June 13th, 2010
12:22 AM ET

Strong quake jolts Japan

A 6.1 magnitude earthquake struck Japan on Sunday, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

The quake was 4.8 miles (7.7 kilometers) deep and struck near the east coast of Honshu, the largest island in Japan, the USGS said.

There were no immediate reports of damage. Japanese authorities have not issued a tsunami warning.

Post by:
Filed under: Earthquake • Japan
soundoff (159 Responses)
  1. looneybin

    theonly1: also having reread some of your earlier posts...

    You are mistaking "news events" for "geological events". There were 143 significant earthquakes (greater than 6.0 mag.) in 2002, not 43.

    Only 43 were news events, and some of the ones in your list are 3.7 and less, significant only because they happened close to populated areas. If we were to add earthquakes of less than a 6.0 magnitude to the first set of data, we would have a lot more earthquakes that year than 143.

    June 13, 2010 at 11:35 am | Report abuse |
    • theonly1

      Ok fine. But the whole point of this is that the end is coming, there will be some house cleaning and more people will die, for whatever reason. I don't care if it is stronger earthquakes, oil spills or tornados, or strange illnesses–there's gonna be some house cleaning and things are gonna change by the year 2012. So, what is important in this argument is what effect these things will have on humanity. That is my most important point. And as far as comparing earthquakes with other years, we'll just have to wait until this year ends so we can see. Nevertheless, in respect to deaths, this year definitely has had a lot more deaths even if you look at past years. To me that is what counts.

      June 13, 2010 at 11:44 am | Report abuse |
    • looneybin

      only1:
      You are welcome to believe that the end is near, whatever your religion says, but the fact is that no scientific data supports your belief.

      As to this year "having had a lot more deaths" again, untrue. 2004 had almost 229,000 deaths. Way more than the following years and indeed more than this year, thus far. Even with the rest of the year to go, there is nothing in any of the data to suggest that this year will surpass 2004. (again, 2007 had a huge amount of quakes and strong ones at that, but only 712 deaths.)

      Many things will happen to humanity over time, there will be good years and extremely bad ones. Some years see an excess of war and human casualty (take WW2 for example) right on the heels of natural catastrophe (see the dustbowl effect preceding WW2).

      To say that these events are tied to an ancient calendar, or mythological end of days, is ridiculous.

      To try and back these views up, erroneously, by misrepresenting scientific data is a travesty.

      June 13, 2010 at 11:59 am | Report abuse |
    • theonly1

      Dude. That is 228,802 deaths for the WHOLE 2004 year. We are only at half year. and we have had 225492. And who's to say there won't be more. You can't argue against it either because THE YEAR HAS NOT ENDED. So we still have to wait. But still, you can't say it won't happen either. Just one more good earthquake will easily take it above that. So still, your argument has no basis either.

      June 13, 2010 at 12:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • theonly1

      Well the deaths are a fact. And we just have to wait till the end of the year. But you can come back and you will see that the deaths will surpass all years. And don't assume things, I am not tying things as much as you believe from the mayan calender. There is more to it than you probably know. Please stop assuming things that you don't know about. And the scientific data is there–the deaths. And we'll see, by the end of this year if it is the MOST deadly year. It is almost there now. Until then, you can't say there won't be, and I can't say there will be, but I bet my bottom dollar that it will be. So you don't have much of an argument till then.

      June 13, 2010 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • looneybin

      only1:
      You've been a hoot. And again, I do not claim that 2004 will stay on top of 2010 for quake deaths. 2010 may turn out to have significantly more human death, I am just pointing out that you have no factual basis on which to predict this.

      A look at the data suggests that there is, in fact, no correlation to the number of earthquakes, their strengths and the number of human casualties.

      What is important in that relationship, is the proximity of the quake epicenter to human population centers and that population's ability to deal with the disaster.

      And given the fact that as human population continues to grow and therefore the probability of humans being affected by natural disaster rises, the population's ability to deal with natural disaster must increase at the same rate in which the population urbanizes or as a result, proportionate human casualty increases.

