underground EMP there are phase differences that occur, that don’t occur when an EMP is deployed in air, because of ground density and resistance. I’m just saying. What fault was active during this event?
What a horrible way to interview an expert on a subject like this. Instead of promoting the work and benefits of an early alert system, she just focused on the complaints of lay-persons about the deficiencies of the system and didn't do any work to try and promote the benefits of it.
I agree. I'm not sure why Kristen Sze had to ask the overestimation question twice especially when the scientist already explained in detail how the information is received by USGS then sent to multiples entities.
Disagree. That alert was unnecessarily confusing. I thought it was an error. Those are the questions we need answered, experts can’t & shouldn’t expect to work in a vacuum. The doc rightfully said they welcomed feedback - as they should, esp. if our tax dollars are funding it. IMHO this system needs more work to be useful.
While i appreciate the idea of getting alerts, seems like it needs some tweaking who gets the alerts. If you got it and didnt feel a thing, you will be less likely to believe it and act the next time it goes off
This is why you should always give feedback after you receive an alert even if you felt nothing. The more data they collect about the impact quakes have, the better they will be able to predict and notify people in the future.
It’s seems strange that an initial reading of a seismic event would be downgraded. When creating an underground EMP there are phase differences that occur, that don’t occur when an EMP is deployed in air, because of ground density and resistance. I’m just saying. What fault was active during this event?
It was on the Midland Fault.
@@yinyangphoenix good place to test underground EMP.
I didn’t know this morning was it 😊
What a horrible way to interview an expert on a subject like this. Instead of promoting the work and benefits of an early alert system, she just focused on the complaints of lay-persons about the deficiencies of the system and didn't do any work to try and promote the benefits of it.
I agree. I'm not sure why Kristen Sze had to ask the overestimation question twice especially when the scientist already explained in detail how the information is received by USGS then sent to multiples entities.
Disagree. That alert was unnecessarily confusing. I thought it was an error. Those are the questions we need answered, experts can’t & shouldn’t expect to work in a vacuum. The doc rightfully said they welcomed feedback - as they should, esp. if our tax dollars are funding it. IMHO this system needs more work to be useful.
Well, it's clear from this that tomorrow is the end of the World then..
Was this scripted?
One Job
Seriously . Did anyone else get a delay? With notifications.
Blah blah blah blah…..