Fake Banner
    Why So Many Earthquakes This Decade?
    By Richard Mankiewicz | February 28th 2010 12:04 PM | 82 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Richard

    I used to be lots of things, but all people see now is a red man. The universe has gifted me a rare autoimmune skin condition known as erythroderma...

    View Richard's Profile
    In light of some comments below, and what appears to be an inability to follow a simple link, I accept it is time to rewrite this blog post as one seamless narrative. Thanks to those comments that helped solve the original problem.

    19 April 2010, version 2.0

    While Haiti is still sorting out the chaos from its January earthquake, the Earth suffers another massive quake in Chile. At a magnitude of 8.8 on the Richter scale this is one of the most powerful earthquakes ever recorded. Concerns about a tsunami spreading across the Pacific have abated and the Chilean authorities claim they have the resources to handle the catastrophe.

    Why are we having so many earthquakes recently? Is it just that the media likes to report dramatic and tragic events, or has there been a quantitative increase? The graph below appears to tell a worrying story.

    The graph legend states "USGS Worldwide Deadly&Destructive Earthquakes between Magnitudes 6 and 8" and plots data from 1900 to 2008. It appears to show a huge spike in major earthquakes starting some time around 1999. The conspiracy theorists have been all over this like a rash and numerous fingers are pointing to HAARP technology. Even the official literature states that starting in 1996 HAARP tested its capabilities for geological mapping using ELF waves by modulating the ambient current in the ionosphere using HF radio waves. Such a graph, showing a spike soon after HAARP started, seems to confirm the theorists' worse fears that not only has there been an increase in destructive earthquakes but that they may well be artificially created.

    However, there's one problem with this theory: the graph does not show what it claims to show.

    If you go to the URL referenced in the graph's title - http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/historical.php - you will find the data upon which the graph is based. However, the subheading on that webpage reads:"Selected earthquakes of general historic interest." This is not a full data set but one selected by the USGS as being of historic interest. The above graph is therefore an artefact of this selection process. To claim that there has been a huge increase in major earthquakes based solely upon this graph is therefore false.

    Luckily, another page at the USGS does have a full data set, although sadly only going back 30 years. I therefore created my own graph by calculating all the earthquakes above magnitude 6 for each year. The new graph looks like this:

    USGS Major Earthquakes 1980-2009
    Along the vertical axis are the number of such earthquakes per year and along the horizontal axis are the years 1980 to 2009. The line plotted is a rolling 10-year average to see if there is any trend. Admittedly, this is not 100 years worth of data but the concerns about the first graph were about a recent increase in major earthquakes so comparing the two is worthwhile.

    As we can see, there was an upward trend in the 1990s but this has since stabilised at about 150 major earthquakes globally per year - or an average of 3 per week. Those earthquakes that make headline news are obviously those that cause chaos and destruction to humans. But there are many earthquakes around the world every single day, they just don't get elevated from local or national news onto the world stage.

    If every earthquake was a harbinger of an impending apocalypse then I think I would go look for a different omen or live in perpetual disappointment. As for conspiracies, not all of them are wrong, but in this particular case, ditch that graph!

    So, has there been a spike up in major earthquakes over the last decade? No.

    Has there been any increase in major earthquakes in recent history? Some during the 1990s, although the data I have only covers the last 30 years. The USGS, who hold all the data, say that major earthquakes have been fairly constant.

    Has something fundamentally changed in the motions of the Earth's tectonic plates? To get the answer to that question you'll have to consult a specialist.

    The subject of this simple blog post was not geology or earthquakes or HAARP or conspiracies, but a simple question about finding the data to fit a graph. Whenever you see data being presented online have a look at the original source, and even then double check that the raw data has been correctly represented and interpreted.

    For lessons in data visualisations, and on how to abuse them, there is nobody better than Edward Tufte.

    Below is the original post (indeed v1.0 and v1.1 with the link). All comments before 19 April refer to this post, and would make little sense without this post as reference. That some comments may make little sense anyway I leave to the reader's judgement.

    While Haiti is still sorting out the chaos from its January earthquake, the Earth suffers another massive quake in Chile. At a magnitude of 8.8 on the Richter scale this is one of the most powerful earthquakes ever recorded. Concerns about a tsunami spreading across the Pacific have abated and the Chilean authorities claim they have the resources to handle the catastrophe.

    Why are we having so many earthquakes recently? Is it just that the media likes to report dramatic and tragic events, or has there been a quantitative increase? The graph below tells a worrying story.

    The graph is compiled from data from the US Geological Survey (USGS), which monitors earthquakes throughout the globe. The data goes back over 100 years and looks as if this was compiled in 2007 or 2008. The URL which it points to has worldwide data on earthquakes but no longer has a graphical representation. Perhaps the graph is so alarming the USGS decided not to show data in this way. Just to fill in the recent data: 2008 saw 35 earthquakes of magnitude 6 and over; and 2009 saw a record-breaking 52, taking it way off the above scale - you can go count them yourself!

    This alarming increase seems to have started in 1999. The conspiracy theorists have been all over this like a rash and numerous fingers are pointing to HAARP technology. There is increasing evidence that HAARP technology can alter the weather, but can it cause earthquakes? Even the official literature states that starting in 1996 HAARP tested its capabilities for geological mapping using ELF waves by modulating the ambient current in the ionosphere using HF radio waves. The official HAARP website has some interesting simulations of the fields created in the Earth's ionosphere-magnetosphere. Weather modification is another hornet's nest so I'd like to keep this to earthquakes.

    However, this isn't a conspiracy website, so are there any scientists in this field who can explain this huge spike in earthquakes? An artefact of more measuring stations, surely not?

    Update: we seem to have some answers! The above graph is an artefact of selective data. As some readers don't go through all the comments here is the link to the relevant comment and a new graph.


    Rycharde:  about the Chile earthquake, from the horse's mouth -
    J. Ramón Arrowsmith, of Arizona State University.

    –Is this a sign that Earth is more active (with the Haiti quake, Chile and one in Japan yesterday as well)?

    Well, from our human perspective with our relatively short and incomplete memories and better and better communications around the world, we hear about more earthquakes and it seems like they are more frequent, but this is probably not any indication of a global change in earthquake rate of significance. If you look at the USGS FAQ web site (http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/learn/faq), you can see that we expect (and get) about 1 event of this magnitude per year on average, and about 17 M7-7.9 events (e.g., Haiti and Japan) per year. The key point seems to be that as the human population of the earth increases, we move into more and more hazardous regions, and with our increasingly connected world, we hear about the events that much more.

    The Arrowsmith blog is https with a bad certificate. 
    If your browser objects, just go ahead and read this most excellent resource:
    I found this by searching for it - Have no answers but im thinking that its time to earthquake my home lol
    Just want to correct you on something aswell- 8.8 is the largest earthquake recored (only in the last 100 years - not largest earthquake ever.)

    **earthquake proof** my home

    I think the largest ever recorded was a 9.5 also in chilie in the 60's!

    The earthquake of 64 in Alaska was a 9.6 on the rhictor scale. More people died from this earthquake, but at least two towns were sunk into the ocean during the 64 earthquake, which is the worst recorded.

