Pamela, please stop quoting me. I, and others reading this forum, I think, can follow the train of thought long enought to not have everything repeated. (somehow I expect to see the previous sentence in quotes soon). Ok. I do not want to do all the things mentioned (solar flares, raining fish, etc.) These are just ideas that we are discussing and when a group of people can agree on one item, we can better define the terms and try to manifest the event. I am open to any of the ideas that were suggested except the baseball and political ones, as like you said, without personal interest, I will not devote any thought to the subject.
And I did not say that predicting an earthquake in california and seeing one in minnesota was a hit. Our "hits" were within 10-20 miles of the target location, on the day predicted. If you can predict the epicenter of an earthquake within 20 miles, 40% of the time, then should being calling that a "hit". And no, I was not the one in Ventura.
Darby, like Pamela said, the lack of baseball interest for for deadens the thoughts. You are welcome to try this yourself, however my thoughts will not be centered on the task. And yes there are hundreds of earthquakes a day (usually small ones below 4 on the scale). You really need a 5 or better to feel something. We chose 5's as they are not harmful, yet not as common as the smaller scale quakes. Often we would notice a quake of lesser magnitude (3.2 for example) in the location and the time predicted, but these were not counted because as you know, there are lots of these. Of course there is a lot more square miles of california too and there seemed to be something to the fact that these lesser hits where more dead on in location and time. From what we dicussed, it seemed like our thoughts created an energy which built up over time and became more refined. My analogy for this one is like using Google Earth. You can zoom in real quick on a location of a house, but it takes the google server a 10 seconds to down load the close-up image. During the 10 seconds, you see at first just colored blobs with no definition. after a few more render passes, you start to make out a rectangle shape, a little longer and you see the defined resolution of the house you zoomed in on. If, during that 10 seconds though, you move the location, you will never see the house in full resolution. Maybe you only made it to the point where the house was seen as a rectangle. This, in quake prediction was like getting a 3 instead of a 5, or having the epicenter on the mountain edge instead of the valley center. The longer and more trained our group thoughts on one item are, the more accuarte the results.
Timenot, your political interjection was partially interesting, but didn't have much to do the experiment. Lets focus.