1,840 Earthquakes in 2010

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by bearice, Feb 25, 2011.

  1. 8 Magnitude and Stronger:

    We had one this year. The USGS average is 1, if any per year. The RHS1 average is two per year.

    7 Magnitude and Stronger:

    We experienced a whopping 20 of these shakers this year. That exceeds the USGS yearly average of 17 by 3 bringing us to 117% of average.

    6 Magnitude and Stronger:

    We experienced 136 of these strong quakes in 2010. The USGS average is 134 per year giving us an increase of only 1% from average rates.

    5 Magnitude and Stronger:

    There were 1684 of these quakes during 2010! USGS average is 1319 per year leaving us a 27% increase in these quakes.

    The deeper a quake is, the less it will be felt at ground level. A 7 magnitude quake happening 500 km below the surface may barely be felt, if it is at all, while a magnitude 4 happening at just a few kilometers below the surface may feel more like a 5 magnitude quake. With the crustal shifting we’ve experienced this year, many quakes occurred at depths of 10 and 35 km. That means that more damage has been caused than usual and more attention has been given to earthquakes than usual. Most of the alarm is due to illusions of more prevalent shaking than actual increases of shaking other than the fact that the large, shallow quakes have caused more aftershocks due to crustal movement and they have also occurred at shallow levels where they were more noticeable than they would have been otherwise.

  2. Would you mind starting these threads in the proper forum....ie chit chat.

  3. When magnitude 10 Earthquake strikes Earth and financial world that would be 100% economics.
  4. Earthquakes and monetary policy......

    “To raise oil prices or not, that is the question”
  5. When that happens, feel free to post that in Economics. But for now, this is just pure chit chat. I'm sorry, but earthquake stats, and nothing more, doesn't belong here.

  6. Actually, since there seems to be a link between earthquakes and climate change, I think P&R would be a suitable forum, where there is a substantial denial contingent (which, as a group, ironically believes in sky fairies and invisible hands).

  7. There is significant bias in the data because the number of sansors has been increasing and no sensors existed before in remote locations.

    This is a very good website with a lots of data:


    According to this, activity picked up after 1994 but has been declinining since 2008:


    But as I said, there is a bias because the number of sensors has increased in recent years.
  8. Banjo


  9. Lucrum


    Probably because, according to Gore, the earth's core is so hot.

    <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zMrxC-qEHb8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
    #10     Feb 26, 2011