REBUTTAL Comments to publication of D. Closson and N. Abu Karaki ‘‘Sinkhole hazards prediction at Ghor Al Haditha, Dead Sea, Jordan: ‘‘Salt Edge’’ and ‘‘Tectonic’’ models contribution’’—a rebuttal to ‘‘Geophysical prediction and following development sinkholes in two Dead Sea areas, Israel and Jordan, by: Ezersky, M.G., Eppelbaum, L.V., Al-Zoubi, A., Keydar S., Abueladas, A-R., Akkawi E., and Medvedev, B.’’ M. G. Ezersky • L. V. Eppelbaum • A. Al-Zoubi • S. Keydar • A.-R. Abueladas • E. Akkawi • B. Medvedev Received: 7 December 2013 / Accepted: 10 December 2013 Ó Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014 In our article (Ezersky et al. 2013a), in accordance with the request of Editor and Reviewer we expressed our opinion with respect to the structural model of the Dead Sea sinkholes presented in papers of Closson and Abu Karaki (2009a, 2009b). Our comment was a scientific discussion deprived any personal claims on our opponents. We sent our paper to Closson with the aim to receive his response. We were not informed on rebuttal published online in the Environmental Earth Sciences on April 2013. It explains some delay with our comments. During time passed after the publication of our paper (Ezersky et al. 2013a), we have published other article where our vision of the sinkhole problem in the aspect of tectonics was presented (Ezersky and Frumkin 2013). This paper was intended to reconcile two models of the Dead Sea sinkhole forming: salt edge and structural ones. We believe that this paper has answered many aspects of the rebuttal. In accordance with this consideration we suggest (based on analysis of the seismic reflection studies) that salt edge was formed either in contact with normal faults or alternatively, in contact with wadi sediments. At the same time, sinkholes were formed at the dissolution front (salt edge). It explains why sinkhole lineaments are sometime parallel to faults and sometimes deflect from them as fol- lowing salt edge. It would support the hypothesis of Closson and Abu Karaki (2009a) that sinkholes of the Ghor Al-Haditha are conformed to normal fault which is in contact with salt edge and located under sinkholes (as it is shown in Ezersky and Frumkin 2013). However, we should respond to mechanism suggested by Closson and Abu Karaki (2009a, p. 1416): In the frame of the tectonic interpretation, one can highlight three structural elements: the Ghor Safi faulted zone, the West Dhira faulted zone, and a lineament, parallel to the sinkholes alignment. All together they form a polygonal shape characteristic of strike-slip movements (Fig. 1a, Orange lines, com- ment of Ezersky et al.). The parallelism between the alignment of sinkholes and the lineament could be the result of differential displacements between Ghor Safi and West Dhira faults, and/or even the Mazra’a faulted zone. Ezersky et al.: Considering typical W–E vertical section (Fig. 1b) along Line C–C 0 through the Lisan Peninsula (see Fig. 1a for location) (Garfunkel 1981; Closson 2005) one can see that 3–6 km space between faults Ghor Safi (GS) and West Dhira (WD) (Fig. 1b) is composed of clastic Quaternary sediments that do not transfer tectonic stresses M. G. Ezersky (&) Á S. Keydar Geophysical Institute of Israel, Lod, Israel e-mail: mikhail@gii.co.il L. V. Eppelbaum Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel A. Al-Zoubi Á A.-R. Abueladas Á E. Akkawi Al-Balqa Applied University, Salt, Jordan B. Medvedev Schlumberger, Via dell’Unione Europea, Milan, Italy 123 Environ Earth Sci DOI 10.1007/s12665-013-3019-2