jafla
This statement is utter stupidity. I seriously doubt that we have had anything comparable to today's monitoring equipment for the whole of the past 100 years. We have no way to compare today's earthquake frequency or earthquake severity with what the earth had a hundred years ago for the simple fact that a hundred years ago we didn't have the same monitoring technology that we have today. We don't have an accurate record from a hundred years ago so we have nothing to compare today's record to.
Just for the record, this century only started 10 years ago...:whistle:
agape,
James
Is this news story talking about this century as in the 21st century, or the previous 100 years? In the grand scheme of geologic time, even with a 6-10,000 year old earth as some claim, a mere 10 years is not a long enough period of time to suggest any trend in geological activity. If this news report is not talking about the past 100 year period of time it should have merely said “this decadeâ€.
We should always expect earthquake-prone regions of the earth to have earthquakes. I seriously doubt if we could use earthquake activity in these places as a fulfillment of prophecy. I would look for quakes in regions that have not had appreciable geological activity in known memory.