reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
I will offer you a objective opinion on it:
1) Glad to see you are looking at more than one source. Okay, it's someone's private project, but they do refer back to where they got their data
from. So you're starting down the right path.
2) There is still the problem with the graphs in again: the amount of earthquake detection devices and their sensitivity has increased over the years.
That increase, will of course make the total amounts and even the averages increase.
It's basic math: if you have a class that has 20 students in it, and you are keeping track of their grades each year. However, if the number of
students increase, it will change your numbers. If the testing materials and teaching materials get better, the grades of the students will appear to
increase also.
If you TRULY want to see if there is an increasing trend in earthquakes, here is what I suggest you do:
Go back to 1973 and look at the data for that year. Find the TOTAL amount of reporting stations, and which ones there are.
Now, from that point all the way up to 2012, ONLY use the data from those reporting stations. Even if the amount of stations has tripled, you do not
use any of the new stations data.
Next, again, look at 1973 data. Find the least magnitude quake, and the deepest depth from any of those stations. That sets the bounds. From that
point on, you must ignore any quakes that are lower in magnitude or deeper in depth (because as we get closer to 2012, the equipment becomes better
and more sensitive, which will skew the numbers).
So there you have it: use only the same amount and same reporting stations that were in 1973, and make sure you do NOT include any quakes smaller than
the smallest listed in 1973, or deeper than any listed in 1973.
Once you have all those numbers up to this year, you can then plot a graph and see if there is an increase in earthquake activity.
THAT would be a truly objective way to see if there is an increasing trend.
