Frank Hoogerbeets is a Dutch researcher at the Solar System Geometry Survey (SSGS). This research institute focuses on measuring the geometry between celestial bodies and the Earth. They then connect it to seismic activity.

Frank Hoogerbeets has gained notoriety for his claims of predicting earthquakes. Despite criticism from the scientific community, Hoogerbeets continues to make predictions based on his interpretations of planetary alignments and their influence on the Earth’s tectonic activity.

The science behind earthquake prediction

The prediction of earthquakes is a complex and challenging task, as the underlying processes that lead to earthquakes are not yet fully understood. Scientists have been able to develop methods for short-term earthquake forecasting, such as monitoring changes in ground deformation and changes in seismic activity. However, these methods are only able to provide a limited lead time of a few minutes to a few hours, and are not suitable for long-term earthquake predictions.

Frank Hoogerbeets and his methodology

Frank Hoogerbeets claims to use a different approach to earthquake prediction, relying on his observations of planetary alignments and their influence on the Earth’s magnetic field. He argues that the gravitational pull of the planets can cause changes in the Earth’s magnetic field, which in turn can trigger seismic activity.

Hoogerbeets’ methodology has been widely criticized by the scientific community, who argue that there is no evidence to support the link between planetary alignments and earthquakes. In addition, Hoogerbeets has been criticized for making predictions that have not been verified, and for providing insufficient data to support his claims.

The controversy surrounding Frank Hoogerbeets

Despite the criticism from the scientific community, Frank Hoogerbeets has gained a significant following, with many people claiming that his predictions have been accurate. However, this is largely due to confirmation bias, as Hoogerbeets often selectively reports on earthquakes that occur shortly after one of his predictions.

Furthermore, Hoogerbeets’ predictions have been found to be no more accurate than chance, and have not been supported by any scientific evidence. As a result, many experts in the field of seismology consider Frank Hoogerbeets to be a pseudoscientist, promoting a false and misleading view of earthquakes and their prediction.

The importance of scientific evidence in earthquake prediction

The prediction of earthquakes is a critical issue, with the potential to save lives and minimize damage in the event of a major seismic event. It is therefore important that claims of earthquake prediction are based on sound scientific evidence and are subject to rigorous scrutiny.

This is why the scientific community has been so critical of Frank Hoogerbeets and his methodology, as it undermines the credibility of earthquake prediction and contributes to the spread of misinformation and false beliefs.


In conclusion, Frank Hoogerbeets and his claims of earthquake prediction remain a source of controversy in the scientific community. Despite a lack of evidence to support his claims, Hoogerbeets continues to promote his methodology and gain a following.

It is important that the public is aware of the lack of scientific evidence behind Hoogerbeets’ claims, and that they seek information from credible sources when it comes to earthquake prediction. By relying on sound scientific evidence and rigorous scrutiny, we can ensure that the prediction of earthquakes is based on the best possible information and can help to minimize the impact of seismic events.