6.9 Earthquake Strikes China

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by tauristercus

 

Neat. Too bad the database you used doesn't seem to include them. Or should I say, the search doesn't find them. Probably has something to do with this:

For global events, magnitudes are not routinely reported until the early 1960s. This means, for example, that the largest earthquake observed - the 1960 Chilean earthquake (Mw 9.5) - appears in this catalog without an associated magnitude.

So an earthquake with no magnitude in the catalog will not be found in a search for a magnitude range of 6.0 - 6.9, will it? Why are you disregarding what ANSS says about its own database? It is the one you used, isn't it?

[edit on 4/13/2010 by Phage]

So if I'm understanding this correctly, he needs to make a new graph which starts from 1960 to ensure all magnitudes are cataloged? I think you would see the same curve. Or am I getting this totally wrong?

reply to post by kaleshchand


I have always wondered how can they get death estimates so quickly? Is it just a guess and then they update it as more info. is available?

It always starts out at 50, 10, 200.... and then ends up in the thousands if not more.

reply to post by Phage


In your expert opinion has there been any heightened earthquake activity at all this year? Or is this just an average year, and nothing unusual is going on?

edit: you seem to have ignored this post Phage, so i'll just cut to the chase.

Seismologists appear to disagree that this year is average, and nothing unusual is going on.

latimesblogs.latimes.com...

If you’ve been feeling more shaking this year, it’s not your imagination. The number of quakes greater than magnitude 4.0 in Southern California and Baja California has increased significantly in 2010. There have been 70 such quakes so far this year, the most of any year in the last decade. And it’s only April. There were 30 in 2009 and 29 in 2008. Seismologists said they are studying the uptick but cannot fully explain it.

Egill Hauksson, a geophysicist at Caltech, said the rate of quakes in the region is “probably ... picking up again” after a relative lull that lasted more than a decade. “What it means is that we are going to have more earthquakes than in the average year,” said Hauksson.

Earthquakes have been in the forefront of public consciousness this year after January’s devastating temblor in Haiti, which killed tens of thousands. It was followed weeks later by a destructive temblor in Chile. And then came the Mexicali quake, which was stronger than Haiti's although much less destructive. Hauksson said it’s easy to read too much into this year's quake uptick.

He doesn't even mention any of the many other large quakes which have happened so far this year on a regular basis, but it would make sense he's mainly studying his immediate area. However he is correct in saying it's only April, and much of the year is left. If this trend continues, there can be little doubt it will be a record year.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Risen]

reply to post by tauristercus


I knew it! Anyone can just read the news and be like "Yeeeaaahhh earthquake activity is at a normal level huh...?"

I think those articles that are saying it's all good and just the same are only saying that to calm people down because I personally think "Everyone" knows something is up. There's been a lot of freaking big earthquakes lately and it doesn't seem a tad bit like normal to me either.

reply to post by Phage


Phage and taurisecus, I don't think this is the thread to be arguing about such, maybe try quake watch?

My condolences for the dead

reply to post by Phage


You know phage you seem to think you know everything there is about earthquakes, but the thing is, earthquakes are increasing I don't know why you keep trying to hammer into everyones heads that their not.

You provided some graphs, which were complete bunk and didn't prove anything in your thread. And then you go around and discredit other peoples graphs and say you need this or that to prove whatever... well I for one am sick of your constant debate against people about not just earthquakes, but everything in general. I'll give you this, sometimes you're right - however sometimes I am as well. This is the internet, and we're on some forums, trying to prove you're better than people by belittling them all the time doesn't make you 'cool' FYI.

Anyway, I think we're being conditioned to accept that seismic activity is going to get worse maybe by mother nature herself, that's just a personal opinion though. Either that or there are other things at work that are creating these earthquakes that we are unaware of, or cannot prove at this time.

[edit on 14/4/2010 by highlyoriginal]

reply to post by CHA0S

No.
That is just one part of the problem. Just because "By the 1950s the system of seismographs could locate all M 6.0 events occurring globally.", it doesn't mean that all 6.0+ events are included in the database he used. And, in fact, they are not.

BTW, Tauristicus seems to have misattributed that entire quote.

posted by Tauristicus
The year 1997 marked the one hundredth anniversary of the general deployment of standardized and calibrated seismographs. It started with nine seismograph stations in 1898 that were capable of detecting, locating and measuring earthquakes of magnitude 7.0 or larger (M 7.0) anywhere in the globe. As a result, major earthquakes have been monitored globally and continuously for more than 100 years. By 1931 there were 350 stations operating worldwide that were locating and measuring M 6.5 earthquakes globally. By the 1950s the system of seismographs could locate all M 6.0 events occurring globally.


