Why

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Only four out of the top ten have occurred within the last 100 years, and only one within the last 10 years.

33 have occurred since the beginning of the twentieth century, that's a rather damning
percentage, 59 percent to be exact.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
oh dear, an appeal to what is not recorded rather than what is, strange that the records
seem to date the great quake of 885, others in 1202 but not these other alleged ones
that we seem to be missing! Id call it a FAIL, but that's just me!

Yes. Some generated writing back then. Most presumably didn't. Have you never studied history in any depth?

Originally posted by FMF
Yes. Some generated writing back then. Most presumably didn't. Have you never studied history in any depth?

I have a higher (Scottish equivalent of A level) in European history, as well as English
and Art, what about it? It does not detract from the facts, the empirical evidence as it
exists FMF, you cannot appeal to non evidence.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no far from it, one merely seeks empirical evidence for ones faith, that's all.

But it seems you need to look at it in a particular way, statistically, and you must not look at it in certain other [different] statistical ways, otherwise it doesn't really work. Did the bible predict that you'd have to juggle the stats in a certain way?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
33 have occurred since the beginning of the twentieth century, that's a rather damning
percentage, 59 percent to be exact.

The Bible mentions 'great' earthquakes though, and only 5 ouf out of the 15 earthquakes which have killed 1000,000 people or more have happenned in the last 100 years, and only one in the last 10 years.

Originally posted by FMF
But it seems you need to look at it in a particular way, statistically, and you must not look at it in certain other [different] statistical ways, otherwise it doesn't really work. Did the bible predict that you'd have to juggle the stats in a certain way?

Yes of course I agree, never the less, substantiation is just that, for in order to discredit
the data, you need to dismiss it by looking at it in another way and who is to say which
way is correct and which way is erroneous.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have a higher (Scottish equivalent of A level) in European history, as well as English
and Art, what about it? It does not detract from the facts, the empirical evidence as it
exists FMF, you cannot appeal to non evidence.

So you understand that what was and wasn't recorded is a whole different kettle of fish prior to the 19th and 20th centuries. Surely you don't think that the flow and quantity of data that makes up the historical record has been constant over the least 2,000 years. Surely your History A level made you aware of this?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
The Bible mentions 'great' earthquakes though, and only 5 ouf out of the 15 earthquakes which have killed 1000,000 people or more have happenned in the last 100 years, and only one in the last 10 years.

killing 10,000 people or more is not great enough? I see.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes of course I agree, never the less, substantiation is just that, for in order to discredit
the data, you need to dismiss it by looking at it in another way and who is to say which
way is correct and which way is erroneous.

Why don't you dismiss it when you juggle the data? Sorry, it sounds like you are simply seeking to confirm something that you wish to find.

Originally posted by FMF
So you understand that what was and wasn't recorded is a whole different kettle of fish prior to the 19th and 20th centuries. Surely you don't think that the flow and quantity of data that makes up the historical record has been constant over the least 2,000 years. Surely your History A level made you aware of this?

Yes but its not the point is it, we can only go on what data actually is available to us,
speculation in this regard is pointless and leads to confusion and inability to draw any
kind of conclusions, just take your medicine and admit that your busted, its ok, i wont
gloat.

Originally posted by FMF
Why don't you dismiss it when you juggle the data? Sorry, it sounds like you are simply seeking to confirm something that you wish to find.

Why would i dismiss something that I am attempting to validate, of course i am seeking
to confirm something i wish to find, but so what? it hardly invalidates the findings
simply because i want it to be true, does it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes but its not the point is it, we can only go on what data actually is available to us,
speculation in this regard is pointless and leads to confusion and inability to draw any
kind of conclusions...

You are speculating though. And you are drawing conclusions based on data you [now seem] to be admitting is merely the data "available to us" which you surely concede is less and less the further back in history we go?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Why would i dismiss something that I am attempting to validate, of course i am seeking
to confirm something i wish to find, but so what? it hardly invalidates the findings
simply because i want it to be true, does it.

It certainly invalidates the objectivity of your findings if you are clearly juggling the data so that it validates them.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
killing 10,000 people or more is not great enough? I see.

Not when compared to the other great earthquakes.

Originally posted by FMF
You are speculating though. And you are drawing conclusions based on data you [now seem] to be admitting is merely the data "available to us" which you surely concede is less and less the further back in history we go?

data is there FMF, I have merely pointed out that the greatest proportion of
earthquakes within the given parameters (potential for destruction of life) have
occurred within the twentieth century. You cannot dispute the data on the basis of what
may or may not have been recorded, indeed, its possible to dispute this assertion on
the basis that many events as far back as the 800's were recorded and have been
included in the data, making any appeal on the basis of communications rather
unfounded.