Hi Roger,

You need to remember that I have several degrees in the physical sciences and am an very experienced professional analyst. Most of my adult life has been spent evaluating complex systems for different organizations. I even own my own science – humanitarian project related organization and provide free advice on environmental subjects etc. to governments, organizations, and private parties around the world. You have repeatedly seen the outcomes of my efforts discussed in the national and international news.

The arguments you have been making concern data processing matters are ones that I myself considered and made adjustments for long ago. My computer programs have certain limitations at the moment. And I just have to live with them or the programs won’t even work.

Now that I have that chart feature operational my programming and data processing efforts are moving forward with tremendous speed. I can finally easily see what happens when I change some variable in the equations I am using. And that makes it much easier to optimize things.

I do wish that I could have my Perl programs generate the charts themselves instead of having to generate data files which are then loaded into Excel so that the charts can be produced. But I don't have time at the moment to learn how to get Perl to generate charts directly.

Some of the data that I have looked at indicate that the Solomon Islands earthquake very likely did generate some warning signals. And peaks did appear in other more optimized versions of that chart. But I still don’t know why that Kuril Islands earthquake generated so many strong signals while the Solomon Islands one generated only a limited number of weaker signals.

As I have been saying, the overall picture here is extremely complex and probably involves solar and geomagnetic storms and fault zone characteristics such as the conductivity of the rock in the fault zone, its depth, its location, its north and south or east and west orientation, and on and on.