内容摘要："The publication of the BBC's story is premature and is a clear infringement of Ms Saunders' privacy rights.

"The publication of the BBC's story is premature and is a clear infringement of Ms Saunders' privacy rights.

"So to people who dismiss what I do, how can you argue it's just a coincidence. It requires serious skill to figure out where earthquakes will go," he said on New Year's EveBut there's one problem: earthquakes can't be predicted, scientists who study them say.

It's exactly that unpredictability that makes them so unsettling. Millions of people living on the west coast of North America fear that "the big one" could strike at any moment, altering landscapes and countless lives.Lucy Jones, a seismologist who worked for the US Geological Survey (USGS) for more than three decades and authored a book called The Big Ones, has focused much of her research on earthquake probabilities and improving resiliency to withstand such cataclysmic events.For as long as she has studied earthquakes, Dr Jones said there have been people wanting an answer to when "the big one" - which means different things in different regions - will happen and claiming to have cracked the code.

"The human need to make a pattern in the face of danger is extremely strong, it is a very normal human response to being afraid," she told the BBC. "It doesn't have any predictive power, though."With some 100,000 earthquakes felt worldwide each year, according to the US Geological Survey (USGS), it is understandable that people want to have warning.

The Eureka area - a coastal city 270 miles (434km) north of San Francisco, where December's earthquake occurred, has felt more than 700 earthquakes within the last year alone - including more than 10 in just the last week, data shows.

The region, which is where Mr Dmitruk guessed correctly that a quake would occur, is one of the most "seismically active areas" of the US, according to the USGS. Its volatility is due to three tectonic plates meeting, an area known as the Mendocino Triple Junction.over whether the money to pay Mauritius for leasing back the military base would come out of the increase in defence spending announced on Tuesday.

Pressed over the issue by Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch during Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir refused to say directly whether this would be the case.He told the Commons the hike in defence spending was "for our capability on defence and security in Europe".

The PM added that the Chagos deal was "extremely important for our security" and the details and cost would be put before MPs when finalised.The UK government has never confirmed the estimated cost of payments under the deal, but there have been reports of a figure ranging from £9bn to £18bn.