My latest data still appear to be pointing to some potential seismic activity around 139 E. And I would expect that it would be shallow and at least in the 6.5 and higher range rather than in the 5 range.

I can't be more accurate than that for magnitude because the main EM Signal that I processed might have been artifically amplified by the recent Mt. Etna volcano activity. And that could probably mean a 1 magnitude unit difference in the magnitude of the earthquake. Solar storms cause that same type of signal amplification. But there were none when that signal was generated.

If the signal was not amplified then the expected earthquake, wherever it occurred, might be 7.3 or greater.

Remember, my proposed locations are based on probabilities rather than EM Signal triangulation methods. Triangulation would likely be much more accurate.

These are personal opinions.