Birdwatch Note
2022-12-06 23:12:45 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction. There is always a chance for earthquakes in areas with active faults, but specific predictions perform no better than random when tested. More from scientists: https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-predict-earthquakes https://scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthquakes/earthquakes-probabilities https://pnsn.org/outreach/faq/earthquake-prediction https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/predicting-next-big-earthquake/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-we-predict-earthquakes-at-all1/ User's history of pseudoscience claims: https://www.vice.com/en/article/kz4jyz/earthquake-conspiracy-theorists-are-wreaking-havoc-during-emergencies https://www.inverse.com/science/earthquake-prediction-dutchsinse-holmquist-conspiracy
Written by 114D3959B7A1FAF013A9773725D3AC9653F490590C8B76CB7CE232B010DE900E
Participant Details
Original Tweet
Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1600253068179738625
Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.
All Information
- ID - 1600267026974625795
- noteId - 1600267026974625795
- participantId - 114D3959B7A1FAF013A9773725D3AC9653F490590C8B76CB7CE232B010DE900E
- noteAuthorParticipantId -
- createdAtMillis - 1670368365408
- tweetId - 1600253068179738625
- classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 1
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- There is no scientific basis for earthquake prediction. There is always a chance for earthquakes in areas with active faults, but specific predictions perform no better than random when tested. More from scientists: https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-predict-earthquakes https://scienceexchange.caltech.edu/topics/earthquakes/earthquakes-probabilities https://pnsn.org/outreach/faq/earthquake-prediction https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2019/predicting-next-big-earthquake/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-we-predict-earthquakes-at-all1/ User's history of pseudoscience claims: https://www.vice.com/en/article/kz4jyz/earthquake-conspiracy-theorists-are-wreaking-havoc-during-emergencies https://www.inverse.com/science/earthquake-prediction-dutchsinse-holmquist-conspiracy
Note Status History
| createdAt | timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus | firstNonNMRStatus | timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus | currentStatus | timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus | mostRecentNonNMRStatus | participantId |
| 2022-12-06 23:12:45 UTC (1670368365408) |
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
2022-12-07 02:16:04 UTC (1670379364565) |
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
114D3959B7A1FAF013A9773725D3AC9653F490590C8B76CB7CE232B010DE900E |
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2022-12-07 09:40:15 -0600 | 0ECF2EA9CED23085643853C76046CD400913FBF71710CC0AA727C7C75FFE25D6 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 09:22:13 -0600 | 1135F5DE9D8D8F9AAD78DD78B893F858B02015852375D448315404F4E877E492 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-08 15:08:00 -0600 | 227B72516F48209D4CD398BD566B39A53B64980200BCA4A4C749072F49AA8384 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 15:34:56 -0600 | 3B2AF89DBCD1E694B82D673CB73DFDD7B87DE49C123765B1EEF6A81DE687D78C | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-11 03:24:27 -0600 | 4A5CF1289C3525A8378191F89622A1FD08B50D5BE7AC083327B66A3C72229F1A | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 07:57:15 -0600 | 4EA541A52F0A2FFA141E9EEC01E8F1EDC92ECAF672EC87DAB3D3CC1557A7AFD0 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 05:48:27 -0600 | 59FA15B71D8C02DCCCADA12BC80429389147D89D428FFACABB8DF6A66B2CE299 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 07:52:36 -0600 | 70C181B24233FF8251A370E67F314FF2678F046BCC2BD211A42D44AC787BC7DC | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 10:23:24 -0600 | 738EC7670526988D3BAE970D27CAC0B2178D8643C4C5DFCF0960AE68D2F26CE8 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 12:26:29 -0600 | 826BAE2151D204EBF3C24D63FE2658259725887D0734C98510B6EE2CE5172C02 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 12:15:45 -0600 | 8C6CEF23E83E377F8BB70BC6CC07AE0FC925DA1BED40DDE74BB27A19296A0341 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-06 22:10:11 -0600 | A30E23B01F927C4387616E33DE422C96B4F9A9B45B8ACA619267391F3D77B5A8 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-06 23:42:09 -0600 | B633C548578A36FAE1AA30EB97C1655FAD1AF3A3AF2605E7352EAA5E51AB61CD | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 07:18:34 -0600 | BF5CA61B7D5B6CBC50F92E7054E8BCBD12039FD3ECF89EB9BD0E1C6FA35F4194 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-06 23:05:39 -0600 | C38E8EBA44E2B47A87402910589FB939E686F766AF8D525700D31239FD691F63 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-07 05:48:39 -0600 | F01474B57CB482EF6467795CAFAA5AD30D7BEDC7D62798BB0158B4E9AFD70D18 | Rating Details |
| 2022-12-06 23:05:39 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 07:52:36 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 09:40:15 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-11 03:24:27 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 09:22:13 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 15:34:56 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 10:23:24 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 05:48:39 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 12:26:29 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 12:15:45 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 07:18:34 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-06 23:42:09 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-06 22:10:11 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 05:48:27 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-08 15:08:00 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2022-12-07 07:57:15 -0600 | Rating Details |