EM signal – Earthquake Web page update
Posted by EQF on August 23, 2004 at 05:27:12:

Over the weekend the following Web page was updated.

http://www.freewebz.com/eq-forecasting/Data.html

The top Wave Chart drawing shows that there was an almost exact match between an EM signal which was detected on July 11, 2004 and the following destructive earthquake in China.

2004/08/10 10:26:14 27.15N 103.87E 10.0 5.1 CHINA
(NEIS data)

The following “Earthquake Data Fingerprint” numbers are also in excellent agreement. The numbers on the left are the most important. To a certain extent they get less important as you move to the right.

23 42 31 66 24 Earthquake
26 43 23 74 31 EM signal

The 42 and 43 in the second column are adjusted sublunar point longitudes. They would be the easiest numbers to understand. 23 and 26 in the first column are “Gravity Point” numbers which show where the combined gravitational pulls of the sun and the moon were strongest. 31, 66, 23, and 74 in the third and fourth columns are ocean tide related numbers. 24 and 31 in the fifth column are Solid Earth Tide related numbers.

Those numbers are not presently being displayed on that Web page as I am planning on changing the format of the page.

Not surprisingly, that China earthquake began appearing in the main Data.html Web page table once it occurred. Prior to that there were other earthquakes listed which were pointing to that area as a possible location for one. For example, my computer program generated the following numbers for the following destructive one:

2003/11/14 18:49:00 27.20N 103.60E 10.0 5.1 YUNAN, CHINA

Test Date Pa: Pd:

2004/04/13 55: 58:
2004/05/18 65: 66:
2004/07/16 89: 93:
2004/07/20 86: 92:
2004/07/25 91: 96:
2004/08/02 87: 94:
2004/08/05 87: 93:
2004/08/09 85: 91:
2004/08/22 88: 92:

The Pa: numbers compare EM signals with all 5.0 and greater magnitude earthquakes in my database (about 23,000) which occurred since the beginning of 1990. The Pd: numbers do the same, but compare them with only those earthquakes which produced at least 1 fatality as that 2003/11/14 earthquake did.

The 2004/07/16 numbers for that earthquake show an abrupt jump in values. That is probably due in part to the EM signal which was detected on July 11.

My Perl language computer program is in my opinion working. And I feel that it is unfortunate that it is not yet in use by governments around the world. If it were then perhaps the people who perished as a result of that China earthquake might have been saved.

These are personal opinions.



Follow Ups:
     ● The next generation research computer program is now running - EQF  10:58:27 - 8/27/2004  (22593)  (1)
        ● Reformatted data table for above note - EQF  11:42:45 - 8/27/2004  (22602)  (0)
     ● Additional note - EQF  05:37:02 - 8/23/2004  (22570)  (1)
        ● Experimental - California earthquake data - EQF  11:11:28 - 8/24/2004  (22575)  (1)
           ● Another STUNNING, accurate earthquake forecast – The Olympic earthquake - EQF  10:34:30 - 8/26/2004  (22580)  (2)
              ● Re: Another STUNNING, accurate earthquake forecast – The Olympic earthquake - Canie  18:12:37 - 8/26/2004  (22586)  (1)
                 ● Re: Another STUNNING, accurate earthquake forecast – The Olympic earthquake - EQF  01:08:45 - 8/27/2004  (22592)  (0)
              ● Re: Another STUNNING, accurate earthquake forecast – The Olympic earthquake - Todd  17:46:34 - 8/26/2004  (22582)  (1)
                 ● Re: Another STUNNING, accurate earthquake forecast – The Olympic earthquake - EQF  01:04:50 - 8/27/2004  (22591)  (0)