I included my comments in between your comments.

"Roger will never accept my prediction since he does not understand my method so far."

>Shan, does anybody besides yourself understand your method?
Please visit my site and read the Evaluation Report by Chinese expert.

>I am under the impression that you refuse to divulge the details of your method. Forgive me if I am
wrong on that. But, if I am right, then is not the statement that Roger does not understand your
method kind of silly considering you are the only one who does understand it?

Yes you are absolutely right and don’t want to through away my hard work just for debate.
The reason for posting in the Board is to create awareness among the experts who are under
impression that " earthquake cannot be predicted ". And another thing is need only observation
with very little fund is enough for the same besides complex calculations with big equipments,
Satellite, GPS etc, etc involving huge costs.

>"Accidents normally took place in heavy traffic places rather than normal."

Which, I believe, is what Roger is trying to say. If your analogy is to draw a comparison
to accidents with cars, of course more accidents happen where there are more cars.
And Roger is saying that you will have more hits if your predictions are where there are
more earthquakes. Heck, that's the whole basis of my little prediction scheme.

http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html

Of course...normally treatment given only for patients who are really suffering from various illness.
Based on the knowledge gained it is to treat the patients easily at all times including accident time.
Right?

>"As on observer I do my work sincerely."

I do not doubt your sincerity. But even the most sincere people can simply be wrong. (not that being
wrong is intrinsically bad)

Yes.. Just now I understood the same.

>Just some observations on your way of thinking.

Brian

Thank you for your valuable time spending on this post.

Shan