    If you go over data for the most deadly quakes by death tolls (1000+ deaths)... You'll find that 16 have occurred from 1990-2010, 21 from 70-90, 29 from 30-50, and 18 from 10-30...The last 20 years have actually taken a pretty good drop from that viewpoint. I'll take earthquakes all day if no one is dying from them. And for all the people who posted debunking his 8.8 statement. He said, "one of the most" not "the most". And as for the past 100 years...Chile had a 9.5 on May 22 1960. Haiti is, however the largest death toll in the past hundred years (316000 deaths), being second overall to Shensi China. (830000) But that was in 1556...so kinda a while back.

    Patrick, why do statements like Arrowsmith's remind me of,"trust me, I'm a scientist."

    Wouldn't it be nice, as we're supposed to be evidence-based, to just be given reassuring evidence rather than reassuring hot air. For example, lets have a graph of the number of monitoring stations over the past, say 50 years - data I'm sure is readily available. Then we can make a better judgement as to the likelihood that the spike in the above graph is an artefact or not.

    I can accept that low-level quakes would have gone unreported in the past but above ML 6 someone would have recorded the event.

    This is from the British Geological Survey:
    On average, the network locates around 200 local [British] earthquakes per year and is capable of detecting all events greater than 1.5 ML (Richter local magnitude) in mainland Britain. In a typical year, 40 events will have magnitudes greater than 2.0 ML and about 20 are felt by local residents. Seismologists are able to discriminate between earthquakes and the large number of other signals (such as quarry blasts, explosions, sonic booms and collapses ) which are recorded in addition to earthquakes.

    Have never felt an earthquake in the UK - have felt 2 in Tokyo and 1 in Chiang Mai.
    Rycharde: I just knew you would enjoy Arrowsmith. ;)

    The nearest I ever got to feeling an earthquake was when a propane bottle exploded about 40 feet from my house.  It felt like I had received a present of a Mack truck through the front door, and I was in a back room.  That will do fine, thanks! No more, please.
    :-) The first time in Tokyo, I was still dozing in bed ( a mat on the floor) so could feel the vibrations. I initially thought that my brother and wife upstairs were brushing their teeth too vigorously. Neither of them felt it and thought it was an artefact of my vivid imagination - so much for human reporting.

    One summer I was in Santorini; a strange crescent-shaped island after its volcanic core erupted so violently as to scoop out the land in the middle. I also went to Crete a few years later and heard of the historical problem of where the ancient Cretans had gone to? The theory is that the civilisation was destroyed by the tsunami caused by the eruption of Santorini, and yet the houses and ports unearthed looked deserted, as if the people had fled already. But there are no records of them landing anywhere in the Med and rebuilding their culture. I therefore suggested helpfully that they probably all died at sea - the Cretan archeologist was not pleased and took this as a tasteless quip. And yet, what other reason could there be?
    Larry Arnold
    I can recall at least 3 earthquakes I have felt in my 4th story flat, I have also felt what seemed to be an earthquake of much longer duration when the neighbouring block was demolished.

    Apparantly being situated on former mining land, this has the effect of magnifying any seismic activity locally. I certainly wouldn't fancy a really big quake, my whole block might disappear down a forgotten abandoned mineshaft.
    Here's an educational video of how the various shockwaves created by the Chile earthquake travel and were picked up by the monitoring station at the University of Portland, OR.

    im from new zealand and weve had our share of quakes with a small one today 4.5 ,it was not as long as the one in the video (chile)but nervertheless it still makes me run out the house as who knows wot will follow,just hearing the lady stressing out makes me feel for that man and his wife,i dont understand chile language but by the tone he does a great job in consoleing her,on the big quakes here i get my family out of the house to the front lawn and we huddle until it passes,makes me gratefull for goodtimes quiet and to realise that luck plays a big part in our existence,as we had an appointment in our town of christchurch in a building that collapsed and many people died ,when an earthquake hit and destoyed a lot of buildings with many deaths,we could of been among them,

    and here I thought I was just being paranoid or just paying more attention to disasters than in previous decades

    time to move away from the coastline, given the third quake off Japan over the weekend.

    I guess Alaska or Vancouver is next

    OK I just checked the data from the usgs website (from the link you provided) and I got all the stats for the last two decades of earthquakes 6.0 and higher. The numbers were MUCH higher that what you stated. However there was no drastic increase as the graph you posted is displaying. Here is where I got the data for the last decade http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/year/eqstats.php

    Gerhard Adam
    Actually a link to the graphs

    Mundus vult decipi
    Thanks, for the links. I had looked at those pages and have started to put together some numbers as have been busy on other articles. I think I know where the above data in the graph I posted come from.

    Now, on this page
    which is the link referenced in the legend of the graph, if you count those earthquakes at or above M 6.0 you will get the same data as illustrated on the graph. However, those numbers bear no relationship to the data given on the page referenced by Gerhard
    Just scroll down and the data is shown by decade only as far back as 1980.

    So why the discrepancy? Well, the first page says in words that I had initially not noticed carefully enough that these are "Selected earthquakes of general historic interest." So the graph is, indeed, an artefact of how the USGS selected these earthquakes of interest!! The graph does refer to the data on the page mentioned but that data is incomplete! That part of the puzzle solved.

    I then looked at the data on the graph page linked above by Gerhard and did a calculation of the averages for each decade of all the earthquakes of magnitude 6 and above.

    1980-89 = 108.5 earthquakes per year
    1990-99 = 149.2
    2000-09 = 160.9

    However, the idea of a decade is also a human construct, so I put the data into a spreadsheet and produced my own graph.

    Along the y-axis is the average number of earthquakes of magnitude at or above 6.0 globally per year as monitored by the USGS, and along the x-axis are the years 1980 to 2009. The line is the 10-year rolling average of such earthquakes.

    So, no alarming spike, but a general trend upwards, at least over the modest timescale of the last 30 years (although only 20 years of averages). Is there something to be concerned about, or is this natural variation or, as mentioned in the article, a consequence of greater monitoring. Again, I defer to a geologist, but at least the data is cleare now, I think.

    Gerhard Adam
    So, no alarming spike, but a general trend upwards, at least over the modest timescale of the last 30 years (although only 20 years of averages). Is there something to be concerned about, or is this natural variation or, as mentioned in the article, a consequence of greater monitoring.
    I think there will always be a problem in dealing with geological time scales since even unusual variations don't necessary represent a departure from normal.  Consider that a tossed coin still has the possibility of streams of heads or tails coming up, so it would be impossible to tell that something was amiss since we lack a true historical perspective.

    This is part of the problem being exploited regarding global climate change, because it is often mentioned that this is just a natural cycle, while others include the point that humans may be accelerating such cycles, etc.  In the end, these are meaningless discussions, but the questions are not about the Earth's cycle, but rather whether such cycles (normal or not) will have a severe impact on the human species.  As the human population grows, it is increasingly likely that we will experience greater effects from planetary events and if humans persist in believing that they are somehow exempt from the laws of nature, they will discover, rather rudely, that nature has no vested interest in ensuring their survival.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Interestingly enough, the USGS also has data for 2010. While we are just beginning the 3rd month of the year (which is a little of 2 months), we have 32 major earthquakes reported (at that rate we will surpass other years with 192 major quakes-6.0 and above) and the most on record so far is 2009, with 159. We are about average for smaller earthquakes, however.

