In the Introduction for the debate, Ian Main pointed out:

在辩论的引言中，Ian Main指出∶ 

“Earthquake forecasting. Here we would try to predict some of the features of an impending earthquake, usually on the basis of the observation of a precursory signal. The prediction would still be probabilistic, in the sense that the precise magnitude, time and location might not be given precisely or reliably, but that there is some physical connection above the level of chance between the observation of a precursor and the subsequent event.” 

“地震预测。这里，通常在观察前兆信号的基础上，我们试图对迫近的地震的某些特点进行预测。该种预测仍然是概率性的，即准确的震级、时间和位置未能准确或可靠的给出。但是，在观察到的前兆和而后发生的地震之间有超过偶然机会的某些物理联系。” 

“Forecasting would also have to include a precise statement of the probabilities and errors involved, and would have to demonstrate more predictability than the clustering referred to in time-dependent hazard. The practical utility of this would be to enable the relevant authorities to prepare for an impending event on a timescale of months to weeks. Practical difficulties include identifying reliable, unambiguous precursors9-11 , and the acceptance of an inherent proportion of missed events or false alarms, involving evacuation for up to several months at a time, resulting in a loss of public confidence.” 

“这种预测也需要包括一个关于所涉及的或然率和误差的准确声明，并且需要显示出比‘依赖于时间的危险’中提到的地震活动‘丛集性’〔clustering〕有更多的预测性。这种预测的实际应用是使相关的政府当局对时间标度数个月到数周的即将来临的事件做准备。实际的困难包括识别可靠的、固有的前兆98 99 100，并且接受固有的一部分漏报的事件或误报的报警，可能涉及到每次长达数月的撤离，这将使公众失掉信心。”

During the 1st week of the debate, Robert J. Geller stated his basic view on “earthquake prediction” as follows11:

在这次辩论的头一周，Robert J. Geller对“地震预测”表达了其基本看法如下11∶ 

“The public, media, and government regard an 'earthquake prediction' as an alarm of an imminent large earthquake, with enough accuracy and reliability to take measures such as the evacuation of cities. 'Prediction' is used exclusively in the above sense here; in other words, longer-term forecasts of seismic hazards or statistical forecasts of aftershock probabilities are not classified as predictions.” 

“公众、新闻媒介，以及政府视‘地震预测’为对即将来临的大地震的报警，其准确性和可靠性足以采取从城市中疏散居民这种措施。‘预测’在此的含义仅限于此；换句话讲，对地震风险的长期预测，或对余震可能性的统计性预测，均不能分类为预测。”

Also during the first week, Pascal Bernard pointed out58:

也在头一周，Pascal Bernard指出58∶ 

“For the public, the main question that seismologists should ask themselves is, "Can earthquakes be predicted?".” 

“对于公众，地震学家应当问自己的主要问题是，‘地震能够预测吗？’”

Max Wyss further pointed out32:

Max Wyss进一步指出32∶ 

“The definition of earthquake prediction” 

“地震预测的定义” 

“A valid earthquake prediction is any statement that specifies:

Location ± uncertainty

Size ± uncertainty

Occurrence time ± uncertainty

Probability of the prediction being fulfilled2 .”

“一项有效的地震预测是明确下述内容的任何声明∶

位置±不确定值

大小±不确定值

发生时间±不确定值

预测能够实现的概率101。” 

“Since there exist a number of different types of consumers (individuals, officials, government agencies, insurance and other companies, police and fire fighting departments), predictions with vastly different uncertainties are of interest. The consumer can judge from the uncertainties, whether or not a given prediction is useful. Insurance companies and those who make decisions on reinforcing old buildings are more interested in long term predictions with large uncertainties, than in accurate short term predictions.” 

“由于存在着不同种类的客户〔个人、官员、政府机关、保险公司和其它公司、警察和消防部门〕，他们对带有不同广泛确定值的预测感兴趣。有关的客户可以从那些不确定值，判断所提供的预测是否有用。保险公司和那些对加固老的建筑的单位最感兴趣的是长期的预测，即便有较大的不确定值，而不是准确的短期预测。” 

“The engineering solution is not enough” 

“仅工程解决方案是不够的” 

“Everyone, except perhaps some real estate developers, and builders of nuclear reactors and high dams, agree that we should build according to strict codes assuring earthquake resistance.” 

