I know it is irrelevant in this case, but someone who efficiently solves problems would approach the perception of a possible successful prediction differently.

He would
1. Lay out the precursory signal clearly and graphically, pointing out exactly what features were portentous.
2. Show that those signals really were anomalous by applying objective criteria to the preceding years.
3. Present the case to the world for evaluation.

He would remember that
1. Any one successful case proves little.
2. To be successful, a hit must have given location, time, and magnitude. In this case, longitude seems to be more than 100km off, it is in the most active spot for seismicity in the world, the Tohoku aftershock zone, the timing was off by a week, and no magnitude was given, and no latitude was specified. The messages allegedly emailed have not been posted.

Coupling the inept argument posted with the simultaneous claim that the US Cabinet should be restructured and no scientist has a clue, suggests, well, you can guess where this is going.

Once again, it appears that EQF himself has not checked whether his signal is not just noise, and it is no surprise that he cannot demonstrate it to the rest of us.