Comments on: Have there really been more earthquakes than average?

By: carsue

carsue — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:18:50 +0000

I discovered my own answer to this question….Starting in January 2009, the USGS National Earthquake Information Center no longer locates earthquakes smaller than magnitude 4.5 outside the United States, unless we receive specific information that the earthquake was felt or caused damage. …. However, I still think we are tracking high between the 6.5 and 7.9 magnitude. Will see how the year plays out.

By: nick

nick — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 05:30:41 +0000

excellent article, very informative. but just wanted to make sure im seeing thing straight. by my count as of today 13th aug. there have already been 17
M7.0-7.9 events with more then 1/3rd of the year remaining. seems to be trending for a fairly big year. would love to see you rework the numbers again. but look at me making more work for you
cheers!

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:16:47 +0000

Nothing interesting there. As I quoted in my update:

2010 is on course to experience 18 major earthquakes, a little above average but well within the variability shown by the whole dataset (and it’s actually closer to the centennial average of 16 major quakes a year reported by the USGS above).

By: carsue

carsue — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:13:53 +0000

Interested wouldn’t you say…

7+ Greater Earthquakes
Date
Range 1/1-8/11 Full year
2010 16
2009 10 17
2008 9 12
2007 6 18
2006 8 11
2005 6 11
2004 5 16

By: carsue

carsue — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 23:32:10 +0000

If you use the USGS tool and indicate a magnitude 2 to 10. Can you explain why from January 1 to July 17…that in 2005 there were 16,944 quakes; 2006 15,509 quakes; 2007 15,237 quakes; 2008 17,211 quakes ….yet in 2009 they are only indicating 8,090 and for 2010 they only indicate 9,676 quakes. How can the activity basically get cut in 1/2 for the past two years?

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 04:02:09 +0000

…I don’t even know where to start.

By: Adam Green

Adam Green — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 03:56:44 +0000

I agree that there has been no “extra” siesmic activity, but I do believe the effects for this years earthquakes have been different than in the past.

My theory is the earth`s mass is trying to move closer to the center of the earth to increase the rotation of the earth , because of the thousands of years of mankind digging from the ground, building ontop of the ground. Thousands of years of kicking dust in the air, we have effectively increased the diameter of the earth making the earth`s rotation to slow down. When our solar system crosses the equator of the milky way the earth WILL be in the same position it was the last time and every time we pass the galactic equator. It`s exactly like the second hand on a clock when it strikes midnight all clock hands are in the same position each time.

Proof of this was evident in the Chile earthquake, the earth day got shorter by 1 millionth of a sec, that may seem miniscule but if you work that out against the circumference of the earth, it isn`t so miniscule, especially when the indonesian earthquake shortened our day by more than 1 millionth of a sec, i dont know the exact figure.

Our galaxy is trying to make us speed up so the earth is in exactly the right spot at the right time, and the earth is reacting to it by moving its mass closer to the centre.

There is a reason the skin colour of our earth inhabitants,dark on on side, white on the other.

How close to Africa are your gonna be during the main event? Depends what skin colour you want to come out with.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 06 May 2010 17:50:06 +0000

Yeah, this is something we’ve known about for decades. Specifically, geothermal power production is known to produce small earthquakes due to injected water lubricating the faults. Most of these quakes are between M2 and M3.

Some have argued that loading caused by the creation of a reservoir (e.g., China’s Three Gorges Dam) might induce earthquakes as well, since the weight of water can significantly alter the distribution of stress on local faults.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 06 May 2010 17:45:10 +0000

That’s an interesting point, but I don’t think it’s indicative of anything. That is to say, I don’t think one can necessarily prove that earthquakes are targeting population centers. It’s the luck of the draw where an earthquake happens and a local population’s ability to prepare for and cope with an earthquake.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 06 May 2010 17:41:43 +0000

No, actually there hasn’t been a significant increase in major seismic activity.

Please read: http://scienceblogs.com/highlyallochthonous/2010/04/the_seismic_non-pocalypse.php

I thought this point could be best illustrated visually, so I ran a search through the USGS/NEIC earthquake catalogue for earthquakes of magnitude 7 or greater that have been recorded globally since 1973 (the starting point of the database). The results are plotted below. In the last 28 years, there have been on average around 13 such ‘significant’ earthquakes a year, with a magnitude 8 occuring about every year and a half. This average rate is marked by the grey line on the plot: if we extraplolate the six major earthquakes recorded in the first four months, 2010 is on course to experience 18 major earthquakes, a little above average but well within the variability shown by the whole dataset (and it’s actually closer to the centennial average of 16 major quakes a year reported by the USGS above).