“所有的人，某些建筑开发商，以及核反应堆和高水坝的建造商除外，都同意我们应当依照保证防震的严格标准进行建造。” 

“However, the great majority of people will live and work for the next 50 years in buildings existing today and having been built when lax codes were in force. The sad fact is that in most parts of the world there is no money available to reinforce these buildings.” 

“然而，更大多数的人今后50年将继续生活和工作在现有的房屋中，这些房屋建造时的建筑标准比较松弛。令人难过的事实是，在世界大部分地方，那里没有钱对房屋进行加固。” 

“Hence, long- and intermediate-term predictions as a motivating force for precautions1, as well as short-term prediction, if attainable, are bound to benefit people significantly, if they are based on sound science and responsibly announced.” 

“因此，长期的预测和中期的预测，作为一种采取防范措施的推动力，以及短期预测，如果能够实现的话，均能够使人民显著受益，如果建立在可靠的科学基础上并且负责任地发布的话。” 

“If the current knowledge of the earthquake initiation process is so poorly founded that experienced researchers can maintain the profound differences of opinion present in this debate, we are in desperate need of the major research effort that is not18 at present being made.” 

“如果目前对地震起始过程的知识过差，使有经验的研究者能够坚持这场辩论中存在的深刻不同的看法，那么我们确实极为需要从事目前并没有做的重大研究努力8。”

David Bowman & Charles Sammis pointed out6:

David Bowman & Charles Sammis指出6∶ 

“As anyone who has ever spent any time in California can attest, much public attention is being focused on the great earthquake-prediction debate. Unfortunately, this attention focuses on deterministic predictions on the day-to-week timescale. But as some of the participants in this debate have pointed out18,22 current efforts to identify reliable short-term precursors to large earthquakes have been largely unsuccessful, suggesting that earthquakes are such a complicated process that reliable (and observable) precursors might not exist.” 

“如在加利福尼亚待上过任何一段时期的任何人可以证明的那样，公众一直对大地震预测的辩论相当观注。遗憾的是，这种观注集中于‘天到周’时间标度的确定性预测。但是，如同这场辩论的某些参加者已经指出的那样8 2，目前用以识别大地震的可靠的短期前兆的努力基本上是失败的，从而建议地震是那样复杂的过程使得可靠的〔以及可观察到的〕前兆有可能并不存在。”

Andrew Michael pointed out76:

Andrew Michael指出76∶ 

“A few consensus reports have been issued that include time-dependent hazard estimates for California94,10 ; an update to the estimates for Northern California is currently under way. Although these analyses attempt to predict individual model events, there is so much uncertainty in the individual predictions that the results are presented as a probabilistic sum over many models. A further problem with level 2b is that these predictions might be impossible to test during our lifetimes. Thus, our faith in these predictions relies on our ability to test the components that went into them and our faith in the 'experts' who must make somewhat arbitrary choices when assembling these components. Although the quality of these predictions is debatable, their impact is clearer. Widespread release of earthquake hazards estimates in the San Francisco Bay area have led businesses and governments to spend hundreds of millions on earthquake preparedness11 .” 

“已经发布几份研究者意见一致的报告，其中包括对加利福尼亚州的依赖于时间的危险估计4 102；此外，对加利福尼亚北部的一个更新的估计报告正在进行。虽然这些分析试图对个别数学模型类型的事件进行预测，在个别的预测中包含那样多不确定因素，使得其结果是作为多种数学模型的或然率值而提出来的。2b水平预测的进一步问题是这种预测有可能在我们的一生中也遇不到机会进行试验。因而，我们对这些预测的信任取决于我们对构成这种预测的有关因素，以及我们对进行有关预测的那些专家的信任，他们在构成这种预测依据的有关因素时有时必须做出某些武断的选择。尽管这些预测的质量是可争论的，它们的影响是清楚的。对旧金山海湾地区广泛发布和流传的地震危险估计已经导致许多公司和政府对有关准备已花费了数百万美元103。

Andrew Michael further pointed out96:

Andrew Michael进一步指出96∶ 

“As discussed by Richard Andrews1 , head of the California Office of Emergency Services, earthquakes are the one natural disaster that currently allows for no advance warning. Storms approach, fires grow, floods migrate after large rainfalls, but earthquakes can turn a perfectly normal day into a disaster in seconds. So, if we can make low probability forecasts, short term (such as those currently based on foreshock and aftershock models) what can society do with them?” 

