Chirs & Ara,

>"it simply seems impossible for there to be a couple cm shift in the normal path of the shadow
across a few feet (1 m). So, the method seems simple enough, it just does not seem that it can work."

Even miniature variation is amplified in a big screen during projections indicates tiny movement
in celluloid can be magnified in to large, which is the basic principle of cinema. What I am doing
is simply reversing the theory. So it is working well.

>IF Shan is correct, then many current ideas will be wrong.
Yes.. of course, if anyone wants to make quake prediction possible, please switch over to fresh view
on science.

>"I think it has to be some local effect..."

Whether the LOCAL EFFECT does not related to the earth movement? If so, is it always?
For example during Pak quake, the buildings upto Delhi were jolted. Is it the local effect of Pak only?

>Assuming you are right, and yet still giving Shan a best-case scenario, there would be some
local effect that was somehow a precursor, for unknown reasons.

If you could provide valid reason the "unknown reasons" will yield new ideas.

>He has to explain his method in precise detail. He must also explain exactly what "adjustments"
he is making to his concept when he gets near misses or total-misses.

I always insist to get a correct result need more observatories and compare the earth movement in all
direction with respect to a particular observatory. Also prediction during diffused sunlight days
will not yield correct results. But due to my interest with very difficult I used to take readings
in such a condition too and more than 50% results were came true in these cases also. If time
comes, I will disclose all of them.

Shan