    Well, the first page says in words that I had initially not noticed carefully enough that these are "Selected earthquakes of general historic interest." So the graph is, indeed, an artefact of how the USGS selected these earthquakes of interest!! The graph does refer to the data on the page mentioned but that data is incomplete! That part of the puzzle solved.

    You see what happens, Richard when you don't carefully check the data that you're posting? You post a blog entry with a title like "Why So Many Earthquakes This Decade?" and then you post "incomplete data" making it seem like there has been a spike in the incidence of Earthquakes. Is it any mystery then why all of the religious kooks are coming out of the woodwork claiming that this is evidence of a coming apocalypse? That's not only irresponsible, but it's a great disservice to science and to our readership.

    I'm sorry for being so harsh, but seeing this post every single day is starting to get very annoying. You have the option to delete this article, you know. That's what I did with mine, because I was drunk when I wrote it and it was a very badly written article. Just a suggestion. The choice is yours. But this is really getting out of hand.
    It might be better to just edit it so that the data is calibrated correctly.    It's certainly a popular topic so we want people to have the most accurate information.
    Earthquake today became the most frightening natural disaster that could happen any time and its because of human activities that are trying to helps us but on the other side these activities could be the reason for such natural calamities.
    They may also be caused by various activities at the earth's surface such as the flow of the tides, the rush of traffic in the city streets, the tumbling of streams over high falls within the interior of the earth or explosion of high power nuclear or atomic bomb etc.

    Thank you Richarde Manne for exploring the USGS data that many do not question, it is important to be careful of how data is presented and how it can be presented in a 'biased' way. Obviously science is about non-biased analysis and observation even if as humans, we may have biased expectations about the outcome of the results. lol.

    Part of being an ecologist, studying the oscillations of earth cycles in which ever form they be is rather valuable to understand what the data is saying with historic references tell us with regards to earth changes and cycles, as we are always learning and making new discoveries about the environment in relation to the universe and how it behaves. I may not agree with all the comments previously posted as I have been researching various angles of this, some more extreme than others. I am aware that there is a lot to be researched on how space weather affects earth changes, geo activity and mangnetic anomoli shifts.

    It is obvious that since the last half a century we ahve developed sensativetechnology to record more earthquakes and with the population increase more are reported therefore these are issues that can add to the possible increase in data which is why it is important to go as far back with our data as we can to observe oscillations.

    Here is an interesting project with regard to historic earthquake data for researchers

    The actual increase in earthquake observations is almost entirely in earthquakes below magnitude of 7, and of that most of the increase is below 5. The observations are consistent with improved observation due to more stations and better equipment. The initial phenomenon of a spike in quakes is based on a bad interpretation of a list of "interesting quakes" not an exhaustive list. Surprisingly, more recent quakes are considered more interesting.

    The details are here: http://www.scientificblogging.com/rugbyologist/quakery
     And here: http://www.scientificblogging.com/comments/34208/If_you_only_look
    Ive been recently compiling information based on UTC times and quakes happenning off the usgs site, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/ which Im sure youve all seen...I jump between Real time USA and Real time world...I refresh the pages as often as I can in a given hour writing down all the times in sequence, using the UTC time..(I write my areas time down as well.) But I have noticed in my two days of watching and writing, there does seem to be some relation of quakes around the globe, in a UTC sequential order...lol Im not sure what I'm doing for real, its more of a hobby, theres no real sequential time graph to look up on quakes, and so many ppl seem to say quakes in different areas are unrelated...I plan on continuing what Im doing and will let you know more as it happens, I do my best to watch the usgs site and log every quake and time and depth by hand in my quake journal I started this year...anyway heres some events from March 3rd of interest, at least to me, and feel free to go to usgs and find em, youll have to write em down like me though as they come to see the sequential UTC happennings...alright.... (Ill write events down in UTC time) ....19:58:29 5.3mag offshore chile 17.8mile depth.....20:10:46 1.6mag greater L.A. 4.7mile depth....20:15:23 2.9mag central California 12.5miles depth....20:32:45 1.8mag East Nevada 5.0mile depth....20:35:58 2.4mag North California 1.6mile depth....20:36:33 3.2mag SanFrancisco California 3.0mile depth...21:06:07 1.5mag greater L.A. 24.8mile depth....21:24:02 5.1mag offshore Chile 17.8mile depth....21:30:53 3.2mag Southern Alaska 49.6mile depth...21:32:50 2.5mag Central California 11.4mile depth....21:34:09 1.6mag greater L.A. 3.6mile depth....21:37:00 4.8mag Talaud, Indonesia 21.9mile depth....21:56:11 2.5mag Southern Alaska 64.9mile depth.......and this series of events...... 01:39:49 6.1mag offshore chile 16.8mile depth....02:05:13 2.7mag Alaskan Peninsula 122.4mile depth....02:08:20 4.7mag Batan Is. Philippenes 19.3mile depth....02:19:22 1.2mag Southern California 8.8mile depth....02:23:47 4.9mag offshore Chile 33.1mile depth....02:35:26 1.9 central California 9.6mile depth....02:35:36 1.3mag Southern California 7.0mile depth..........OR.....09:03:42 5.1mag Chile 21.7mile depth....10:53:51 5.1mag Argentina 6.6mile depth....12:22:31 3.8mag offshore North California 6.8mile depth....12:57:21 4.8mag Indonesia North Australia 21.7mile depth....13:02:10 2.2mag Central California 3.7mile depth....13:27:13 1.4mag North California 2.7mile depth....13:27:27 2.5mag Southern Alaska 5.5mile depth....13:33:40 2.0mag Central Alaska 2.6mile depth....13:41:27 2.0 Central California 4.8mile depth....14:02:30 6.4mag Australia Vanuatu 124.4mile depth.......the last ten entries were for march 4th.....Am I making any sense with my point here..lol Time sequences in events, that quakes do start other quakes, and that its even probable that we know very little about the plates compared to how they actually connect...is there a keystone plate or movement that could trigger a large event, ..or is it possible that random and sequential events could run together at that golden moment and give us several large quakes at the same time, seconds apart...which could in turn trigger a larger cascade/dominoe like effect...anyway thanks for your time if you read this...Im gonna keep doing my quake journal, its just too fun for real...peace all...

    Hi Richard,

    I know it seems like more than coincidence that so many Earthquakes have occurred during this last decade, but it truly is nothing out of the ordinary for the Earth. This is the way our planet works. These plates are continuously moving--at about the rate which your finger nails grow--and if those tectonic stresses aren't released on a regular basis they build up. What results are major Earthquakes.

    But the Earth has its own rhythms which over great periods of geologic time are well within the norm of our planet. In the context of the vast time scales of the geologic history of this planet, these events are far from extraordinary. The simple truth of the matter is that our planet is a very violent place. Like the rest of the universe, it destroys as it creates, and it does so on an unimaginable scale when viewed from the human perspective, my friend. : )


    I apologize for my rudeness last night in this particular thread. But you have to understand that since these recent Earthquakes have occurred I have been hearing an earful from the "end-of-the-worlders", as I call them, that this is a sign of the coming apocalypse. And then there are the conspiracy theorists who say that we are doing this because of experiments being done researching the ionosphere of the Earth. So, that is why I reacted in a not so polite way last night. I ask your forgiveness, my friend. : )


    Neither patience nor tolerance is one of my virtues, my friend. ;-)
    Perhaps I should add the comment where I posted the new graph and the debunking of the "old graph" into the main text. Looks like some people are not reading the whole thing and still believe that this is an "alarmist" article. The original article ended with a couple of questions which we seem to have answered. Some blog posts impart information, others seek it - the collective knowledge at work.

