Tsunami 2004; The place, size and shape of the Earth’s crust break from December 26, 2004 confirmed in 100% my, presented for 20 years now, driving mechanism of plate tectonics witch is the west drift of Earth’s crust deformations. Unfortunately, the doctrinal approach to science and the arrogance of the American scientists cost life of hundreds of thousands people in 2004.
On December 26, 2004 a strong underwater earthquake in the area of the Sumatra Island caused a huge tsunami wave which brought death and destruction everywhere on its way from Thailand through Sumatra reaching India and Sri Lanka and even further – to Africa. According to data published by AFP on February 6, 2005, the number of people killed was at least 294,000 and that was not the final result of this tragedy. The question is whether all responsible people and institutions did their best to minimize the scope of this tragedy? In relation to this tragedy we still do not get the answer to the question whether those institutions do their best not to allow the same happen again? It is fundamental for better prediction of earthquakes to describe properly all the mechanisms and forces inside the Earth involved in this process. Until 1993 in geophysics there was no generally accepted, coherent and correct description of the inner Earth logically explaining the tectonic phenomena. In 1993 at Institute of Geophysics of the Polish Academy of Sciences I delivered a presentation on ‘Driving mechanism of plate tectonics’.
The article was printed (ISSN-No 0947-1944) and the comment given by the Institute of Geophysics Polish Academy of Sciences in 1997 was as follows „…your idea seems to be very good, but the mathematical algorithms used are very complicated”. My idea of the plate tectonics is so clear that it allowed me to predict the eruption of Popocatepetl Volcano in Mexico 3 years before it really happened. I sent warning letters to CENAPRED and UNAM but I haven’t heard from them until now. The same happened to my letters sent in February 2001 to Harvard-Seismo, California Institute of Technology, USGS, NOAA and FEMA in the USA.
If, after receiving my letter in 2001 the American geophysicists really took care of the earthquakes’ victims, they would have known, concluding from my arguments, that the most endangered is the region of the Indian Ocean. Between 2001 and 2004 they had enough time to install there a warning system signalling the tsunami coming. It could have saved hundred of thousands people in 2004. But the Indian Ocean region is considered the slums of the world, so no one was even a bit interested in installing such system there. Only the photos of thousands of human corpses ground with the slums’ garbage, debris and car scraps shown in all the world’s media caused that under the pressure of public opinion the USGS and FEMA officially announced the installing of a warning system in this region. 300 000 dead bodies too late!
The place, size and shape of the Earth’s crust break from December 26, 2004 confirmed in 100% my, presented for 20 years now, driving mechanism of plate tectonics witch is the west drift of Earth’s crust deformations.
But the warning system on the Indian Ocean is not everything. Today, basing on my verified model, I can state that an evaluation of the endangered zones on the globe should be done and warning systems in all these places should be installed to minimize the number of future victims.
Unfortunately, the doctrinal approach to science and the arrogance of the American scientists cost life of hundreds of thousands people in 2004.
My letter to FEMA from 2001 together with the address list is available here .
PDF 
I am not persuaded that T.T. is the seer he claims to be in this posting. As I noted in the previous T.T. blog article, I will limit myself to one comment per posting. Here’s my take on this one.
I can’t comment on the theory referred to, because T.T. provides no details of it. But if this is another case of claiming that centrifugal force has been ignored, then I can understand why no one bothered to reply to his letters.
In this case, centrifugal force has a role to play, and geologists know it. Also as noted in my comment on the last blog entry, centrifugal force is not real in the Newtonian sense of having a corresponding reaction partner. But it is useful for analyzing mechanics in a rotating frame of reference.
Specifically, we can note that the crust of the Earth tends to adjust so that its surface is perpendicular to the effective local gravity, meaning gravity plus a correction by a centrifugal “inertial force” to account for the Earth’s rotation. That’s why the Earth is an oblate spheroid, not a perfect sphere.
If T.T. is arguing that standard analysis of tectonics leaves out centrifugal force, he is wrong. I am certain that such analysis uses the effective local gravitational force, not the gravitational force due to Earth’s mass alone.
I’m no expert on tectonics, but I’m sure experts consider both Earth’s local gravity (which accounts for centrifugal force) and tectonic forces, plus details of subsurface structures and histories as far as they are known, in trying to predict when a given fault may slip.
The problem in T.T.’s previous postings seems to be the inability to distinguish when the analysis is being done in an inertial frame of reference and when it is being done in an accelerated (or rotating) frame. I suspect that’s the problem here as well, though T.T. provides no details beyond his paper’s title: “Driving mechanism of plate tectonics.”
The comment from the Polish academy suggests that the reviewer couldn’t understand the mathematical details in the algorithm well enough to critique it in detail. All the reviewer could says was that the “idea seems to be very good.” I think the reviewer was saying that the idea needed, at the very least, a clearer explanation. It sounds similar to the way a professor might instruct his graduate student to go back and work on it some more–a C+ at best. T.T., however, seems to think that was ringing praise.
Finally, T.T.’s claims of the value of his predictions are overstated, to use a kind word. Geophysicists certainly knew about the strong possibility of tsunamis in that region of the Indian Ocean.
The problem was not in the science but in the policy about establishing warning systems. I agree that it was a terrible policy/political oversight not to have such systems in an area where tsunamis have happened before with some frequency. The policy makers didn’t need T.T.’s theory to tell them about potential dangers.
Likewise, it was a safe bet to predict in 1997 that Popocatepetl Volcano was likely to erupt within three years since geologists had seen seismic activity there beginning in 1994.
My advice to other readers: Beware of people like T.T. who claim to be prophets. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Fred Bortz
“People may carp, but carpers are soon forgotten.”
My article “Earthquake prediction; Principles” is available here .
Tadeusz Tumalski
http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/blog/2040-expertise-vs-puffery-and-haitian-earthquake-29191.html