Hi Chris,

As I said in an earlier post, it is taking a while to get all of the charts etc. organized.

Japan was suspect at first because of that earthquake that occurred there a year ago. Then when I started specifically checking for matches between the EM Signals and past Japan earthquakes there were clear, high quality matches.

This is scheduled to be shown in some of the charts I am preparing.

Also as I have said in past notes, I myself can’t check for everyone’s earthquakes.

Governments and researchers need to use these types of data to watch for their own local earthquakes. The computer programs can at times work fairly well if you limit the area that you are checking. You can focus in on the data. If you are having to check the entire planet to determine where an expected earthquake is going to occur then that simply takes too long to be practical for me, anyway, with the present computer programs.

One of the EM Signals did appear to be pointing to the Vanuatu earthquakes. However, both the signal and the earthquake itself appeared on the chart at 179 W instead of the actual 170 E location.

This has to do partly with the fact that these are probabilities. And that Vanuatu earthquake simply did not match the earthquake triggering characteristics that I have for ones that occurred in the past in that area.

The EM Signals for the Japan earthquake also did not point to the exactly correct longitude. But they were close enough and clear enough to indicate that something could be about to occur in the Japan area.

Regarding a new government environment and safety agency,

The people running the U.S. government are not scientists. And, in my opinion, they don’t understand how bad things can get with regard to environment and safety matters getting out of control.

There needs to be some government agency that has a sense of direction regarding these types of matters and that is interested in and can actually get something done.

These are personal opinions.