    The question of HAARP (and other EM devices) requires more space than a mere comment. But the broader question is: do scientists honestly believe that the whole of science takes place in the public domain of peer-reviewed journals? Have scientists become like lawyers, merely quoting precedents rather than thinking about the problem at hand? Probably the best science journals are the world's patent offices - and those patents are largely owned by corporations and the military. A look at the history of science will show that the military have always been the first customers, whether it's building a better sword, a better boat, a better gun, flying machines, submarines, radar, computers, electromagnetics - more power and more control. The whole point is to have power over someone else - to believe that such knowledge would be published to get brownie points from a journal is laughable. Such stuff is published when it is old knowledge or because some bright spark has independently figured it out. And that is the hope for science; that things can be discovered afresh even if they are known already by a secret group. In the absence of that it is still possible to formulate  experiments and build equipment that can test the more outlandish claims from conspiracists. If history is the science of things that happen only once, then journalism is the science of things that are happening right now.
    Honestly Richard, I think you should delete the entire post. It already has gotten completely out of hand. It should have never been posted in the first place. Of course the kooks are not going to read the whole thing. But it's too late to correct your mistake by simply adding more to the original post. At this point no one is even reading the original post but merely responding to each other's comments and the title of the blog.
    What exactly are you afraid of Eric? Are you advocating censoring some valid and interesting questions? Why do you label some readers as Kooks? From a kook with a real interest in the clear and obvious spike in the number, magnitude and diversity of location of all manner of tectonic activities across this planet, I suggest it is most refreshing to find a boffin with the communicative abilities of "Rycharde Manne".
    Why is no one courageous enough to point out and examine the blindingly obvious links between this phenomenonal and practically exponential increase in quakes and volcanoes across the globe with CERN. Why?
    I realise this will intoxicate you with seething indignation at my evident kookiness, but I am not blinded by science.
    I am interested in the truth.

    I'm not afraid of anything. But even Richard, the author of this article, writes above:

    Perhaps I should add the comment where I posted the new graph and the debunking of the "old graph" into the main text. Looks like some people are not reading the whole thing and still believe that this is an "alarmist" article.

    I think anyone who adds to fear-mongering and superstition when the evidence clearly shows that nothing extraordinary is going on, is doing a great disservice to not only our readers and science but ScientificBlogging. That's not what we're about here.

    I have been a field geologist and igneous petrologist for close to 40 years. And to read such absolute nonsense is offensive to me in the extreme! A good scientist will admit when he or she is wrong when the evidence is contrary to their beliefs. I, myself, despite my many years of experience, have had to admit on many occasions that I've been wrong.

    And no one is censoring Richard or anyone else. You'll notice that the article is still here.  Hank or any of the moderators could have pulled this article any time they wanted! But they didn't, because they respect the right to freedom of speech, as do I!

    But, if I had written something so badly, I would be ashamed to have it being viewed in public. In fact, I deleted my first article on the subject because I felt it was badly written; I wrote it when I was very drunk. And because of the mistakes I made in it, I felt the article was doing more harm than good. But, it's entirely up to Richard whether or not he wants to keep this article up.

    This is an open forum, which holds dearly the right to freedom of speech!
    Perhaps I should add the comment where I posted the new graph and the debunking of the "old graph" into the main text. Looks like some people are not reading the whole thing and still believe that this is an "alarmist" article. The original article ended with a couple of questions which we seem to have answered.
    May I recommend you add a new 1st paragraph or two.  Something on the lines of:

    A new graph shows that earthquakes are not happeming more frequently.


    This article was originally posted as ...
    but some comments show ...
    accordingly I have edited in these first paragraphs.

    Here is what I wrote originally:

    Eric is right about people who tend to read the headline - or perhaps the intro. -  and then jump in with a comment.

    Having the new graph up front would take the wind out of the sails of the [insert relevant term/s] who only read the first parts of blogs.
    To Patrick and Eric, yes, I best rewrite part of it so that the conclusion is loud and clear, and insert that 2nd graph into the text. (I'm just about to go off to work so will do it tonight.)

    However, I have had exchanges on other sites that have thanked me for debunking the original spike - so that message just needs to be clearer now. Actually, thanks Patrick for advice on the protocol to use; I was reticent to change the article completely as people then find their link is different to what they thought it was previously.

    Time to plunge into the Bangkok smog... back in 12 hours!
    Sounds like a plan, Richard! : )
    I didnt want to talk about haarp, although I should, Ive been reading about it for the better part of ten years now, granted with harsh responses and harassment that drove me from /e domains.... but that wasnt the post, and this now, isnt the space...maybe later...theres still too many haters...lol ...scientists became the lawyers back when the the Royal Astronomical Society gave birth...nothing is viewed at hand..there is no now science...sad as that is, the failures and limitations of man...blah blah etc etc...The best science journals are those never read, lost to mind, rest over the bones...but how true..... " Probably the best science journals are the world's patent offices - and those patents are largely owned by corporations and the military. " Rycharde Manne...you've made my day, your my hero...lol Im a quake geek a rock geek, astronomy geek and archeological geek, not to mention an architectural geek and a bit of a....?... and a real jack off all trades....lol anyway good words man...I dont know where to take my thoughts anymore about the seismic movement I see, all I know is USGS, and that refresh button have become better than t.v....me and my pen and the utc times...I threw all that jazz up there on a whim of desperation and lack of conversation....and it seems that the spark of life.....has somehow brought me to this place, ..this scientificblogging.com.....this lair, of intelligence, true intelligence...not all that crap Ive found for years now on the "other sites" ... but humans wanting answers, and humans learning that the standard....may not be the way...I only hope it lasts...like I said, only a moment...dust in the wind is an understatement....breathe deep the gathering gloom...and thanks to the un-proven, the un-met...the now...

    Oh, I was hoping you wouldn't write the acronym 'HAARP', Richard. That is a topic of which I am more than sick and tired of talking about and explaining to other people. That's why I didn't use the term in my comment. But being as intelligent as you are, you knew exactly what I was talking about. This one, I'm going to leave alone. ;-)
    My thoughts are...if you pump out billions of lubricating oil every day for years the shifting tectonic plates have no - or little lubrication when continental shift occurs.... Try draining the oil out of your Mercedes Benz engine and go for a drive from Dubai to wherever..and see how far you get.. We are a stupid race we kill each other ,soon..
    Pat Morris. Good Luck..putting it back...

    People always want a scientific theory for everything. The truth is this is just the start of the end. If you don't believe me just read Matthew 24;7.

    Gerhard Adam
    The truth is this is just the start of the end.
    This is precisely what I find the most annoying about this type of belief.  How is one to trust someone that is preparing for the end of the world? 
    Mundus vult decipi
    Gerhard: maybe he meant Mathew 7:24 - the wise and foolish builders would be more on-topic.
    Don't know about HAARP, but I've heard of two man-made earthquakes in the recent past. IIRC, one was in Switzerland, and I think it was related to drilling for a geothermal powerplant. The other was perhaps in Indonesia, related to some sort of drilling. Or maybe it was a hot-mud eruption that was linked to the drilling.