      June 13, 2010 at 12:21 pm | Report abuse |
  2. looneybin

    only1:
    "But if you go to the same place and go to "significant earthquakes" and you compare 2002 with 2010 you will see that it is obvious that there are stronger earthquakes in 2010."

    Once you got past the fru fru stuff, that statement was the basis for your argument. And it's inaccurate.

    And by the way, "intellectually disingenuous" is not redundant, a person can be disingenuous in action, feelings, etc. What's more is a common phrase. Read some real stuff, instead of just conspiracy nut bloggers.

    June 13, 2010 at 11:41 am | Report abuse |
    • theonly1

      Well. like I said. What is important are the deaths. And like I said, if you only want to talk about amount of earthquakes and make some kind of statistical estimation, we have to wait until the end of this year. But still, one thing you cannot deny are the death statistics. That is where you can't explain it. And that is where something really different is occurring. That is where it counts.

      June 13, 2010 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
    • looneybin

      only1:
      You are welcome to believe that the end is near, whatever your religion says, but the fact is that no scientific data supports your belief.

      As to this year "having had a lot more deaths" again, untrue. 2004 had almost 229,000 deaths. Way more than the following years and indeed more than this year, thus far. Even with the rest of the year to go, there is nothing in any of the data to suggest that this year will surpass 2004. (again, 2007 had a huge amount of quakes and strong ones at that, but only 712 deaths.)

      Many things will happen to humanity over time, there will be good years and extremely bad ones. Some years see an excess of war and human casualty (take WW2 for example) right on the heels of natural catastrophe (see the dustbowl effect preceding WW2).

      To say that these events are tied to an ancient calendar, or mythological end of days, is ridiculous.

      To try and back these views up, erroneously, by misrepresenting scientific data is a travesty.

      June 13, 2010 at 12:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • theonly1

      We'll talk about this later, at the end of the year. To see who was right. In the end of it all, what happens is what matters. So, see you in jan of 2011 to see if the deaths did not surpass all years.

      June 13, 2010 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
  3. looneybin

    only1:
    again, you've been a hoot.

    I'll leave you with one last verifiable statistic as stated by a previous commenter.

    Historical Success Rate of those predicting the end of the world: 0.

    June 13, 2010 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • theonly1

      Loonybin: you've been a hoot too. I still believe what I believe, and it isn't really religiously based. That statistic that you mention about prediction is true, but that is because nobody knew until now. Anyways, what I like about your arguments is that it makes me work to prove it, and this discussion has helped me do more research. Unfortunately, I don't have too much time to spend on it, but with you here I was forced to study it more, which is good. But I still believe what I believe and I appreciate your discussion.

      June 13, 2010 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Dan

    IT IS the end of the world for all the millions of people that die during an earthquake,tsunami,NATURAL disaster,etc. Because all they know is the before, and don't get to see the after. So the end of the world plays out over and over and over everyday. Get it?

    June 13, 2010 at 4:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • theonly1

      That is a good point. I try to tell people that this is a cycle. But just like wintertime when all the leaves fall off the tree, the leaves come back in spring. I think one problem is that people think linearly. So when I tell them end of the world they think the end of a linear line. That is not the case, it is the end of a cycle, which naturally leads to the begining.

      June 13, 2010 at 8:31 pm | Report abuse |
  5. damiao

    http://www.englishtips-self-taught.blogspot.com Help to spread this idea overseas, thanks for visit my webblog.

    June 13, 2010 at 7:03 pm | Report abuse |
  6. JL

    True, "a true Christian doesn't worry about trivial things" Ignorance is bliss and if caught can confess.

    June 13, 2010 at 10:14 pm | Report abuse |
  7. JL

    On all the data reported above. Is google the new truth?

    June 13, 2010 at 10:18 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Meh

    That's just Godzilla being reborn

    November 5, 2010 at 2:14 pm | Report abuse |
  9. AgokyMocA

    Товарищи солдаты, песню надо орать так, чтобы мышцы на жопе дрожали. Спи быстрей – подушка нужна. Лучше сделать и жалеть, чем жалеть что не сделел. Не так я вас любил, как вы стонали !..

    November 16, 2010 at 9:27 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5