Web Site Selling "Earthquake Forecasts"

waytoomuchcoffee writes "The San Francisco Chronicle is running a story on geoForecaster.com, a site that offers 'earthquake forecasts,' for a fee. California is looking into claims that the site is practicing geology without a license."

Comments

Say what?

[MsWillow]

"practicing geology without a license"?!? Does that mean that the local rock & mineral club, of which I'm a member, could be violating laws when we go out and study the local terrain, searching for specimens?

I'm glad I don't live in California. I'd hate to learn that my checking the webicorders could be illegal.

For all of the "Why license geologists?" people...

[kearneyj]

http://www.asbog.org/Licensure.htm

Sounds like this is geared more towards professional geologists than amateurs.

Re:Is this for real?

[the_cowgod]

California Business & Professions Code Section 7841:

7841. An applicant for registration as a geologist shall have all
the following qualifications:
(a) Not have committed any acts or crimes constituting grounds for
denial of licensure under Section 480.
(b) Meet one of the following educational requirements fulfilled
at a school or university whose geological curricula meet criteria
established by rules of the board:
(1) Graduation with a major in geology.
(2) Completion of 30 semester units in geological science courses
leading to a major in geology, of which at least 24 units are in the
third or fourth year, or graduate courses.
(c) Have at least seven years of professional geological work
which shall include either a minimum of three years of professional
geological work under the supervision of a registered geologist or a
registered civil or petroleum engineer, except that prior to July 1,
1970, professional geological work shall qualify under this
subdivision if it is under the supervision of a qualified geologist
or a registered civil or petroleum engineer, or a minimum of five
years' experience in responsible charge of professional geological
work. Professional geological work does not include routine
sampling, laboratory work, or geological drafting.
Each year of undergraduate study in the geological sciences shall
count as one-half year of training up to a maximum of two years, and
each year of graduate study or research counts as a year of training.

Teaching in the geological sciences at college level shall be
credited year for year toward meeting the requirement in this
category, provided that the total teaching experience includes six
semester units per semester, or equivalent if on the quarter system,
of third or fourth year or graduate courses.
Credit for undergraduate study, graduate study, and teaching,
individually, or in any combination thereof, shall in no case exceed
a total of four years towards meeting the requirement for at least
seven years of professional geological work as set forth above.
The ability of the applicant shall have been demonstrated by the
applicant having performed the work in a responsible position, as the
term "responsible position" is defined in regulations adopted by the
board. The adequacy of the required supervision and experience shall
be determined by the board in accordance with standards set forth in
regulations adopted by it.
(d) Successfully pass a written examination that incorporates a
national examination for geologists created by a nationally
recognized entity approved by the board, and a supplemental
California specific examination. The California specific examination
shall test the applicant's knowledge of state laws, rules and
regulations, and of seismicity and geology unique to practice within
this state. The board shall use the national examination on or
before June 30, 2000.

Re:You need a licence to do geology now?

[LMariachi]

The license is required to be a registered geologist. Obviously anyone is allowed to study rocks and even sell the products of their research, just as anyone can get a doctorate from a diploma mill and go around putting "Dr." on their business cards.

But do you really want just anyone doing geological assays for construction projects? Is that an area in which you want to say "Fuck it, caveat emptor?"

In that light, it doesn't seem at all ridiculous to license geologists. Not that selling earthquake predictions should necessarily be illegal (aside from existing laws against fraud), but maybe the state is just trying to raise awareness of the difference between a licensed geologist and Joe Shmoe with a rock collection. (Similar to nurses' unions pointing out that a "nurse practitioner" is not held to the same standards as a registered nurse.)

Re:Oh no!

[azav]

It's really simple. We have earthquakes here. Water is a precious resource here. We have floods and landslides here. Land starts burning here after months of no rain. Before building on land, a geological survey must be done to see if it is safe to build because of all of the above. The potential for fraud and exploitation here are rather high.

If that's not enough to make you not want to move to California, last week I saw gas prices at 2.40 a gallon in San Francisco.

Re:Oh no!

[Thomas M Hughes]

But I wonder, why on earth do you need a license to practice geology?

There are plenty of reasons. For example, an insurance company might go to a geologist in order to determine what the premiums should be like for 'earthquake insurance', and if the geologist in question is a complete quack (when they claim to be authoritative), the quack geologist can potentially cost millions of dollars to companies based on figures that they have made up. Or for example, if this site goes and claims that there will be a massive earthquake in the LA area, and millions of people flee the city, bringing the economy to a standstill, and no earthquake occurs, then the non-licensed geologist has done millions of dollars of real damage to the economy. Similarly, if they say "Oh, no earthquake will occur at this point in time" and one does occur, but people planned for one not occuring (not having buildings up to code, people not stocking up on emergency supplies, etc), real damages can also be incurred.

Now, does this mean that any random person is forbidden from saying something like "My knee is itching, an earthquake is coming soon" without a license? Of course not. The difference is when you claim to be professional, and charge money for that information. It then becomes commerce, and something that can be regulated. Licenses are usually required to show that you at least have some basic knowledge and understanding of the field that an individual or a corporation is proclaiming to be a master of. For example, there are engineering licenses, medical licenses, and so on and so forth, since failure to live up to the expectations of their field can do real damages.

Now, on the other hand if this website claimed something like "This information is for entertainment purposes only" they might be able to avoid the licensing restrictions, much like telephone pyschics do to some degree. Though, if I recall, Mrs. Cleo recently got nailed for fraud. The point is, the rules change, and you need to be somewhat accountable when you start charging money for your services.

26 states register/certify geologists

[stefanlasiewski]

Quit it with the anti-California rhetoric already.

The majority of US states regulate their geologists (Washington isn't on this list, but Washington hardly regulates anything).

Do any states register geologists?

Yes. Twenty-six states now have registration or certification laws: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Puerto Rico also has passed a registration law.

California has more geologic activity in it's little pinky then most states have in their whole territory. Regulation and strict building standards is why over 30-million Californians can survive in Earthquake, flood & landslide country. The potential for fraud is enormous. As a homeowner, I'm glad for the regulation.

In 1989, a 7.1 earthquake in the SF Bay Area killed 62 people.

By contrast, in 1999 a 7.4 earthquake hit Turkey, killing over 30,000 people. Turkey has regulation, but doesn't enforce it.

Yes, their are many factors involved in these two numbers, but regulation saved many lives in 1989.