Source: T. M. Tsapanos and P. W. Burton, "Seismic Hazard Evaluation for Specific Seismic Regions of the World," Tectonophysics 194 (1991): p. 154.

While the actual source does footnote Tsapanos and Burton, the quote actually comes from here:
www.icr.org...

The misattribution is a bit ironic because the actual source provides data which contradicts his conclusion.

[edit on 4/14/2010 by Phage]

Originally posted by asala
Im hearring word that its just about to be upgraded to about a 7.1
Via the china earthquake networks...

Will update if more comes up.

Where I am in Sichuan Province, it's being reported as being 7.2 in magnitude.

I must say in all fairness, those who think earthquake activity is abnormal are right..im 47, i,ve never known mother earth be so pi**ed off as she has been these last few months...I think someone is not telling us whats going on, probably to stop the cause of mass panic.

reply to post by highlyoriginal


Just let Phage go... He will say it in every earthquake and volcano thread there is. Using one graph or set of dates to prove one thing and another set of dates and graphs to prove another thing. He goes back and forth time and time again with whatever fits his argument.

I think it's obvious that earth activity is increasing and is being documented with increased solar activity.

Check Out This Video
Experimental Log From YouTube Account - astrotometry
This is very interesting and he has been doing it for a while.
He seems to think that it does have something to do with the sun.

He's done a better job then the weather men in New England this year!~

Now this is getting bloody ridicilous.. It seems like theres a 5.0+ mag earthquake somewhere in the world, to the point where im starting to think conspiracy or HAARP, and i know that the critics are gonna come and start saying that all these earthquakes are naturally caused, but earthquakes of this magnitude didnt seem to happen every other day.

I think it's fun, to be experiencing major earth changes. It adds a level of complexity to my day here in california. If your not having fun, then your in the wrong paradigm!!

[edit on 14-4-2010 by onequestion]

[edit on 14-4-2010 by onequestion]

Earthquake death toll per year. 2000 - 2010.
2000 - 231
2001 - 21357
2002 - 1685
2003 - 33819
2004 - 228802
2005 - 82364
2006 - 6605
2007 - 712
2008 - 88011
2009 - 1787
2010 - 223142


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.

Originally posted by patmac
Can oil in our Earth's crust act like a lubricant? Is this all due to us messing with nature's gears? Just curious. I haven't heard anyone mention that on here before. I have NO intent to derail. Also, condolences to any lost in this recent quake.


[edit on 13-4-2010 by patmac]

I always said that and people said I was crazy. I really believe that oil works as a isolator for solar radiation. Not to mention that once extracted nothing is put in the hole left there to replace it. So you basically end up with huge empty spaces that have loads of pressure over them that with time can and probably do crumble causing havoc.

Not only this could explain the tsunami of 2004 which could have been triggered by a settlement of all the empty or half empty oil galleries, but it could also explain the increase in the global average temperature.

Graph showing increase of ALL 6+ Mag earthquakes from 1973-Present
research.dlindquist.com...

Graph showing increase of TOTAL STRENGTH of ALL earthquakes from 1973-Present
research.dlindquist.com...

Graph showing increase of TOTAL MAGNITUDE of ALL earthquakes from 1973-Present
research.dlindquist.com...

We can all show graphs... It's what you are feeling that really matters... Doesn't the world FEEL different?

reply to post by thomas_


How can oil protect us from radiation ? The magnetic field surrounding the Earth is protecting us, because of is nature.

Don't forget that oil is only organic matter, mainly Hydrogen, Carbon, some Oxygen and sometimes a bit of Sulfurs.

Also, don't believe that extracting oil is always creating empty holes in the rock. All rocks beneath the surface, when porous, are filled with fluid, mainly water, then oil, and finally gas. So extracting oil only makes the pore filled with water, IF possible of course.

When it's not possible, well nature hates emptiness, so if no fluids can replace the extracted oil, the rocks collapse. That's what's happening in the North Sea.

Also, you have to see an oil field not as a "cavern", but as a sponge, in fact, most of the pore where oil resides are micro-metrical (at least in carbonates, and really not more in sandstones).

Someone asked a question about faults locations, I believe it was "Boondocks-Saint", well, faults can propagate from the surface to a deep depth, but in the other way, faults are present in the crust and do not show on the surface.

I'm not going to debate about the frequency of earthquakes, may ask some colleagues working at the tectonic lab tomorrow if I see them.

EDIT : corrected some grammatical errors, sorry, french dude here.

[edit on 14/4/2010 by Solenki]