    Wired has a story on it, but no mention of the quakes that I'm thinking of

    I Have never seen such a case of comments that base around personal opinions of an individual who thinks he knows it all, and likes to reasure himself that everything is okay and normal, get a reality check will you, just because the quackes may not be striking your backyard yet? Doesnt mean there normal, try telling that to people who have lost there loved ones in chile and haiti, the trouble is people love living in a faulse sence of security! time and time again these socalled scientists who are paid to say all sorts of lies try to play down the effects of what is happening, let me explain it this way, its true we can detect more earthquacks more than we used to, however earthquack machines were capable of reading quacks way back over a century ago, and people populate areas not in 10 years but 1 or 2 centurys
    and there has never been Eathquacks to this magnitude and Regularity before, we have had earthquacks over Century's the odd one here or there but not so close together in one generation or decade as we are now witnessing, now of course were going to get some smart alleck scientist or ignorant people, thats why we had the world wars, that think they know everything about history and say oh 50 thousand years ago or 1000 years ago etc this happened, they are convinced they know what there talking about, just like a crafty dishonest car saleman who convinces a person to buy a heap of garbage at a high price, scientist know very little because 1- there opinions are based on Pride and selfishness, 2- who pays them the highest cheque to say whatever, and 3- it's hard for a scientist or person with a high degree to say I DON'T KNOW WHATS GOING ON, lets face it how can a man thats only alive 50 to 80 years possibly know or think he knows the answers to things that happened long before he was born!? agree we have some records but there not that acurate, The problem is that Man is Ruining the Earth, after the Bombs he dropped including the Voilence that still continues, the chemicals used, the melting ice, the viruses being spread, the oil being taken from the earth just to name a few is having a massive reaction on the Earth which is now starting to show it's reaction, everytime a big earthquack hits you will find that the scientists and people dont know what to think or what is causing it until 3 to 4 weeks down the track when it dies down you start hearing comments like on this blog from people who think its not serious or its just a cycle, then when the next big one hits! and it will probably in the next month or two they will go silent again, Time for people to start waking up and realise were in for the most amazing time in human history, for those that couldnt give a rats whats happening as long as it doesnt effect your neck of the woods, just bury you head in the sand and keep pretending it's not going to effect you, but be Warned your in for a Big shock in the future, by the way I found this the other day, talking about prophecy's check this out in the Bible Revelation chapter 11 verse 12 to 18 its amazing and everybody realises this is happening unless you have burried your head, regards Johhny and Frankie

    Gerhard Adam
    ...time and time again these socalled scientists who are paid to say all sorts of lies try to play down the effects of what is happening...

    Why don't you just stop with the stupid crap and stop your ridiculous religious and prophecy nonsense.  All you want to do is advance superstitous nonsense and get people to live in fear by creating this environment of doom and the "unknown".

    The reality is that your warnings amount to nothing more than superstitious drivel, so quit accusing people that make an honest living of lies when the only lies that are being told are those by ignorant leaders who haven't spent one minute studying the evidence and love the fact that people respond to this garbage by giving them more power.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Have you ever noticed, Gerhard that these religious fanatics always post anonymously and never have the guts to reveal their true identities while posting their drivel? ;-)
    To your comment Gerhard Adam, the world will never end the Bible even say's that, it was made to time indefinate and man will inhabit it forever, the Bible says the righteous will possess the earth and the meek will inherit the earth, what this implies is that the end will resolt in a massive change that has to take place in order to bring a perfect condition to the earth, not humans being destroyed to extinction or the earth being destroyed as some conmen want to convince you, but an end to Man's Rulership of Politics and Religion, The lords pray Our Father in heaven Hallow be thy name, thy Kingdom come Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven, or the more correct version is Father in Heaven let your Name[Jehovah] be Santified let your Kingdom come Let your will take place as in Heaven also Upon the Earth. so what were experiancing is God's way of allowing man to see that he can't rule or govern himself correctly or without his direction, Another scripture says That Unless he [God] cuts the Day's short No Flesh will be saved, but on account of the Chosen Ones [Millions of people worldwide] those days will be cut Short. the increasing of earthquacks in one place after another as were now starting to experiance was the indication to Rightious hearted ones that Gods kingdom is near, When you see these things Begin to Ocur[Jesus words] Lift your heads up high your deliverance is getting Near, In Noah's day people were laughing at Noah and Mocking him right up to the day he entered the Ark, Then the Rain came and destroyed that wicked generation of people, Jesus said it would be the same today, Just like the day's of noah, men will be given in marraige, Drinking Partying doing everything that is considered normal, except they took no note until the floods came and swept them all away, Jesus made a parable to the time were now living in, it will be like Noah's day were people will not listen to the warnings and make excuses to the things coming upon the inhabited Earth, So to answer the question quickly, The End of a system Governed by man and wicked invisible spirit forces is what is about to end, not the earth or humankind in general, although it will result in destruction of the wicked, which are people who are against God's Rulership and still want this world as we now no to continue even though they know it will eventually result in there own death anyhow. Thats what the End of the world Means.

    Why don't you have the courage of your convictions instead of posting
    Gerhard Adam
    ... the Bible says the righteous will possess the earth and the meek will inherit the earth, what this implies is that the end will resolt in a massive change that has to take place in order to bring a perfect condition to the earth...

    This is what I mean by nonsense.  If you want to talk about religion, OK, let's do it.

    The simple reality is that if I accept the story of creation, then the only evidence I have for such an existence is that God couldn't get it to work when there were only two humans.  Even under such simple circumstances, it couldn't be held together.

    If we consider other myths, then Satan/Devil is a fallen angel, or was cast out of heaven.  Once again, the evidence suggests that heaven was hardly perfect since rebellion could still occur.

    No matter how many stories you read from the Bible the only thing that is a universal theme throughout is that the righteous will invariably suffer and die, while the evil persists.  There isn't a single example of good achieving a long-term triumph ... the only thing stated is that there is some vague promise that the future will be different.  Based on the evidence, I can't imagine how that could possibly be achieved.

    There is no such thing as a "perfect condition".  There isn't a single thing you can mention that doesn't invariably involve some sort of conflict, even if it is simply the emotions in one's own mind.  This is precisely the kind of fantasy that people cling to where if they took even a moment's thought to consider it, they would realize that it is conflict that makes life worth living.  The perfection of which you're speaking would be a hideous parody of life and cannot coexist with any freedom.

    Mundus vult decipi
    FFS please dont ever quote the bible like that again and try to force ur beliefs on everyone.
    No 1 cares

    Hi Again Gerhard, Sorry if you think that I'm spreading supersticions, thats not the case, People are concerned about the things that are happening, and it is a possitive not a negative Prospect that the Bible holds out to people, it's the only book that explains in detail whats happening, I agree with you though Gerhard that Religion is a problem and causes wars and divisions in peoples lives, however that doesnt change the reality of what God's word says about the future, including the destruction of all False Religion, also there are many lies and superstitions that are commonly practised throughout the earth, that is one of the main reasons we need a change, Take care Gerhard.

    Anonnymous: are you getting your 'facts' 2nd hand from an agendist, or from the Bible as primary source:

    Revelations 21: Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.

    Astonomers predict that the sun will become a red giant at which time earth will be scorched to a bare planet.

