California Rattled With Quakes

reasareasa Members, Constellation Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 8010Posts: 2,367
edited June 2005 in Discussions
Perfectly normal or something new?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8247661/?GT1=6657

user posted image

Over the past few days California has been racked with earthquakes in what experts appear to be calling perfectly normal for an active zone.

But if you keep watch over this kind of stuff its rather noticeable that the number of "noticeable" seismic activity has been on the increase.

In 1997 there were only 3 notable quakes. http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/1997/

1998 saw 10 notable quakes. http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/1998/

In 1999 there were 13 notable quakes: http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/1999/

In 2000 there were 6 notable earthquakes. http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2000/

In 2001 the number increased to 7. http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2001/

By 2002 we jumped to 12 notable quakes. http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2002/

In 2003 it was 39 notable quakes. http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2003/

2004 also 39! http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2004/

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eqlists/sig_2005.html At this rate, our annual "run rate" will top 115 for 2005.

Now if you look at the graphs on http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eqlists/eqstats.html you will find that the number of earthquakes worldwide is on an increase. These numbers do indicate a slight increase every year.

Number of earthquakes per years..
1990 - 16590
1991 - 16484
1992 - 19524
1993 - 21476
1994 - 19371
1995 - 21001
1996 - 19938
1997 - 19872
1998 - 21688
1999 - 20832
2000 - 22256
2001 - 23534
2002 - 27454
2003 - 31419
2004 - 31199

The data is certainly there the question is what if anything do we do about it?

Comments

  • moultanomoultano Creator of ns_shiva. Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts Join Date: 2002-12-14 Member: 10806Posts: 4,219 Advanced user
    edited June 2005
    Serious discussion only please.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • reasareasa Members, Constellation Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 8010Posts: 2,367
    Those lyrics are a bit to angst filled for my taste.

    You know what some people fail to remember on a day to day basis is that we live on a rock, a rock floating through space.

    This isn't some Armageddon thread, this is a discussion about the fact that seismic activity has been steadily increasing over the years.

    I don't believe in an "Armageddon" but I do believe that our rock isn't always going to be so stable.
  • moultanomoultano Creator of ns_shiva. Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts Join Date: 2002-12-14 Member: 10806Posts: 4,219 Advanced user
    edited June 2005
    It just reminded me of that song. I was trying to find an animated Gif of the album art that shows california falling off into the ocean. (On the cd its one of those things that animates as you move it back and forth.)

    Has this increase been noted or documented by other sources? The data looks pretty clear, but it seems like something like this would be under hot debate by seismologists. Just about the only thing I would have to contribute would be random speculations that would be quickly put to rest by someone who actually knew what they were talking about.

    I found one for you ~Merk - http://www.rain.org/~jkenner/media/aenima-arizonabay.gif
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • Splinter_SteveSplinter_Steve Members Join Date: 2005-03-20 Member: 45881Posts: 310
    edited June 2005
    Serious discussion only please
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
  • BulletHeadBulletHead Members Join Date: 2004-07-22 Member: 30049Posts: 2,530
    QUOTE (reasa @ Jun 17 2005, 01:35 PM)
    Those lyrics are a bit to angst filled for my taste.

    You know what some people fail to remember on a day to day basis is that we live on a rock, a rock floating through space.

    This isn't some Armageddon thread, this is a discussion about the fact that seismic activity has been steadily increasing over the years.

    I don't believe in an "Armageddon" but I do believe that our rock isn't always going to be so stable.

    Well, think of this

    Every day, our athmosphere is being ripped at by the sun, held in place only by our powerful electromagnetic field generated deep in the outer core.

    Now, think of this:

    That EM Field is quickly failing. It's come to pass the time at which Earths EM field "flips", which is PRECEDED by a faulter or failure in siad field. Without this, parts of the atmosphere (eg, ozone) weaken and can even be broken thru by the suns radiation, eg, Solar Wind.

    Extra Radiation = more heat

    What this has to do with the earthquakes? WHO KNOWS! It could be tied in thru some geothermal-astrochemical reaction with the suns UV A/B/C rays.
    QUOTE (DragonMech @ Jul 9 2005, 09:19 PM)
    QUOTE (Sonic @ Jul 9 2005, 06:49 PM)
    I wish my butcheeks could propel me up flights of stairs are terrifying speeds.

    I sense a custom title right there... :D
  • reasareasa Members, Constellation Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 8010Posts: 2,367
    QUOTE (moultano @ Jun 17 2005, 01:40 PM)
    Has this increase been noted or documented by other sources?

    Well I'm sure there are lots of other governments and private institutions that monitor earthquakes on a more localized scale.

