I've been holding back this commentary for a long time out of respect for Canie and not "flaming" the board. Maybe I am wrong in my perception, but it really seems that the EQ prediction field is cannibalistic in terms of innovative thinking.

The paradigm of presently acceptable prediction parameters is so confined that anyone who engages in study, commentary or even questioning outside of it is subject to some pretty harsh criticism. I always thought that, in science, there has been some degree of reverence for creative truth seeking. So, I've always been bewildered by this.

The point is, I hope that you are able to get your material published without getting bucked by the politics of the field. Clearly, publication is the ratification that one seeks in the field. However, if you can't get the word out through academic publication, hopefully you will consider other avenues.

Tony