    No conflict there, either way the earth will not last forever -

    so we should treat it as a shared treasure for all to enjoy, not the plaything of the rich and powerful.
    The New Heavens and New Earth stand for 1 - Heavens mean Goverment and a new world power, Thats what it Means when you say the lords pray at John ch17, you dont pray for god's kingdom if the earth is going to be no more,
    2- New Earth means a new Society of people who God's Goverment or kingdom will rule over, These people are the ones who survive the Great Tribulation [Millions worldwide] and then are helped to reach perfect human life as well as all those bought back from the Dead which are Billions, this takes place not in one go but over a gradual long period of time, yes the Bible is were this info is from, If you want to believe the world is going to be destroyed that is your Choice, however that opinion is not supported in the Bible, and again Astronomers have only limited Knowledge, they dont know anything really about the universe, except certain solosystems and stars that they have mapped out on there charts and again they choose not to look in to the bible for direction they follow there own, as the majority of this world does, Everybody is entitled to there own opinion, However I prefer to stick to the facts and not some science fiction Novel, The Bible History is Fact and makes perfect sence and is the only book that offers Humans a hope, But again each human has there own right to decide which direction they will take or what information they choose to believe in regards Johny

    Sorry, Johnny.  I can't accept your explanation of what the words in the Bible mean.  They may well mean that to you, but to me, as a linguist, I find your meanings to be quite in conflict with what I understand from reading my own Bible. 

    I wouldn't dream of trying to tell anyone else what the words in the Bible mean.  I don't mix science with religion, and whether in science, religion, politics or whatever, I never wish to do other people's thinking for them.  Besides which, this is a science site, not a Bible-meanings interpreters' convention.
    And, therein, lies the confusion in religion. No one interprets the bible the same way. No one knows what is going to happen.

    There is increasing evidence that HAARP technology can alter the weather

    For example?

    Larry Arnold
    Being a habitue of email and blogging disagreements, I find that given the diversities in the usage of English today that misinterpretation of something that was written only yesterday is rife.

    In my lifetime I have seen words take on entirely new meanings and political contexts change.

    Indeed over the period the Bible was written there was huge change. One cannot compare the tribes who sojourned in Egypt, with the tribes taken into Babylonian exile, with the tribes living in post exilitic Roman Palestine.

    For one thing the Greeks had left a huge influence so that there were already multiple disputes in theology and eschatology over the variance between a Greek interpretation in the Septuagint, to a notional original Hebrew.

    Just as one can never appreciate Shakespeare until one has heard it in the original Klingon, we have interpretations of the Apocalypse of St John which have told us more about the times they were made in than what St John had in mind.

    One thing is clear, John was writing in a highly metaphorical tradition, and one can't grasp that symbolism without being immersed in it, and I guess much of it is lost because the society that produced it exists no longer.

    I have to say that during the English Civil War coming at the end of a long period of reformation, you have to marvel at the attempts of someone like John Bunyan to interpret it.

    Perhaps it could fairly be said that it cannot ever be given a literal interpretation, and perhaps God truly did mean the ambiguity, leaving it a document not for it's age but every age. If one is being charitable that is. There are other scholars, indeed back at the beginning of the Christian era, who argued that it did not even belong in the canon, being a piece of dubious authorship seemingly much out of line with the sentiments of the John of the Gospels.

    It is doubtless a work of art and a rattling good read, but in terms of it's relationship to a blueprint for the future, it bears as much veracity as let us say an artists rendering of the crucifixion on canvas does.

    Given the amount of trouble that Jesus got into for interpreting scripture himself against tradition, I think we have the same problem, in that tradition is being held over what the real message of the Apocalypse is, which is a moral tract against the deviance of the original Church, and heck those seven deviant Churches have multiplied enormously since, so the message still holds true.

    Evil doing does bear with it a consequence, and if there is enough evildoing it threatens our survival and the warning of the Earthquakes is that we don't respect the land and build all over it in the most unsuitable of places.

    I wonder if there is a hidden message in the Captcha's mine today was "priests molting" :)
    ... one can never appreciate Shakespeare until one has heard it in the original Klingon ...
    Come, sir!  The so-called 'Shakespeare manuscripts' were merely the field notes of a paleoanthropologist decoding Neanderthal Braille.

    To flee, or not to flee, that is the question.
    Whether it's better to put up with the alarmists who say
    the ice is going to kill us all
    so we should all move south -
    or - to take our slings and arrows and by opposing

    end them.

    Right! That's settled. More mammoth meat anyone?
    I always get a kick out of the hypocritical notion put forth by the religious anti-scientists that "scientists claim to know everything", or something of that nature. In reality, the exact opposite is true. The very purpose of science is to try to know the unknown. If scientists claimed to know all, there would be no purpose for them anymore.

    Only the religious claim to know everything with certainty (well, everything that God has "revealed" to them, and by the way, don't bother trying to figure out what he hasn't revealed, because there's a reason he's kept it from us, right?).

    Just read this and saw SO many religious nuts!

    Is there any official information we can trust ??
    I know different Seismological Centers colaborate.
    But what about one entity integrating all data and giving a single report.

    Greetings from Irotama Colombia

    Larry Arnold
    There having been another earthquake reported today, I think it goes back to the old questions of trying to report prevalence from incidence.

    Quite apart from records of seismological data, it would be appropriate to discover whether the rate of reporting of earthquakes has increased over time, that is to say what proportion of recorded earthquakes is reported, and what the magnitude threshold is. Earthquakes of relatively low magnitude tend to get reported locally in the UK for instance, but I doubt if they used to get much coverage elsewhere. A small earthquake in a populous centre or one which causes much loss of life and damage to property is likely to get more headline billing than something that is a fairly regular, but small scale occurrence in earthquake prone regions.
    You bag the Bible only because you do not understand it. Yes this may be a science blog, but the topic is earthquakes is it not? The so called science buffs on here keep saying they DO NOT KNOW, they don`t have answers. Well from what I can see the Bible explains it all too well. Bible Truth and "religion" are 2 seperate things by the way. "Religion" does not even teach what is writen in the Bible.

    Larry Arnold
    I would suggest that it is the doom sayers who do not understand the Bible and it's purpose.

    To begin with it is not a historical document, it was not intended as such, it's history is moral history, and more like news reporting than analytical histories we have become used to in Western Civilization (if it can be called such) Neither is it a scientific textbook, or indeed a weather forecast.
    It may be in parts something of a legal document regarding custom and practice of mosaic period. I'll grant that but few of the laws are obeyed today by even by the most fundamentalist of preachers or orthodox of jews.

    It does not include instructions to build airplanes or motor cars, nor any moral guidance about how we should use them either. There are doubtless many aspects of contemporaneous technology that are not covered, for instance how to build a pyramid or ziggurat.

    I would also suggest that using it for divination is also wrong, that is half way towards the kind of spiritualism that did for Saul.

    Anyway this is supposed to be a science blog and here I am being side tracked by religious questions again.

    So what does the Bible tell us to do in the event of an Earthquake or Volcano, lie down and die?
    I don't think so, if one has led an evil and selfish life, and comes upon these phenomena, it behoves one to put away that former life and help out the rest of the survivors. I certainly think in practice that natural disasters have a lot to teach us about mending our ways, for instance there are a lot of conclusions to be drawn about the global economy and dependency on air travel from the Iceland event, and people do indeed reap what they sow, that much is plain to anyone who cares to look at it, but a sign of end times? No because the end times are always within a couple of generations, and have been ever since the first generation if you think about it, your personal end and mine.

