Hey Shan:

From what I've seen of Roger, he is an 'expert' who is also quick to mention the works of others who are 'experts' (like Alan Jones who came up with a way to reduce aftershocks effects in observed probability calculations).

Your efforts will place you in a stronger more persuasive position if you have many many predictions which properly specify magnitude,time window, and location.

In addition, if you pass your predictions to an independent third person who can vouch for your predictions and when they were made this will improve your credibility. A skeptic may argue that you can alter your web-site at any time (iuncluding after an earthquake) to make it appear that your success rate is higher than it is. I'm not saying that you are doing this but I am saying that an indepenent party can eliminate this charge from skeptics.

Do you have a list of complete predictions that Roger can evaluate ? I do believe that Roger is willing to change his mind provided you show sufficient evidence of the success of your method.

Maybe back in March you did not narrow the location down enough so Roger could not evaluate them. You could now try again with your +/- 3 degree predictions.

This evaluation will move you to more observatories if your predictions are significant. Are you willing to do this?

I beleive I do know what you are saying and I hope you understand the words I have written as I intended them.

2cents

• Alan JONES -created calculation to remove aftershocks from quake data (used by Roger Hunter)