Global disasters: Geodynamics and society

ISSN 0001�4338, Izvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics, 2013, Vol. 49, No. 7, pp. 691–714. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2013.Original Russian Text © A.V. Vikulin, N.V. Semenets, M.A. Vikulina, 2012, published in Geofizicheskie Protsessy i Biosfera, 2012, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 11–45.

691

INTRODUCTION

Our planet is a living organism in which all pro�cesses are interrelated [Mikhail AleksandrovichSadovskii…, 2004, pp. 242–245]. This relation is justi�fied in the geophysical [Gol’din, 2003] and social[Levi et al., 2003; Cherkasov, Romanovskii, 2003] senses.Seismicity, volcanism, tsunami, typhoons, cyclones, andfloods, as well as social hazards (revolutions, wars, andrelated starvation and epidemics), lead to great materiallosses, a significant number of victims, and frequentlycause strong tensions in society.

To confirm the importance of this problem, it isenough to recall the Sumatra earthquake in 2004;Hurricane Katrina 2005; and the earthquake in Sendai(Japan) on March 11, 2011. They became the modern“standards” of the societal relationship to naturaldisasters. The earthquake in Sendai revealed the mostdangerous consequence of disasters: radiation pollu�tion, which is a hazard for the existence of life onEarth.

Terminology and classification. Society is a “largestable social collective of people characterized by sim�ilar life activity and culture” [Politologicheskii slovar’,1995, p. 145]. In this work, we understand the term“society” as all of humanity or a significant part of it in

accordance with the widely accepted understanding ofthis term, and discuss the problem of disasters (see, forexample, [Zadonina, Levi, 2008, 2009; Levi et al.,2002, 2003, 2010; Cherkasov, Romanovskii, 2003, andothers].

Unlike the social phenomena, we understand thatnatural processes and phenomena are geodynamicprocesses, while geodynamic disasters, includingweather cataclysms related to floods and droughts, arenatural disasters.

The problem of what is a disaster is not very obvi�ous. For example, a number of scholars consider thatdisasters are common phenomena in the Universewhich initiate following processes that later develop in“regular” evolution, for example, the Big Bang thattriggered the existence of the Universe [Scheidegger,1982, p. 207]. K.G. Levi et al. feel that there are nodisasters in nature [Levi et al., 2002]. A phenomenonthat we generally consider a disaster is a rare andmaybe an outstanding natural phenomenon [Leviet al, 2003]. According to the classics of mathematicaltheory, “peculiarities, bifurcations, and disasters areterms describing the appearance of discrete structuresfrom smooth continuous ones” [Arnold, 1990, p. 4;Poston, Stewart, 1980].

Global Disasters: Geodynamics and SocietyA. V. Vikulina, N. V. Semenetsb, and M. A. Vikulinac

a Institute of Volcanology and Seismology, Far Eastern Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Petropavlovsk�Kamchatsky, Russia

e�mail: [email protected] Research and Production Company EKOS, Moscow, Russia

c Khibini Educational and Scientific Base, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University, Kirovsk, Russia

Abstract—The problem of reducing the damage caused by geodynamic and social disasters is an importantand urgent task facing humanity. By the middle of this century, damage from these disasters will exceed thecombined gross national product (GNP) of all countries in the world. The authors have developed the firstdatabase to include the largest geodynamic and social phenomena that occurred on Earth before 2005. Alldisasters are classified by size using a single�logarithmic scale suggested by Rodkin and Shebalin in 1993. Thebase consists of 47 dates and 104 disasters. The following phenomenological model is proposed: the scale ofdisasters does not decrease in time and a minimum of disasters was recorded in the 15th century; the numberof disasters is characterized by cycles that last as long as the first thousand years. Natural and social disasterstaken together are uniformly distributed in time, but their separate distribution is not uniform. One funda�mentally new feature of this paper is that the assumption about the statistical significance of the impact of thebiosphere and society on the geodynamic processes is justified. The results allow us to formulate a new under�standing of global disasters as an event, the damage from which will not be possible to eliminate by the jointresource potential. The consequences of a global disaster may cause the irreversible destruction of civiliza�tion.

Keywords: geodynamics, society, magnitude of disaster, interaction of disasters, impact of society on the geo�dynamic processes

DOI: 10.1134/S0001433813070086

692

IZVESTIYA, ATMOSPHERIC AND OCEANIC PHYSICS Vol. 49 No. 7 2013

VIKULIN et al.

