There are many theories floating around out there on how Earthquakes occur, in fact many believe that some cycles happen almost like clockwork and there is evidence, which actually seems to condone such areas of thought on seismic activity. This has prompted one online think tank to address this issue as they consider the possibility of using such data to predict future quakes and cycles.

Joe states; "Some theories about large seismic events over the past couple thousand years in the Northwest where earthquakes are less frequent and powerful in comparison to the California area. They dirt tells us that every 300 years or so there's a fairly large tsunami that dumps a whole bunch of sand across the surrounding Puget Sound.”

I have heard of longer periods but yes, they do predict that indeed there are some possibilities that Seattle thru Vancouver BC is over do for some big time events. Regarding if there are some correlations to other events "When Cycles Collide,” which I have always thought would be an excellent title for a book, like "The Day After Tomorrow” type Sci Fi genre, indeed generally my theory of cycles, flows, patterns, where every thing affects everything else, seems to predict that in fact it makes sense that the largest of events are like the NTSB Accident reports, that is to say it is "never just one thing” but rather a compilation of events.

So to prevent an event you choose the smallest easiest to control event in the set of converging cycles and get it to skip its cycles while letting the others occur naturally. Then trigger the other event you "skipped” later at the safest time during the lowest potentially problematic period. Your pattern may not look so hot "Mathematica-Stephen Wolfram Theory” but you prevent disaster without disrupting the normal cycles.

Yet one could say screwing with such cycles, weather, ionosphere is problematic, until which time you figure out what you are doing and how the cycles inter-relate then you are safe and can easily control the system without causing imbalance, you see; all abstract theory, but you get the point and your questions therefore are also relevant to the equation? My answer is I do not know, but would like to. Although I do suspect there is a lot more too it and the CalTech guys are way ahead of me on this. Consider this in 2006.