Hi Lowell. "China earthquake forecasters, I recommend that you check to see if any precursor observations are being made in the area where the following earthquake occurred. A few earthquake warning type
signals which I detected yesterday matched that earthquake. It could also occur somewhere else. So far it does not look like it will be very destructive."

The problem I have with this is that is so vague that it could almost fit into any area within 500 miles or maybe even more. As it was the quake occurred 130 miles from the reference point that was used.

However the biggest problem with this is the statement "It could also occur somewhere else. So far it does not look like it will be very destructive." Tells me that one doesn't know for sure where its going to occur and that it might not even be a destructive quake which would result in injury or death.

In order for me to lay claim to an accurate quake forecast I must have that forecast posted for all to see before the quake occurs. That should apply to any and all persons claiming to be able to predict quakes.
I'm not saying EDG didn't do it, but he is the one making an extraordinary claim therefore it requires extraordinary proof. You prove it by making it known to all before the quake occurs. One of my forecasts was voided because there was some doubt as to whether I made the forecast before the quake or not. The quake had occurred before my forecast, but was not made public until after my posted forecast. Voiding the forecast was the right thing to do, as there should be no doubt in anyone's mind about the authenticity of the prediction/forecast. Take Care…Don in creepy town