    As far as credibility and proof of documentation if you can't trust the US Geological Survey who can you trust?

    Of course they will be the last to alarm anyone even if the data requires us to be alarmed. tounge.gif
  • SirusSirus Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation Join Date: 2002-11-13 Member: 8466Posts: 4,804
    Perfectly normal.
    IPB Image
    Cyrus // Sirus
    [NAPT] Constellation Member
  • DragonMechDragonMech Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow Join Date: 2003-09-19 Member: 21023Posts: 6,778 Fully active user
    Ahhh yes - California; the land of earthquakes and fires. Or, as I like to call it, shake 'n bake. biggrin-fix.gif
    I see custom titles. <_< >_>

    QUOTE (DOOManiac @ Jul 10 2005, 07:00 PM)
    I for one can't imagine downloading several gigs of pornography from a typewriter.
  • SkySky Members Join Date: 2004-04-23 Member: 28131Posts: 3,666
    Maybe the number of quakes has remained relatively constant, it's just that we're coming up with better and better equipment so we're detecting more of 'em.
    user posted image
    QUOTE (Snidely)
    I guess their slogan should be "with a Trojan, sex will last as long as the Trojan War, with only a fraction of the eroticism".
  • BulletHeadBulletHead Members Join Date: 2004-07-22 Member: 30049Posts: 2,530
    QUOTE (DragonMech @ Jun 17 2005, 02:33 PM)
    Ahhh yes - California; the land of earthquakes and fires. Or, as I like to call it, shake 'n bake. biggrin-fix.gif

    rofflewaffle
    QUOTE (DragonMech @ Jul 9 2005, 09:19 PM)
    QUOTE (Sonic @ Jul 9 2005, 06:49 PM)
    I wish my butcheeks could propel me up flights of stairs are terrifying speeds.

    I sense a custom title right there... :D
  • Cereal_KillRCereal_KillR Members Join Date: 2002-10-31 Member: 1837Posts: 4,943 Advanced user
    You're aware you're right on top of a subduction zone right? There's no given numbers of earthquakes, it depends of geologic activity, in the Pacific, as well as in California. It's a huge chunk of land going under another one, and there's obviously going to be seismic activity

    The earth is always varying, and it just so happens these last years saw a bit more action. On geologic terms, nothing visible is happening. There's a couple possible reasons we're experiencing more earthquakes:
    -more precise and more numerous instruments.
    -Slightly Increased activity.


    It's not impossible we're going towards a true augmentation of earthquakes and it'll be very common, but it's not going to change tomorrow morning. It's not much to be worried about, I'd rather worry about global warming, and that's already probably looking ahead (and the ecologists know we need to do more of that)
    It's like blinking. You're not closing your eyes, you're just blinking for an instant.




    What I would like to know is if it's possible for mankind to affect the earth's geology? Ie. nuke tests have sent huge shockwaves throughout the planet. I think there was even one that went around the earth SEVEN times before stopping being detected by instruments.
    Knowing Man can wipe out most life off of the planet, do we have the power to affect the Earth's inner activity? We're already messing out with its frail outer activity, I'm sure we can eventually do something that can eventually (butterfly effect) lead to a huge change in the (distant?) future.
    -signed-
  • BulletHeadBulletHead Members Join Date: 2004-07-22 Member: 30049Posts: 2,530
    I think that was Guindana Island they nuked out of existance with 5 hydrogen bombs at once in order to get the seismic readings to test their theory of the earths outer core.

    Yeah... poor island just... vanished... vaporized...

    *shudders*
    QUOTE (DragonMech @ Jul 9 2005, 09:19 PM)
    QUOTE (Sonic @ Jul 9 2005, 06:49 PM)
    I wish my butcheeks could propel me up flights of stairs are terrifying speeds.

    I sense a custom title right there... :D
  • That_Annoying_KidThat_Annoying_Kid Sire of Titles Members, Constellation Join Date: 2003-03-01 Member: 14175Posts: 5,583 Advanced user
    WERE ALL GOING TO DIE, NEVADA == OCEANFRONT PROPERTY

    eh not really...

    I felt nothing in northern california, and my grandparents literally live within a decent golf drive of the san andreas fault

    it has been overdue in slipping for quite some time, but I'm not concerened over the latest quakes.



    Merk thanks for regulating on the non serious discussion
  • SirusSirus Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation Join Date: 2002-11-13 Member: 8466Posts: 4,804
    QUOTE
    Merk thanks for regulating on the non serious discussion


    That was me : )

    And you're more than welcome.
    IPB Image
    Cyrus // Sirus
    [NAPT] Constellation Member
  • TalesinTalesin Our own little well of hate NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators Join Date: 2002-11-08 Member: 7710Posts: 6,952 mod
    Meh. I was driving. I didn't feel anything, just got back to the mechanic's shop and saw 'OMG EARTHQUAKES!!1!' on the news.

