That "other" earthquake

Cabaal

I was watching TV3 this evening after I finished work and they were explaining how earthquakes happen (like as if they were talking to 5 year olds) and one thing they mentioned is apparently experts believe if there's a earthquake on the pacfiic plate it always happens in two's and that the next one could happen tomorrow or 10 years from now.

Ok I thought to myself thats fine and all but hasn't that already happened been two?, I find it very strange that NO news channel has reported that there was a massive earthquake (8.1) on same plate on the 24th Dec 04.
Per the BBC news site > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4123927.stm

An earthquake on a remote Antarctic archipelago home to 850,000 King Penguins was the strongest on earth in four years, seismologists say.

The quake hit 400km (250 miles) off the Macquarie Islands on Friday, measuring 8.1 on the Richter scale.

Penguins appear to have escaped a major disaster as the quake occurred deep under the sea, far from inhabited land.

There were no tsunamis, or large tidal waves, because the quake moved horizontally rather than vertically.

The tremors were felt in Tasmania, 1000km (600 miles) away, but because the epicentre was 10km underground, few observers noticed the initial quake.


10 BIGGEST QUAKES SINCE 1900
Chile, 1960: 9.5
Alaska, 1964: 9.2
Alaska, 1957: 9.1
Kamchatka, 1952: 9.0
Near Ecuador, 1906: 8.8
Alaska, 1965: 8.7
Tibet, 1950: 8.6
Kamchatka, 1923: 8.5
Indonesia, 1938: 8.5
Kuril Islands, 1963: 8.5
Source: US Geological Survey
Buildings on the islands shook for 15 seconds, seismologist Cvetan Sinadinovski said.

"If this had happened underneath a population centre it would probably have destroyed a whole city," he said.

The quake was the biggest anywhere on earth since an 8.4-magnitude tremor off the coast of Peru in June 2001. That killed 74 people.

Friday's earthquake was caused by the collision of two of the major tectonic plates which make up the earth's crust layer, the Indo-Australian and the Pacific plates.

The last quake of a similar magnitude in the Macquarie region was in 1924, Mr Sinadinovski said.

Despite its size, 22 staff of the Australian Antarctic Division slept through the tremors.

"Nobody felt anything," a spokesman said.

Why has the mass media not even mentioned this other quake since the one on the 26th?

seamus

Cabaal wrote:

Why has the mass media not even mentioned this other quake since the one on the 26th?

Probably that it wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. People won't make a connection, even many scientists would come on and say "These earthquakes happen all the time, this was big, but nothing special".
As you say, these come in twos, but who is to know? This one probably did get someone's attention, but since there's no way they can predict when, where or how large these things will strike, what would they have done?
I don't think this one is worthy of much more than a tick or a brief footnote in some future geographical or historical text.

Basically, what I'm saying is, that while it's a scientific tidbit, the fact that it happened doesn't (and couldn't) really change anything.

mike65

...that and no-one died.

Mike.

On the topic of other quakes - Was bored last night and decided to have a look-up to see if anything had been reported on aftershocks felt around the region. There isn't too much information around about this, but the first site I found mentioned how two large island groups north of the epicentre have been "rattled" with "strong aftershocks."

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/975378.cms

I watched Sky News for nearly 2 hours last night, and didn't hear a thing about the aftershocks. I understand that the original quake was the force that killed so many people, but surely the threat of such an event warrants the release of aftershock information?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/eye/andaman-pix.htm

chewy

i heard reference to an earth quake below tazmani, is that the same one? unpopulated area etc is the reason it wasn't reported he aftershocks were supposed to be in the sevens... theres little reference to actual earthquake damage to sumatra?

is_that_so

Earthquakes occur with monotonous regularity round the world. Take a look at this list
http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/
and this graphic for the last 30 days

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/qed/

Genghis

The point here is that TV3 were claiming* that earthquakes happen in twos - presumably to sensationalise their story by suggesting that another Asian disaster is looming - without realising that the earthquake on the 26th was a second quake, not a first.



*Of course, the claim in itself is ridiculous - how can you pair off earthquakes if you don't know the frequency relationship between them ("the next one could happen tomorrow or 10 years from now") - with that degree of uncertainty, surely these are best considered random events.

MojoMaker

You seem to be under some illusion that the role of the mass media is to inform and/or educate and that they carry around some kind of social responsibility. The mass media exists to make money, like any other business. Newspapers only print information they think their readers will be interested in, cable TV stations will only publish information they think their viewers will stay tuned to see, radio stations sell advertising space etc etc.

The Antarctican quake is uninteresting to the vast majority of viewers of the likes of Sky. Remember Sky is the merely the UK equivalent of the likes of NBC or ABC - i.e. the trashy channels in the US.

galactus

Not surprised to hear TV3 spouting un-scientific crap. I bet they didn't get any of the facts wrong on Jen & Brad's break-up. TV3 is the Irish ITV.