Yes, but how many of these quakes make headlines around the world like the Christchurch quake did? As I said before, most of them are too insignificant to even rate a mention.With over 150 quakes a week over the world thats 7800 a year
Yes, but how many of these quakes make headlines around the world like the Christchurch quake did? As I said before, most of them are too insignificant to even rate a mention.
Sure, pick a date at random and there will almost certainly be an earthquake somewhere, but would you care to predict the date of the next major earthquake that makes world headlines because of the destruction it causes in a large city?
Ruby, I agree Weatherbill was not 100% perfect with his prediction but I do think it’s rather unfair that he received the deluge of scorn and ridicule that he did. I don’t know what the probability of correctly picking the date of a major earthquake is but I imagine it’s fairly small – perhaps less than 0.005, so I just think it’s interesting that the quake transpired as it did. You apparently see nothing unusual about it so we obviously see things differently.
Ruby, I agree Weatherbill was not 100% perfect with his prediction but I do think it’s rather unfair that he received the deluge of scorn and ridicule that he did. I don’t know what the probability of correctly picking the date of a major earthquake is but I imagine it’s fairly small – perhaps less than 0.005, so I just think it’s interesting that the quake transpired as it did. You apparently see nothing unusual about it so we obviously see things differently.
I don’t know what the probability of correctly picking the date of a major earthquake is but I imagine it’s fairly small – perhaps less than 0.005...........
Bit vague there Tech so could you specify a particular date (your timezone) and also name the city affected so we can look for coincidences when it happens? Also, it has to be a quake that makes headlines around the world, otherwise it doesn't count.This is how easy it is This month possibly 14th to 18th of Sept there will be a quake of over 7.
Did they make headlines around the world?Incidentally, a quick Google search revealed that there have been 8 earthquakes this year of magnitude 6 and above, so the chances of predicting the date of a major earthquake so far this year would have been 1 in 30 - one a month. Quite good odds, I would say.
Bit vague there Tech so could you specify a particular date (your timezone) and also name the city affected so we can look for coincidences when it happens? Also, it has to be a quake that makes headlines around the world, otherwise it doesn't count.
Not unusual???? As someone who spent my entire life in Christchurch until coming here to live relatively recently, I can assure that the event of the weekend is hugely unusual. Perhaps you have no real idea of the level of devastation, Ruby. Thousands of homes are either in ruins or have to be demolished. They are still experiencing aftershocks.No, I see nothing unusual about the NZ quake happening when it did. It is important to keep a sense of perspective here. The NZ quake was expected, they are not unusual.
Not sure where you got those numbers from Ruby but they are a bit off the mark. In the last 30 days there have been 8 quakes greater than mag 6 and 3 greater than mag 7 (That is with the site recording the NZ quake as 5.1 as they seemed to have only recorded the smaller initial quake that preceded the main two big ones by a few seconds).Incidentally, a quick Google search revealed that there have been 8 earthquakes this year of magnitude 6 and above, so the chances of predicting the date of a major earthquake so far this year would have been 1 in 30 - one a month. Quite good odds, I would say.
As I mentioned in the previous post the effect of an earthquake is dependant on quite a few factors with magnitude just being one of them. e.g the Haiti quake had a magnitude of 7.0 and killed almost 300,00 people, where as the magnitude 8.8 in Chile had a waveform 63 times greater than the Haiti quake and released just over 500 times the energy and only little over 500 people were killed.Ruby, this quake was of around the same magnitude as the one in Haiti which killed nearly 300,000 people, for god's sake. And you don't think it was unusual or noteworthy?
I was reading somewhere today that this quake may have been a blessing in disguise, as due to the lack of any recent large earthquakes, Christchurch has a lot of older brick buildings whereas most of the other high risk cities don't any more. If you look at the bright side, this quake has allowed most of those brittle buildings to be removed with no loss of life whereas in a really big quake they would be totally disaggregated piles of bricks.It's simply a tribute to the good building codes in NZ and the fact that most people were asleep when it began that there has not been significant loss of life.
It may be that it is always Wellington that is the place that is expected to get wrecked sooner or later as it is based on the Alpine fault whereas Christchurch is located to the south of the transverse structure that joins the Alpine Fault to the main northern fault structure and was always at less of a risk.New Zealand is Australia's closest neighbour, and supposed to be the object of genuine affection under all the ribbing which occurs on both sides.
I'm blown away by the fact that there has been no appeal for any funds to assist the people of Christchurch.
The Hiroshima bomb was actually a bit more powerful than a magnitude 6 quake.Interesting chart, derty, thank you.
So a magnitude 7 earthquake is equivalent to the Hiroshima bomb.
Still think it's nothing unusual Ruby?
Good point Julia! I suppose our Govt is bogged down with other matters at the moment but I hope that assistance will be forthcoming when they finally get their act together. I'm very relieved that there were no deaths or serious injuries there and I think some help is already on its way:I'm blown away by the fact that there has been no appeal for any funds to assist the people of Christchurch.
Therefore, the probability of a minimum 7.0 quake on a specific date in the next year in L/A area is about 0.00001. Not very good odds but, come on Tech, you can do it. L/A is now the specified area so just think of a number between 1 and 31 and then a number between 1 and 12.Probability of a 7.0 quake in the next year in L/A area .005%(Pik 2)
Ruby, this quake was of around the same magnitude as the one in Haiti which killed nearly 300,000 people, for god's sake. And you don't think it was unusual or noteworthy?
Not sure where you got those numbers from Ruby but they are a bit off the mark. In the last 30 days there have been 8 quakes greater than mag 6 and 3 greater than mag 7 (That is with the site recording the NZ quake as 5.1 as they seemed to have only recorded the smaller initial quake that preceded the main two big ones by a few seconds).
http://www.iris.edu/seismon/last30.html (last 30 days from when you click this link)
When you look at the global averages for earthquakes you can expect around 200 magnitude 6 quakes and 20 magnitude 7 quakes. So there is a reasonable chance that one greater than 6.0 will occur on every second day. Also bearing in mind the relative devastation (read newsworthiness) of the quake also is dependant on the depth, the direction of movement of the shifting blocks of earth, the proximity to population masses, the resilience of the structures and if it occurs in 1st world or 3rd world centres.
Ruby, what I'm saying is that there are too many known unknowns for me to be able to completely rule out what we currently regard as 'supernatural'. Not so long ago, disease and mental illnesses were attributed to supernatural influences. If the best minds in the world are now talking about parallel universes then I think anything is possible.
Ruby, I agree Weatherbill was not 100% perfect with his prediction but I do think it’s rather unfair that he received the deluge of scorn and ridicule that he did. I don’t know what the probability of correctly picking the date of a major earthquake is but I imagine it’s fairly small – perhaps less than 0.005, so I just think it’s interesting that the quake transpired as it did. You apparently see nothing unusual about it so we obviously see things differently.
1 city, large number of insured premises, no loss of life, first world country.I'm blown away by the fact that there has been no appeal for any funds to assist the people of Christchurch.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?