    Screw it. The news is just bored now that Michael Jackson was proven innocent.
    IPB Image
    NS -=- ROOTS
  • DarkATiDarkATi Revelation 22:17 Members, Reinforced - Shadow Join Date: 2003-06-20 Member: 17532Posts: 2,545 Fully active user
    In 14 years the number of quakes have almost doubled...

    Nothing we can do though. confused-fix.gif

    ~ DarkATi
  • TalesinTalesin Our own little well of hate NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators Join Date: 2002-11-08 Member: 7710Posts: 6,952 mod
    I doubt it's the quakes doubling. I get the feeling it's more that the seismographs have become more sensitive. :b
    IPB Image
    NS -=- ROOTS
  • DarkATiDarkATi Revelation 22:17 Members, Reinforced - Shadow Join Date: 2003-06-20 Member: 17532Posts: 2,545 Fully active user
    QUOTE (Talesin @ Jun 19 2005, 11:21 PM)
    I doubt it's the quakes doubling. I get the feeling it's more that the seismographs have become more sensitive. :b

    My view is that we're all born to die and so was Earth. The clock is running down. Earth is dying, basically. Though I'm sure that technology has advanced and therefore renders these numbers questionable at best.

    I still think we're seeing an increase in earthquake activity.

    ~ DarkATi
  • CageyCagey Ex-Unknown Worlds Programmer Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation Join Date: 2002-11-15 Member: 8829Posts: 1,751
    edited June 2005
    QUOTE (DarkATi @ Jun 18 2005, 01:37 PM)
    In 14 years the number of quakes have almost doubled...

    Nothing we can do though. confused-fix.gif

    ~ DarkATi

    Attempting to extrapolate a geologic trend using only 14 years of data isn't going to be as helpful as looking at several thousand years of information--the fact that we don't have seismograph records going back that far doesn't mean that it's time to take a short view of a long process smile-fix.gif.

    If the next 15 years of data all fall somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000 quakes per year, the data here won't mean much as a trend line. It's quite possible that California is in for a rougher ride than normal over the next few years, but there is also a lack of data to suggest that the early 90s didn't have unusually low quake numbers. Over the last five hundred or thousand years, 25,000 or 30,000 quakes per year could have been normal activity and we'd never know. It's certainly not time to worry about seeing 60,000 per year in 2020 smile-fix.gif.
    XP-Cagey

    Recommended Reading: NS Mapping Guidelines | Mapping Forum FAQ
    Nostalgia: Power Cells Thread
  • Cereal_KillRCereal_KillR Members Join Date: 2002-10-31 Member: 1837Posts: 4,943 Advanced user
    QUOTE (DarkATi @ Jun 20 2005, 06:54 AM)
    QUOTE (Talesin @ Jun 19 2005, 11:21 PM)
    I doubt it's the quakes doubling. I get the feeling it's more that the seismographs have become more sensitive. :b

    My view is that we're all born to die and so was Earth. The clock is running down. Earth is dying, basically. Though I'm sure that technology has advanced and therefore renders these numbers questionable at best.

    I still think we're seeing an increase in earthquake activity.

    ~ DarkATi

    The earth isn't dying in 14 years. And if it was, sismic actvity would drop, not rise.
    -signed-
  • DarkATiDarkATi Revelation 22:17 Members, Reinforced - Shadow Join Date: 2003-06-20 Member: 17532Posts: 2,545 Fully active user
    edited June 2005
    QUOTE (Cereal KillR @ Jun 20 2005, 05:51 AM)
    QUOTE (DarkATi @ Jun 20 2005, 06:54 AM)
    QUOTE (Talesin @ Jun 19 2005, 11:21 PM)
    I doubt it's the quakes doubling. I get the feeling it's more that the seismographs have become more sensitive. :b

    My view is that we're all born to die and so was Earth. The clock is running down. Earth is dying, basically. Though I'm sure that technology has advanced and therefore renders these numbers questionable at best.

    I still think we're seeing an increase in earthquake activity.

    ~ DarkATi

    The earth isn't dying in 14 years. And if it was, sismic actvity would drop, not rise.

    Well, not in my theory of what a dying earth would look like. I imagine the Earth tearing itself apart. Totally opinionated, just my 2 tiny cents, now, back on topic:

    Well has someone thought to use the same equipment for a 10 - 20 - 30 year test of siesmic activity? That would be a good way to get an accurate account, right?