“如加利福尼亚紧急救援服务办公室负责人Richard Andrews讨论过的那样104，地震是目前无法做到提前报警的一种自然灾害。暴风雨来临、火灾在扩大、暴雨之后发生洪水，但是地震在几秒之内可将完全正常的一天变成一场灾难。所以，如果我们能够做出某些低概率的预测、短期的预测〔如目前建立在前震或余震数学模型基础上的预测〕，社会可以用它们做什么？” 

“Raising awareness” 

“提高了解度” 

“There are a number of low cost actions that can have large payoffs if a damaging earthquake occurs. Often earthquake preparedness plans are not maintained as real world pressures focus attention onto other problems. Low probability warnings can serve as reminders, like fire-drills, to update plans and review the state of preparedness. For instance, childcare facilities might check their first aid supplies and review the parents' emergency contact numbers. Companies might service their emergency generators.” 

“有一些低成本的措施，若发生一个破坏性的地震，它们可以有较大的益处。地震防备计划往往并不象真正世界压力下集中注意力的其它一些问题。低概率的报警可以起到提醒的作用，如同防火演习，以便对防备计划进行更新并审查防备的状况。例如，儿童设施可能检查他们的急救物品并审视父母的紧急联系电话。公司亦可能对他们的救急发电机进行维护保养。” 

“Certainly, earthquake prediction is extremely difficult, but it is possible that we will be able to improve our ability to make low-probability, short-term forecasts and these may be much better for society than the high probability ones that are most likely impossible. The trick will be to improve the quality of both the data collected, particularly in the near-source region, and the work done with it.” 

“当然，地震预测确实极为困难，但我们应可能改进我们做出低概率预测的能力，而且，与看起来不大可能的高概率预测相比，低概率的预测可能对社会更有用。其中的诀窍是既改进数据收集的质量，特别在近震源地区，同时改进使用这些数据的工作。”

Leon Knopoff pointed out53:

Leon Knopoff指出53∶ 

“For a prediction to be successful, the probability of occurrence in a time interval and a space domain must be specified in advances, as must the lower magnitude. There are two important additional constraints: a utilitarian constrain demands that the lower magnitude bound be appropriate to societal needs; in other words, we are especially interested in strong destructive earthquakes.” 

“对于一项预测作为成功的，预测必须事先明确发生的时间概率的间隔〔偏差〕以及空间范围〔偏差〕，以及最低的震级。还有两项额外约束∶ 一项实际利益的约束要求最低的震级偏差带须与适合社会需要；换言之，我们对破坏性地震有特别的兴趣。” 

“The time intervals for societal needs in the developing countries are of the order of days, but in the developed countries the windows can be broader, even of the order of years, because the response can be one of marshalling resources to improve construction, for example.” 

“社会需要的时间间隔〔偏差〕，在发展中国家中为数天，而在发达国家的时间差带可以宽一些，即便数年，因为对其做出的反应可以是动用大量资源改进建筑。”

接续后篇∶

——>10. Encouraging constructive suggestions on how to improve work on earthquake prediction

对于如何改进地震预测的令人鼓舞的建设性建议

参考文献

1 Wyss, M., Second round of evaluation of proposed earthquake precursors, Pure Appl. Geophys. 149, 3-16 (1991).

2 Campbell, W. H. A misuse of public funds: UN support for geomagnetic forecasting of earthquakes and meteorological disasters, Eos Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 79, 463-465 (1998).

3 Scholz, C. H. The Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990).

4 Allen, C. R. Responsibilities in earthquake prediction, Bull Seism. Soc. Amer. 66, 2069-2074, (1976).

5 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities. Probalities of large earthquakes occcurring in San Francisco Bay region, California. (U.S. Geol. Survey Circular 1053, 1990).

6 Bakun, W.H. Pay a little now, or a lot later. (U.S. Geol. Survey Fact Sheet 169-95, 1995).

7 Andrews, R. The Parkfield earthquake prediction of October 1992: the emergency services response. Earthquakes and Volcanoes 23, 170-174 (1992).