QUAKE UPDATE
Posted by Diane on January 18, 2000 at 16:04:31:

I have begun the progress of updating my summary documents and decided to post the first two here. The first are all the left forehead spikes, the number of EQ matches (made in accordance with the rules laid down and the squaring numbering system for identifying nine day windows when the quakesare most likely to occur.), the unmatched remaining spikes, the per cent matched, the period of time covered and the largest EQ to occur during this time. TL has recently undergone a change in that I have ceased to get many spikes and, those I have been getting, are matching much larger EQs. Which I conclude will alllow my body to take much more of a voltage than has previously been required...meaning much large quakes are on the way. The remaining unmatched Pressures agree with this conclusion. I haven't worried much about this month, but February could be a battle field of quakes in every area except LB and B is scheduled to get only one quake if it is to occur. I have gotten a number of very strong more immediate to quake symptoms which are still waiting and obeying the rule; the closer the quake, the closer to me or the larger the quake. Outstanding are two left foot areas, two right foot areas, right kidney, and a left thie spot of note. Now look at the past and the number of matches made.

AREA SPs MATCHES REM SPs COMPLETE FROM LAST SP LARGEST EQ
TL+5 3068 3064 4 99.9% 3/26/95 1/16/00 8.2
LS+2.9 766 720 46 94.0% 9/13/94 1/14/00 7.7
RS+2.5 585 371 214 63.4% 2/27/94 1/2/00 5.4
TR+2.9 704 647 57 91.9% 3/13/94 1/14/00 5.6
LB+2.6 104 44 60 42.3% 2/12/94 12/29/99 5.3
C+2.5 264 104 160 39.4% 3/1/95 1/16/00 4.5
RB+2.7 1471 1150 321 78.2% 3/13/94 1/17/00 7.1
B+2.7 163 66 97 40.5% 2/27/94 12/5/99 6.1

TL has become a mystery to me. Normally, through this time, there have been loads of waiting spikes to match with quakes, but not now. While this could change at any time and I could suddently begin to be hit by spikes, this slow down has been going on for awhile. As we know, large quakes tend to have many aftershocks and, if they fall in a certain range, they will get a spike. But now a M- has been producing 5.4, 5.5, even 5.6 quakes when it used to be simple; 5.0-5.3. Is this why I need to have fewer of them? Or, are the quakes to be so large, there will be little need for aftershocks to balance things out?

The chart below shows the number of +7.0 and +6.0 including the +7.0s in the world since I began testing the squaring numbering factor. Anyone see anything to be concerned about?

93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000
EQ +7.0 XX XX 19 12 4 6 15 1

EQ +6.0 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000
January 2 1 13 10 4 7 5 5
February 1 12 13 18 7 4 5
March 0 2 8 13 5 7 7
April 0 12 17 4 9 6 8
May 3 15 17 8 9 6 8
June 1 11 12 12 3 3 4
July 2 10 12 7 5 9 6
August 2 14 16 6 7 8 7
September 4 8 8 9 7 4 5
October 4 12 21 9 6 3 4
November 0 7 10 6 7 5 14
December 0 6 13 7 3 2 10
TOTALS 19 110 160 109 76 64 83 5