I am somewhat troubled that there appears to be a financial benefit to the owner of the site.I have said for years that if one can do this with any success then it should be public domain. This quote from the site says:
"Using a novel, new approach, she invented, designed, and built the equipment which produces a pre-quake signal. It is for sale to a principaled concern"
I have serious problems with this. If the idea is proprietary and really works then as a 'scientist', she should be the one doing the work on it. This smacks a bit of snakeoil. Why a childhood picture? Is this some sort of ruse? If she has presented papers as it says to the AGU, then her name and picture would be widely known...Just a bit too strange... I will investigate it further.And what about this quote:
"Without outside funding, a modest fee, of $3.00 for regional forecasts and $300.00 for projection of the next major worldwide earthquake forecast, must be imposed." Sounds to me like obfuscation and mirrors!

Bob