Originally posted by robbie carrobieOf course it's because of population densities. Take Manchester where i live, 400 years ago it was nothing more than samll town with a few thousand people, now there's 500,000 people. The population on this planet has dramtically increased since the begining of the 20th century. The fact still remains that the top 15 highest killing earthquakes have been spread throughout history even with the population boom of the last 150 years.
59 percent PK, 59 percent a huge proportion have occurred since the beginning of the
twentieth century, are you willing to state that this is simply the result of population
densities, even so, it hardly invalidates the data, does it.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou have dodged it again. So I will ask one last time and then let your evasiveness speak for itself [unless of course you choose to answer it on this occasion]:
cant say, its useless to speculate, we have data at hand from as far back as the 800's,
its good enough for me. You speculate about what might have been recorded and what
might not have.
Do you think that all earthquakes and their death tolls were recorded in the 800s? Do you think that all the records that were made survive to this day? Do you think the survival rate of the records from the 9thC is more or less than the survival rate of data from the 20thC?
[sorry to other posters for this repetition]
so dear friends , PK and FMF are refusing to take their medicine, PK claiming that
only the top five represent great earth quakes anything under a mere 100,000 death
toll doesn't really count and FMF claiming that the data is incomplete, oh well, one
can only take horses to water. The empirical data has demonstrated three things,
1. wars and their potential for destruction have increased since the beginning of the
twentieth century.
2 there has been a disproportionate number of occurrences of devastating
earthquakes since the beginning of the twentieth century, 59 percent of the worlds
most devastating having occurred since this period.
3. The empirical data demonstrates that we are living in the last days, these
evidences being what Christ termed, 'the beginning of pangs of distress'.
Originally posted by FMFsorry i dont do useless speculation.
You have dodged it again. So I will ask one last time and then let your evasiveness speak for itself [unless of course you choose to answer it on this occasion]:
Do you think that all earthquakes and their death tolls were recorded in the 800s? Do you think that all the records that were made survive to this day? Do you think the survival rate of the records ...[text shortened]... s than the survival rate of data from the 20thC?
[sorry to other posters for this repetition]
Originally posted by Proper Knobthen how are we to account for the great quake of 855, clearly there were huge
Of course it's because of population densities. Take Manchester where i live, 400 years ago it was nothing more than samll town with a few thousand people, now there's 500,000 people. The population on this planet has dramtically increased since the begining of the 20th century. The fact still remains that the top 15 highest killing earthquakes have been spread throughout history even with the population boom of the last 150 years.
population densities back then also.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't think the world is about to 'end'. I have no reason to think so. What is interesting - albeit of no actual tangible consequence for the world - is that you do not seem to have made the case for your prediction, even by your own terms, either.
so dear friends , PK and FMF are refusing to take their medicine, PK claiming that
only the top five represent great earth quakes anything under a mere 100,000 death
toll doesn't really count and FMF claiming that the data is incomplete, oh well, one
can only take horses to water. The empirical data has demonstrated three things,
1. wars ...[text shortened]... last days, these
evidences being what Christ termed, 'the beginning of pangs of distress'.
Originally posted by FMFI have both made it and validated it through the utilisation of empirical scientific data,
I don't think the world is about to 'end'. I have no reason to think so. What is interesting - albeit of no actual tangible consequence for the world - is that you do not seem to have made the case for your prediction, even by your own terms, either.
you have attempted merely to dispute the data's completeness on no other grounds than
useless speculation of what is not recorded.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe validity of your "scientific" empiricism lives or dies according to "what is [..] recorded" or "what is not recorded". To point this out to you is hardly "useless".
I have both made it and validated it through the utilisation of empirical scientific data,
you have attempted merely to dispute the data's completeness on no other grounds than
useless speculation of what is not recorded.
1,000,000–43,000,000 Period of Three Difficult Years (most estimates are between 20 and 30 million) (China 1958 - 1961) * 24,000,000 Chinese Famine of 1907
5,000,000 Chinese Famine of 1936 China 1936
5,000,000 Holodomor USSR 1932-1934
5,000,000 Ukraine and Volga Famine USSR 1921-1922
3,000,000 Chinese Drought 1941 China 1941
3,000,000 Chinese Famine of 1928-1930 China 1928 - 1930
3,000,000 Indian Drought of 1900 India 1900
1,500,000 - 3,000,000 Bengal Famine of 1943 India 1943
1,500,000 Indian Drought of 1965-1967 India 1965 - 1967
1,200,000 North Korean famine North Korea 1995 - 1998
1,100,000 Irish potato famine Ireland 1846-1849
1,000,000 Ethopian famine Ethopia 1984
150,000 Finnish famine of 1866-1868 Finnland 1866-1868
30,000 Dutch famine of 1944 The Netherlands 1944
what does one notice about this empirical scientific data?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie8 out of the top 22 famines have occurred within the last 100 years, with only 2 in the last 50 years.
shall we move on to the third aspect of Christ's composite sign, famine, or have you
had enough?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_disasters_by_death_toll#Famines
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHow did the Finnish famine and Dutch famine get on to this list? Does it mean there were no famines with 30,000+ death tolls prior to 1866?
...150,000 Finnish famine of 1866-1868 Finnland 1866-1868
30,000 Dutch famine of 1944 The Netherlands 1944
what does one notice about this empirical scientific data?
Originally posted by Proper KnobLooking at the whole list more than half have occurred sine the beginning of the
8 out of the top 22 famines have occurred within the last 100 years, with only 2 in the last 50 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_disasters_by_death_toll#Famines
twentieth century, a rather disproportionate amount.