Earthquake comparisons: Italy v New Zealand

oggbashan

Dying Truth seeker
Joined
Jul 3, 2002
Posts
56,017
Italy had an earthquake in August. About 300 people died and towns were destroyed.

New Zealand had an earthquake in September. No one died. Some people lost electricity for several hours.

Both countries are in active earthquake zones and know they are.

Which was the larger earthquake?

New Zealand's by a large margin.

Why the difference? Italy's was on shore. New Zealand's was offshore.

New Zealand had an evacuation for a tsunami alert. The tsunami was 30 cm (1 foot).

Was it the Mafia's fault for providing sub-standard building materials in Italy?
 
The quake the other night woke me up, which is pretty rare.

I note that your comparisons didn't include the depth of the quakes.
 
Also Italy's population is over 60 million; New Zealand has 4.7 million. That must be a mafia plot too.
 
The earthquake in Italy was a huge tragedy.

The earthquake in New Zealand was a shake, some damage, no one hurt.

No comparison in my opinion when it comes to the loss of life and the damage done to the buildings etc.


The magnitude of the earthquake might be larger in NZ but not the fallout in terms of casualties.
 
Last edited:
the entire country of italy need to be put onto a historic marker grid and restored square by square, to ensure sites are up to earthquake codes. churches built by the sea.
 
and new zealand.

to the bat.

i send you hope and love.

solidaridad.
 
Another "debate" the wannabe experts of the GB shall decide!

Though, it is nice to see you evolve from peni jousting to earthquake fencing, oggnog.
 
i prefer my huevos scrambled.

and then i just chew them.

it just makes sense.
 
Back
Top