earthquakes have no names...

maybe eathquakes are not often, so there is no need to give the special name that the place where the earthquake happen can be its name.

Hi, Does it make any difference with their having a name having no name. We all have different names in our own language but English has only one name and there is no problem. And neither there is any problem if they are male or female. Do they?

This is something that rarely comes to our minds when we think of nature's disasters. Why do we stop to give deadly hurricanes a name but a devastating earthquake just gets destruction totals?

The name of an earthquake is made from the degrees of Richter scale and the location where it does damage. Example Chile 5.3; Japan 9.0 etc.

Luckily I hope not, it's a little bit weird to have earthquake names for that matter, I mean by the magnitude or intensity you're gonna name them hmmmm let me think how about names of famous explorers? they rocks!on the other hand it would be a great thing too. not so much fuss but would it be neat.

That is a great question I never thougth of that before. I think there are just too many to name because while they happen quite frequently, we don't feel them. Of course it depends on the depth and location of the epicenter as to what will be felt and how far it will be felt. I live in California and have been through a few quakes. I only feel the ones reported in the higher 3's or 4 point.I think perhaps naming the ones over a certain magnituede might be intereating..now we use location..and year like the "Northridge 1994 quake" I'll never forget that one..I thought for sure it was 'the big one', but it wasn't.

Probably because an earthquake starts and finishes in the same spot. There is one location for it, whereas a hurricane can cover a large area. Also, multiple hurricanes can occur in the same area. So you'd have to have some way to differentiate which one you were referring to. Thus naming them works. Tornadoes don't have names either, but I think they tend to occur singly, so they might not need them. It's the Japanese earthquake or the New Zealand earthquake. No confusion.

volcaninc eruptions has already the name, the name of the volcano is already its name. i think the earthquake do not have names because it doesn't need a name. it happens instantly that you do not need to name it unlike the hurricane and storm, the weatherman needs a name to refer to the incoming hurricane and storm. well, that's my 2 cent thought

i think because earthquake is not constant unlike storm which is constant folowing the weatHr system and season and also storm tornado can be tracked , hence while tracking the folowing storm formation they will need a name tag hoever eartquake is sudden and not predictable .

The only storms that are named are hurricanes.Tornado's, thunderstorms, volcano's, blizzards, none of these are named so why should it be different for earthquakes? Actually i don't see why any storm or natural disaster should be given a name, sincemost of these occurances cause so much widespread distruction, to personalize them with anyone's name who had nothing to do with the disaster itself, is kind of insulting to anyone with that particular name.

Perhaps volcanic erruption, high magnitude earthquakes and tsunamis do not happen as often hurricanes and storms do that's why there's no need for proper names given to them. Place and year of the incident would suffice. I'm not really sure if it's the real reason behind it. It's just my wild guess.