    So does taking a rationalist perspective on the Bible make me a heathen? I hope not.
    I have to admit I am not interested in Geography but dam this was all scary more so when you feel the evidence of earthqukes that have happened across the world. It made me think of a special I seen on tv of yellow stone national park and now of the eathquakes happening there. Its a reality check we all need to look at closely and quick I dont know what else to say but it's scary and puts things in perspective to open my eyes...

    Larry Arnold
    I have to confess I used to watch all the popular science programs on the TV until they all started getting too scary, the one about Yellowstone really put the wind up me.

    However I realised after a while that these TV programs are more journalism than science and they love to entertain with scary ends for humanity, be that a new plague, a supervolcano, an asteroid, gamma ray bursts, black holes, you name it.

    However I realise that they are all rather formulaic, in that they all seem to contain this trope that everything happens in well defined cycles and we are long overdue for the next disaster, not a matter of if but when etc.  Thats the same formula for super volcanoes and H1N1 alike.

    Well whatever either all the air traffic controllers over reacted to the degree of risk, or it was a wake up call after the Iceland business. There was an Icelandic vulcanologist on the news saying that this one is nothing, there are others that are likely to blow out much more ash in the coming decades so we need to get used to the disruption or work round it. (as indeed I believe Icelanders do) I am old enough to remember Surtsey, that was pretty spectacular, a whole new Island, what they take away, they also give back.

    If us Europeans really want to get worked up about something, it is Vesuvius we have to worry about not Yellowstone, cos that could mean goodbye Naples.
    Your graph is WRONG! It assumes that every earthquake over 6.0 causes tha same amount of shaking.
    It would still be wrong even if you assigned each magnitude a different value in your graph. This is because the Richter Scale is LOGARITHMIC.

    So, if you had three 6.0 earthquakes, two 7.0, and one 8.0 in "Year One", and in "Year Two" had three 6.0, two 7.0, and one 8.0 quake and one quake of 8.1; your graph would indicate an increase of 1 earthquake greater than 6.0 -- but in reality you would have experienced more DOUBLE the amount of seismic activity ("shaking").\

    If you assign each magnitude an appropriate value on a LINEAR SCALE rather than a LOGARITHMIC SCALE, then you would see that there has indeed been a significant increase of seismicity over the past 4 decades.

    Actually, there has been an increase in major seismic activity from 1973 to 2009 (the years for which there is online information at USGS.gov)

    I was curious, so I took only those quakes of 7.0 magnitude or greater for each year and compared the seismic action on a linear scale (rather than the logarithmic Richter scale). Obviously, there are years of high seismic activity and years of low activity; but, when I ran an OLS regression the slope was +0.97 per year over 37 years. This is the equivalent of one additional magnitude 7.0 earthquake EACH YEAR! Keeping in mind that the quake that recently leveled Haiti was a 7.0 magnitude quake, there are 37 more 7.0 earthquakes per year in 2009 than there were in 1973. That's significantly more shaking now than in 1973.

    Anyone can do the same analysis that I did and get the same result.

    Where is the info you used on UDGS.gov, Uriel? Couldn't find it: their website really sucks :-(

    To everyone else. So. Went to ncedc, and got everything 6.0 and higher from 1900 onwards (got the earlier years just for fun: about 5800 records in total.) Then did a spreadsheet thingy using a level 6.0 as baseline (i.e. =1), and calculated relative energy content per year. Starting about 1963, things started to get kinky. 1980-1990 was a bit of a lul (relatively), but then things REALLY got going (2004 (34.5k !!! wowzers !!!), then 2011 (33.3k so far, but seems on the way to being the worst year ever, even if you only look at the 6's), 2010 (19k), 2007 (13k).)

    Now, there are certain to be some flaws in what I did, and data limitations, etc, but unless the ncedc records are COMPLETE nonsense, there is something very radical going on with the quakes: the energy graph is just CRAZY!

    Something that is quite clear, however, is that the sob story about "more stations" is pure nonsense: 1990 was not that long ago, and modern sensors have vast ranges. And I'm guessing that 7's+ are not as easy to miss... heard around the world and all that. So try another line, you jackassess. (Takes about 32 level 5's to match the energy of ONE level 6; 1000 level 4's to match the energy of ONE level 6; so lots of new little ones are not relevant to the matter at hand, now are they.)

    But if you want to (not that it matters since you lot are liberals are therefore incapable of either honesty or reason) please do detail why none of you awesome sceintist-types have bothered to respond to Uriel. Methinks likely because like any and every liberal-atheist psudo-scientist, you lot lapse into silence when faced with what your 'beliefs' do no allow for: Enter ClimateGate-like Corrupt 'Science', the Earthquake Edition. Bleh, you guys all SUCK! And then you lot dare to claim that the the religious are the blind bigots. Mirror, meet jerks.

    My first BIG earthquake was the Southern California 4.8 earthquake. It was big enough to shake my cosmetics off the table and wake me up from sleep. I send my blessings to New Zealand :(

    It is the right time to stop us heating the planet. Otherwise, we have to pay what we have done to nature.

    What are you guys making of this earthquake in Japan then?

    Unfortunately I think its too late....

    Unfortunately I think its too late....

    This may be an explaination for the gradual increase shown in your blog of earthquake activity Rycharde.Glacial Rebound linked to global warming,seemed to have both accelerated around the early 90's.See March25 1998 antarctic earthquake.link www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/EPS/pdf/5202/52020133.pdf also Antarctic earthquake 5th nov2007 link johnseach.com/?p=226 .Antarctica seems to have been relatively eartquake free historically.

    Just because this current trend of increased seismic activity isn't necessarily out of the range of normal for the earth, that doesn't mean that the earth doesn't have highly active periods that we should be concerned with. Normal seismic and meteorologic activity doesn't always equal a good prognosis for living things. We don't have enough data to make broad assumptions about whether or not as a species we need to have global concerns about the trend we're seeing now. We could be in a punctuated period of seismic activity that could prove catastrophic for mankind beyond the pacific rim. End of the world? Probably not, but that doesn't mean that life on earth can't become very difficult for people. Any person who works in the science has to wonder about the trend and consider that we may be witnessing a phenomenon we're historically unfamiliar with... in other words, in terms of weather and seismic activity, we don't have enough historical data to know how bad it could get. Stay tuned.

    I am a member of the Scientific Community and would like suggest the following hypothesis. The New Zealand earthquake at Christchurch nearer to the South Pole, and the Japanese quake nearrer to the North Pole could be a result of the Polar Meltdown. The loss of ice on both regions has caused a "gyro" imbalance which can effect plate tectonic interactions. The earth keeps trying to "correct" its axis as the mass is reduced in those specific areas.. The solar reflective abilities of the Poles continues to be compromised and the frequency of quakes will increase.

    so, it all comes down to the issue of when the data appears to support your extraordinary claim

    re-check the data

    The data is completely WRONG period ....

    It comes from some junk published on the net here is the original
    The keypoint is backup to the original site and you will see the agenda which is all this garbage is

    It actually had me trying to work out how the bent the data but I figured it out the key is the description
    >>> Deadly & Destructive Earthquakes <<<

    What they did was eliminate any quakes that didn't kill or damage anything.

