(computer note: I keep getting a No Name error asking me to re-submit. When I did last time, it formed a new topic)

Shan,

"Please refer my post viz. http://www.earthwaves.org/wwwboard/messages/29438.html
and my postings dt 18th Oct. on my website. I have clearly stated that"

That is exactly what I did, Shan.

"I have clearly stated that in the first
line itself the Japan location as appended below..."

Sorry, Shan, you are now referring only to the prediction on your website, not the prediction you posted.

http://www.earthwaves.org/wwwboard/messages/29438.html
The post states:

"Around 6 to 7M quake over

XIZANG (31.1N 81.1E)
IRIAN JAYA REGION, INDONESIA(3.7S 131.1E)
NORTHERN MOLUCCA SEA (1.0N 126.0E)
KOMANDORSKIYE OSTROVA REGION (55.55N 165.67E)
TAIWAN REGION (24.1N 122.6E)

may occur within 2 to 10 days from 4.30 UTC on 17th October 2005.

Subsequent to the above quakes the following location may receive
slightly lower magnitude or vice versa on the same time frame.

LUZON, PHILIPPINE (13.8N 123.1E)
MINDANAO, PHILIPPINE ISLAND (5.7N 125.7E) -
MARIANA ISLANDS (17.4N 145.9E) - VANUATU (13.8S 167.4E)
NEAR W. CST EASTERN HONSHU (37.2N 138.6E) "
--------------------------------------------------------------
This is two groups of locations. Group A has 5 locations. Group B has another 5 locations, including the NEAR W. CST EASTERN HONSHU (37.2N 138.6E)

Your website states:
"UPDATED 18th October 2005 - 07.30 UTC
PREDICTION Dt.17th & 18th Oct.'05:
Bright sunshine days
Around 6 to 7M quake over

XIZANG (31.1N 81.1E) - NEAR W. CST EASTERN HONSHU (37.2N 138.6E)
LUZON, PHILIPPINE (13.8N 123.1E)
IRIAN JAYA REGION, INDONESIA(3.7S 131.1E) - NORTHERN MOLUCCA SEA (1.0N 126.0E)
MINDANAO, PHILIPPINE ISLAND (5.7N 125.7E) - TAIWAN REGION (24.1N 122.6E)
MARIANA ISLANDS (17.4N 145.9E) - VANUATU (13.8S 167.4E)
KOMANDORSKIYE OSTROVA REGION (55.55N 165.67E)

and round 5 to 6M quake over

NORTHERN SUMATERA (5.7N 94.9E) - NEW BRITAIN (5.8S 148.8E)
KYUSHU, JAPAN (33.6N 130.3E) - XIZANG (31.1N 88.8E)
SOUTH OF KERMADEC ISLANDS (34.5S 179.6E) - ANDREANOF ISLANDS (51.55N 175.97W)

may occur within next 48 to 240 hours from 04.30 UTC on 17th Oct. 2005."
---------------------------------------------------------
In this version, Group A has 10 locations, including NEAR W. CST EASTERN HONSHU (37.2N 138.6E). Group B has 6 locations, including KYUSHU, JAPAN (33.6N 130.3E

---------------------------------------------------------
There is a discrepancy between the predictions. Kyushu is not mentioned in one of them and the Niigata area changes from one Group to the other.

----------------------------------------------------------

Shan, before you accuse me of having motivations of "confusing" people, you should check out the FACTS to which I am referring. There IS a discrepancy in the predictions. And from my perspective, you are the one confusing people by first stating that you cannot disclose your method, and then stating that you have disclosed the details of your method.

-----------------------------------------------------------

In August you made a prediction for Wakayama and then claimed a "result" for a Tokyo quake over 800km distant, even though you have said you are limited to a 200km distance.

Now you are claiming a result for a Tokyo area quake, when you predicted Kyushuu and Niigata. That is ridiculous and meaningless, in my opinion.
-----------------------------------------------
I did not notice an explanation of the connection between Group A and Group B in your predictions: "Subsequent to the above quakes the following location may receive slightly lower magnitude or vice versa on the same time frame."

Since you say "or vice versa" I guess this is just one big group of 16 locations? Why did the Niigata location change from one group to another?
-----------------------------------------------
Though I have not looked in detail at your non-Japan predictions, your Japan predictions (along with your failure to explain anything about how you calculate locations/magnitudes) make me doubt you have a viable method. Before you again attack me personally with accusations concerning my "intention" I suggest you consider the possibility that I am merely criticizing your inconsistencies, vagueness, especially concerning Japan predictions.

I do not blindly praise people who cannot set forth their ideas clearly and convincingly.