How can you explain that there was only one major earthquake in the 1700's and 15 major quakes in the 1900's?

Question

I got this question for my homework, any of you got any ideas why there was only one major earthquake in the 1700's and 15 major quakes in the 1900's?

Answer 1

Of course.

Why were there so many fewer earthquakes?

Because there were fewer people, with lesser tools, looking for them.
That is to say, there were just as many earthquakes, but no one recorded their occurance.

By the end of the 1900's, pretty much every bit of the planet was being monitored by technology, looking for and measuring these sorts of things.

Exactly how many seismographs existed in the 1700's?
None.
Not to mention that most of the people of the world were not looking for, or writing about, any earthquakes that did happen.

Answer 2

This is an interesting question. You have to ask yourself was there only one earthquake in the 1700's or was there only one recorded and reported? There may be a difference there. In the 1700's the population of the earth was less and their geographic distribution was not as great as today. An earthquake in Antarctica for instance would not be reported unless it caused a tidal wave and then it may be reported as an ocean disturbance. A second possibility was that there really was only one in the 1700's. If you look at the time frame of the lifespan of the Earth at 3.5 billion years - a couple of hundred year spans do not reflect an average number of earthquakes. There may have been 100 in the 1800's and 0 in the year 300,000,000 B.C. You can't statistically compare two snapshots of the earth 100 years long and get any idea of the long-range average of anything. Hope this helps.

Answer 3

Sounds like someones teacher is trying to instill some kind of paranoia into his/her students. Don't read too much into this question. There was only 1 RECORDED major quake in the world at that time. The middle east was no mans land during that time. Islam ruled there and no infidel was allowed or informed about anything that happened in the area. Most of north America was inhabited my native Americans, the the white man thought of them as savages and discounted everything they said. Asia has always been an isolationist kind of society. Under water quakes weren't even thought of. Just because our society didn't record something doesn't mean it couldn't have happened. What about the 1800's? How many happened then? 1600's? 1500's? 1400's? How many were recorded then?
I would say the reason there was only one is because of the lack of technology, science, and population. There were possibly as many major quakes during that time, but due to the diversity of societies, coupled with the total absence communication between them, nothing was ever recorded.
You have to remember, whatever we do to this planet, there is nothing we can do that would influence plate tectonics. It is a lot more powerful then most are aware of.

Answer 4

If you are refering to the U.S. only, then most of the country was uninhabited so the earthquakes were not recorded. Also a lack of seismographs in the 1700s might be the reason. I doubt there are typically more or less earthquakes over a period of time except in the case of a major worldwide tectonic plate movement. If this happened in the 1700s then civilisation would have suffered tremendously. Most likely the lower numbers from the 1700s are the result of poor record keeping, lack of equipment, and a lack of mass communication tools (like newspapers, tv).

Answer 5

This was written almost 2000 years ago: 2 Timothy 3:1-5 1 But know this, that in the last days critical times hard to deal with will be here. 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, self-assuming, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, disloyal, 3 having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, without love of goodness, 4 betrayers, headstrong, puffed up [with pride], lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God, 5 having a form of godly devotion but proving false to its power; and from these turn away At the time this was written none of the above mentioned happenings were going on so along with what you wrote there are those that are listening, over 25 people an hour are paying attention throughout this world we live in, that's about 300,000 last year. So yes people are paying attention, don't stop caring and don't stop telling all who listen that soon this world will be changing back to what it was meant to be, a paradise and a beautiful place to live!

Answer 6

Well, where are the records from that you are referring to? Keep in mind that in the 1700's there wasn't a CNN covering everything that happened around the world. Are you comparing seismic activity in Tulsa,OK in the 1700's and around the world in the 1900's? Beyond that, it's just that geologic activity was less active in that time. Nothing mysterious.

Answer 7

Here are some 18th century earthquakes that have been recorded -
1727 Tabriz, Iran also in Massachusetts
1737 Kamchatka - East Asia
1750 England
1750 Cascadia
1755 - Lisbon, Portugal, more than 70,000 killed
1780 Florida
1783 New Jersey
1783 Calabria, southern Italy. more than 35,000 killed
1791 Connecticut, USA.

Also Mt Fuji in Japan erupted in 1707.

Answer 8

Because in the 1700s people didn't live all over the world. There were probably several that no one knew about.

Answer 9

Some good answers, pointing out that since 20th century we have been monitoring Earthquakes, but I have to ask what you mean by "major". It's a pretty loose question - and you can tell your teacher I said that.

Answer 10

d earths nearing its end