The following earthquake could be the one which I was expecting:

2001/12/12 14:02:35 42.78S 124.82E 10.0 7.0 A SOUTH OF AUSTRALIA (NEIS data)

It occurred at the expected time and was strongly felt. I have not seen any reports of major damage.

One of the reasons that I usually do not more accurately identify a location for an expected earthquake in my public notices is because of a location accuracy problem which appears to me to also be affecting the forecasts of a number of other groups and individuals including some people who are earthquake sensitive. I have described this problem in the past in Newsgroup notices etc. And I presently do not understand its actual nature. But two theories for it are being listed here. The first one provides a good outline of the appearance it gives:

THEORY # 1

*** During the days, weeks, and months before they occur, some powerful earthquakes create or interact with some type of electromagnetic energy field, probably the Earth’s geomagnetic field. And at specific times which can be linked directly or indirectly with forces or phenomena such as the positions of the sun and the moon in the sky and ocean tides and the Solid Earth Tide, that fault zone will generate some unknown type of electromagnetic energy field pulse, usually within days of the time that (both before and after) the earthquake is going to occur. Those pulses can be detected at times by some people (and perhaps by some animals) who are earthquake sensitive and then used to tell when and where the earthquake will occur.

*** Those pulses can be perhaps 0.25 to 30 seconds in duration. And that short duration time could be making them difficult to detect through the use of conventional instruments such as radio receivers. Researcher might presently be regarding them as background noise and simply ignoring them.

*** During the same time that the fault zone is creating or interacting with that electromagnetic energy field, other fault zones around the world which are getting close to having an earthquake of their own can interact with it as well. And under the control of those same tidal forces etc. those fault zones can generate their own electromagnetic energy field pulses. Forecasters such as myself detect those "Shadow Signals," cannot tell the difference between them and the ones linked with the original fault zone, and conclude that the earthquake may occur at the wrong location. The problem is complicated by the fact that at the same time, the original fault zone may be generating only weak signals in comparison with those Shadow Signals. And as a result they are ignored.

This effect was also seen with the following recent earthquake. The signals which I was working with suggested to me that it might occur around 24N and 100E.

2001/11/14 09:26:10 36.01N 90.50E 10.0 7.9 A QINGHAI-XINJIANG BORDER, CHINA

THEORY # 2

As the Earth rotates on its North and South Pole axis, some sort of strain associated with fault zones around the world where earthquakes are about to occur rotates to the west following the sun and the moon. And when those strain waves reach the original fault zone and cross it they cause it to generate those "Shadow Signal" type electromagnetic energy field pulses. Because the times when those pulses are generated are affected by the distances between the other fault zones and the original one those pulses do not appear to point to the original fault zone.

COMMENTS

*** This location accuracy problem is not simply a matter of academic interest. My own forecasts are usually for earthquakes which are likely to occur close enough to populated areas to cause problems. And accurate location information can determine if government officials and others in some area will or will not receive a warning before an approaching earthquake occurs.

*** If other people reading this report have encountered that same "Shadow Signal" type of location accuracy problem with their own forecasting efforts then I would be interested in hearing what they have to say about it.

*** These are my own opinions.