    EDIT: Furthermore, on my later point, to say that the Earth isn't dying in 14 years, is to say that you haven't died a little bit in the last nanosecond. Because, you have. Cells die and organs wear every moment of your life.

    ~ DarkATi
  • TrevelyanTrevelyan Members Join Date: 2003-03-23 Member: 14834Posts: 2,227
    Here is a nice question for discussing...


    Ok... so there is this fault line right? and this... thisss.... thissssssss.... Science thats it... this science tells us this fault line makes earthquakes right? So what do people do? They build on top of it. When (notice the when not if) earthquakes occur, its devestating if they are large. People die... buildings crumble.

    Am i the only one that think these people shouldn't get any aid beyond search&rescue/food&water whatsoever? The fact that earthquake insurance exists there bewilders me.

    Its like building house when the tide goes out... and when it comes in acting all surprised. "Duuuurrrrrr teh water... it come and taked meh house away along with all my puppies!" No S*#T? really???

    And yes, this is a serious question since millions of dollars of damage has been caused in the past... with the potential to reach billions.

    Don't Die!

    LOVE NATURAL-SELECTION HARDER!

    It seems the only way to change anything this day and age is to kill. Whatever happened to talking?

    (>#_O)>/ .... (/'.')/
  • SirusSirus Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation Join Date: 2002-11-13 Member: 8466Posts: 4,804
    Well Trevelyan, if we're going to take that approach, we shouldn't build over a large portion of the world, seeing as most is susceptible to some type of natural disaster. But that wouldn't make sense would it :/

    IPB Image
    Cyrus // Sirus
    [NAPT] Constellation Member
  • moultanomoultano Creator of ns_shiva. Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts Join Date: 2002-12-14 Member: 10806Posts: 4,219 Advanced user
    Do you drive a car? If yes, don't rag on people living in earthquake territory being unsafe.

    I've heard that if you drive 15 miles or more to play the California state lottery, your odds are higher of dying in a car wreck on the way there than of winning the lottery.
  • SirusSirus Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation Join Date: 2002-11-13 Member: 8466Posts: 4,804
    Also, please keep in mind, that despite structural damage, many modern homes in California are incredibly safe during earthquakes (even high magnitudes). I know that a decade or so ago, a 8.2 I believe hit southern california and there were only 2-3 deaths. The only thing to be concerned with is structural damage, but heck, you can always rebuild, and it happens so rarely that it's not that big of a deal.

    Plus, I'm positive that there are more damage caused by electrical fires than earthquakes in California. (including more deaths) Should we stop using electricity?
    IPB Image
    Cyrus // Sirus
    [NAPT] Constellation Member
  • TrevelyanTrevelyan Members Join Date: 2003-03-23 Member: 14834Posts: 2,227
    QUOTE (Sirus @ Jun 20 2005, 03:39 PM)
    Well Trevelyan, if we're going to take that approach, we shouldn't build over a large portion of the world, seeing as most is susceptible to some type of natural disaster. But that wouldn't make sense would it :/

    I'd say every part is susceptible to natural disasters. Some are moreso then others. There is a place between total wrecklessness and being anal about ones safety. Find it.

    QUOTE
    Do you drive a car? If yes, don't rag on people living in earthquake territory being unsafe.

    I've heard that if you drive 15 miles or more to play the California state lottery, your odds are higher of dying in a car wreck on the way there than of winning the lottery.


    Honestly i try to as little as possible. I even wish i could function in society without one... but mass transit in america isn't as big compared to other countries. This is because there is a much larger landmass to cover. So in my area... you either pay for a bus ticket or you drive if you work out of town. Cars are a large part of why americans are so overwieght... if everyone could walk to wherever they needed to work/eat/shop at there wouldn't be that big of a problem.

    Back to the car driving comparison... If there was a large stretch of highway on which random thugs are known to hijack, kill, and destroy property people would avoid it no?



    QUOTE
    Plus, I'm positive that there are more damage caused by electrical fires than earthquakes in California. (including more deaths) Should we stop using electricity?


    People use that same reasoning when it comes to firearm regulation... so in our current political machine you could probubly say yes. Like firearms though... upping safety procedures would probubly eliminate all but a few cases of these fires. these house/building/forest fires are probubly caused by old/outdated/faulty/incorrectly used wiring.
    Don't Die!

    LOVE NATURAL-SELECTION HARDER!

    It seems the only way to change anything this day and age is to kill. Whatever happened to talking?

    (>#_O)>/ .... (/'.')/
Sign In or Register to comment.