    The graph will auto increase with world population and more buildings thus they can make an alarmist claim.


    Thanks for the graphs and level-headed perspective. I like the 30 year graph of quakes 6.0 and above, but it seems to me what might be more interesting is to sum the exponential values (since quakes are classified logarithmically) of all the >6.0 quakes each year. I would be very interested to see this graph if anyone cares to create it, and it may tell a different story than the flattening out rolling decade average from the currently shown graph.

    Luke 21:10,11- "Then he (Jesus) went on to say to them 'Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there will be great earthquakes, and in one place after another food shortages; and there will be fearful sights and from heaven great signs."

    Maybe it isn't that we have more earthquakes but that we have better records of them now. Also we can only base our opinions on the technology we have now as opposed to pre-1780. If we had better information over a longer period of time, then we should have a better idea of earthquakes.

    Im not a person of science or anything but I go by logic ... I often come across the end of the world stuff as you do while surffing the net and things like this which I believe is showing inacurate information is sealing the ideas that its a sign ... I personally believe (because I work on logic) .... the reason there seems to be more now that 200 years ago ... is that these days we have far more better and faster ways of recording data IE equipment / news and internet .. news spreads faster for example someone sitting in UK will know instantly that an earthqueake just happened in australia whereas 200 years ago they would have been none the wiser.

    the other thing I want to mention is the death toll... we are living in times where we are over crowded there are thousands more people living in each town / city now plus not to mention the massive expansion of houses / office blicks and tower buildings it's no surprise that we have a higher death toll today.

    I was looking for statistics on what year had the most quakes in total. I wondered if 2011 going into 2012 might be the most active? I have looked in a few places but I might not have worded it well enough. If you can help I would appreciate it very much.

    The sounds and rumbling of Volcanoes Around Earth are Waking Up at a Alarming Rate.

    Read well and study on your own after you have read this.

    This is not a game or joke our Sun gives off a Solar Wind all day year round if you live in the State of Alaska you see it in the sky above what a sight it is going through our Earth’s Magnet Polls of the North and the South, North Poll. Its Called the Northern Lights or the Aurora Borealis.

    The day will come when you will be able to see it all over Earth as in the year 1859 Solar Flare, It was the largest in 500 years. Two Astronomer’s Hodgson and Carrington told the World that the Solar Flare made a Geomagnetic Storm reach Earth in hours not days. Back then it gave new meaning to Reach For The Skies from Telegraph Operators. For hours sparks flew from the key board. Even after the Batteries were disconnected. Nov 3 and 4, 2003 had a X40+ Class Solar Flare.

    Our Sun’s UV Rays will get stronger as each passing day go’s by, read and i will tell you why.

    The Great big forest have be striped from most of the Earth for Greed of Money by the Wicked. The trees our are Main Source of Oxygen on this Plant.
    The Forest Trees scrubs the Pollution out of the air and makes Oxygen from the rain and dirt that it grows in.

    The Forest Trees do more then just make Oxygen they stop Soil Erosion, just Look at the 1930 Dust Bowl. Greed by our Government taxes led farmers to clear cut all their Forest and farm all the land they were being Tax on. They had to farm it to pay for the Taxes. Why leave the Trees when food crop makes Money. This Did not Help the Depression that effected most all Worldwide. This year 2012 more then 100 million will suffer from Malnutrition lack of food and Dehydration lack of water. Many will not make it and die!

    In the United States of America alone more than 45 Million Americans Received Food Stamps and that number is going up every day every year for more then 3 years in a row now.

    The Pollution and CO2 Carbon Dioxide go into the Tree Bark as a shield from most bugs so they do not eat the tree.

    Less Forest less Oxygen this is why the moon. That has no Oxygen is very cold on the side with out Sun Light, And hot as ever on the side with Sun Light. Way too cold and too hot to live there. You would need at least 10 times the Energy we use on Earth to even live there and life on the Moon would be very short.

    With no blank of Oxygen to lessen or reduce the Sun’s UV Rays and Solar Wind they are deadly there on our Moon. Every Mt. Climber and Aircraft Pilot knows the higher you go the thinner the Oxygen and colder it gets.

    Just spend a night on a Mt. top above 13,000 feet with no Sun Light and you will see or should i say feel the cold stinging any of your exposed skin. If you are new to Mt. Climbing stay below 10,000Ft. The Astronauts and the Cosmonauts and Fighter Pilots that i have been with for years know this very well, and the Radiation Hazards to humans at High Altitudes.

    Soon the Sun’s Solar Wind and UV rays will be way to strong for most to go out in the Sun Light for even a short time. The Geomagnetic Storm to come and the Bad Weather Storms well you have not seen nothing yet and the Sea Level is Rising the Oceans. Many Millions have been affected by Floods in China and Pakistan just last year. In 2005 Over a Thousand dead in New Orleans flood, and the list going on. The sounds and rumbling of Volcanoes Around Earth are Waking Up at a Alarming rate.

    And there shall be famines, and pestilences, and Earthquakes, in divers places such as was not from the beginning of the Creation.

    The last 30 years On Earth we have broke all High Temp Records and the temp it is still going up. All the Worlds Ice Glacier are melting at an Accelerating Rate. The Glaciers and Polar Ice Caps store more water than all the Fresh Water Lakes on Earth. Many of them are drying up or water levels are going down past the lowest point every recorded.

    The Bad Weather Storms now are Babies compared to what is to come.

    They will get even bigger and worse less Oxygen the more UV Rays to the Earth and more Water molecules will evaporate and go up into the Earth’s Atmosphere. Less Oxygen the colder with out sun light and hotter with it.

    The Sky full of more water vapor molecules, more snow in the winter and more Flash Floods in the Summer. All earth will see way more fires and the Deserts are growing larger.

    If every living person on Earth were to Plant A Tree Today we might have a chance.

    The Earth’s Atmosphere Blanket surrounding it protects life on Earth as Our Lord and GOD will all that seek Him.

    Then it is written when the tree is full it is harvest time. All the Earth will someday burn away.

    This is all Foretold in the Bible Read it
    and may our Lord Bless all that do so.

    The Lord’s Little Helper
    Paul Felix Schott


    2 Peter 3:10
    But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the Earth and its works will be burned up.

    GOD Bless You and Your Love ones
    Give thanks to our Lord Jesus Christ every day.

    Luke 21:20-22
    Matthew 24: 30-33

    I have been in major California earthquakes in Sylmar, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz and Pasadena. I receive a small stipend from San Francisco NOT to live there. :)

    Dear religious posters --

    There is a legitimate place to voice these notions; this is not it. I am not religious but I have never questioned a higher intelligence operating within the universe; it's kind of obvious in my mind, as if Humans are magically the end-all be all? Hubris plus pure silliness. Yet, when you post things like this, it just taints the discourse, and I believe you do a disservice to the deity you revere -- the notions you express seem relevant in almost any context and it is only your interpretation that maps it onto this process. In either event, such expressions do not add useful information that people can use.

    In essence, you're just making assertions without a coherent framework with which to justify linking it to this specific series of phenomenon. As such, it only perpetuates the negative connotation to those that have a practical acknowledgement of higher, unspeakable forces --as yet-- beyond our comprehension.