2cents, I feel that there is already quite a bit of proof that my forecasting program works stored at my Web sites. However, I will add the following simplified explanation of how it works to see if this helps. You can check my Web sites for more details. These are my own opinions.

Let us say that you “hear” a very loud “ear tone” at some point during the day. The time that it was heard is then entered into a computer program which produces data regarding where the moon was in the sky at that time. Say for example that it was directly over the 45W longitude line. The moon latitude does not appear to be important for my present program.

The next step is to check to see which earthquakes occurred in the past at the time when the moon was directly over that 45W longitude line. My data show that there is a good chance that the earthquake responsible for the ear tone will occur near where one of those previous earthquakes occurred.

Obviously, that involves a lengthy list of earthquakes. And so additional data comparison procedures are used to eliminate as many of them as possible. For example, the position of the sun in the sky when the ear tone was heard is taken into account. Then the locations of ocean tide crests and troughs at the time when it was heard are considered, and on and on. I am presently using quite a few data comparison routines to eliminate as many earthquakes as possible. The hope is that after that data comparison step is finished just one or only a few will be left.

In late February I used that procedure to check some warning signal data. And my final list contained two earthquakes, one in the Philippines and the other in Asia. At that point my data processing procedures could not eliminate either of them. And so I passed information regarding them both along to some of my contacts. A few days later I saw that someone who does research on “Earthquake Clouds” had apparently spotted one over the Philippines. And I told my contacts about that. There was also a forecast posted to the EarthWaves board which pointed to exactly the same location in the Philippines that I had identified. However, for some reason at that time it did not occur to me to check the board for forecasts. On March 5 a destructive earthquake in the Philippines occurred fairly close to where my data indicated one might occur.

It unfortunately presently requires so much time to use those data comparison procedures to check for even one expected earthquake that I am now doing that only for research purposes and when I suspect that a highly destructive earthquake might be about to occur. That is fairly rare.

As I stated in earlier notes, I am hoping to get some organization to develop a computer program which would more quickly and effectively run those data comparison procedures. Then “ear tone” times etc. could be entered into the program and it would generate a list of fault zones where the they might have had their origins.

Finally, as long as ear tones have been discussed here I will point out that in saying that I believe that my data comparison procedures work for locating fault zones responsible for some of them I am not saying that procedures which other people have developed do not also work. Perhaps they do. I myself have simply not had time to look into the matter. I will also point out that ear tones are just one of the earthquake precursors that I work with. All of them appear to represent electromagnetic energy field fluctuations which may be linked with both earthquake fault zone and geomagnetic storm activities.