Catastrophism in geology is a concept introducedby G. Cuvier in 1812 to explain the change in faunasand floras [SED, 1985, p. 557]. According to this con�cept, events that suddenly change the customary hori�zontal location of rock layers and topography of theEarth’s surface, partly (according to G. Cuvier) oreven completely (according to A. d’Orbigny) destroy�ing the entire organic world existing on Earth, reoccurperiodically. After this, a new world appears [Geologi�cal…, 1978, p. 319].

Finally, social disasters (and/or global social phe�nomena) can be sources of motion in the Universe:“Disasters that result in the activity of creative mattercan be sources of motion [Burlachkov, 2012, pp. 199–200]. However, such a “universal” approach to disas�ters as sources of motion is already close to the view�point of [Levi et al., 2002, 2003].

In this work we follow S.I. Ozhegov andN.Yu. Shvedova and understand disasters as unex�pected and grandiose events in the history of the planetwhich have tragic consequences (accompanied by suf�ficiently large amounts of material damage and manyvictims) [Ozhegov, Shvedova, 2003, p. 269].

The classification of disasters and assessment oftheir social importance is an important problem whichis widely discussed in relation to geophysical phenom�ena in [Shebalin, 1997; Pisarenko, Rodkin, 2007]. Weshall not discuss these problems here. We shall esti�mate all (natural and social) disasters using a uniquesix�grade scale developed by Rodkin and Shebalin[Rodkin, Shebalin, 1993]. It is based on a classifica�tion of disasters by the death toll P and material loss Qfor “fast” Q1 (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, andtsunami) and “slow” (hurricanes, cyclones, andfloods) disasters. According to this scale, the bound�aries between grades J are determined as follows:

J = I: Worldwide disaster: 31 mln. ≤ P ≤ 3 billionpeople, 151 billion ≤ Q1 ≤ 15 trillion USD, 601 billion ≤Q2 ≤ 60 trillion USD;

J = II: Continental disaster: 301000 ≤ P ≤ 30 mil�lion people, 1.4 ≤ Q1 ≤ 150 billion USD, 6.1 ≤ Q2 ≤600 billion USD;

J = III: National disaster: 3001 million ≤ P ≤300000 people, 14 million ≤ Q1 ≤ 1.5 billion USD,61 million ≤ Q2 ≤ 6 billion USD;

J = IV: Regional disaster, J = V: District disaster,and J = VI: Local disaster, with the correspondingdecreasing number of victims and material losses.

The “weight” indicators of disasters are different.For example, Katrina resulted in 1000 deaths and amaterial loss exceeding $200 billion, whereas the con�sequences of the Kobe earthquake in 1995 resulted in“only” $121 billion in losses [Pisarenko, Rodkin,2007, p. 196] but 6433 deaths [One Hundred…, 2007].Losses from the Sendai earthquake in 2011 exceed$400 billion and 30000 dead and missing. Losses withaccount for activities related to the decrease in the

radiation pollution of buildings, terrain, and peoplewill only increase in recent decades.

Formulation of the problem. It is likely that theimportance of relations between the geophysical phe�nomena and society was shown most revealingly in thebook of the well known Japanese scientist T. Rikitakepublished in 1976, which is based on seismologicalmaterial [Russian translation Rikitake, 1979]. In thebook, the author found links between the formation ofstate institutes of the geophysical field in Japan withspecific strong earthquakes and their consequences.Later, this theme was developed in the publications ofRussian scientists S.M. Myagkov, N.V. Shebalin,M.V. Rodkin, and others [Myagkov, 1995; Pisarenko,Rodkin, 2007; Shebalin, 1997] and in our publications[Vikulin et al., 1989, 1997; Vikulin, 2000, 2008, 2009].

In the publication [Trifonov, Karakhanyan, 2008],the authors use the data of the last few millenniums todemonstrate the influence of natural processes on thedevelopment of the economy and the formation ofcultural societies and states using examples of theAlpine–Himalayan orogenetic belt from Greece tothe Black Sea regions, India, and Central Asia, as wellas the European part of Russia.

The last third of the 20th century is not demonstra�tive in relation to the problem of disasters in the senseof understanding the importance of this problem byhumanity. The myths of ancient civilizations offer evi�dence that the problem was always pressing. The lastthird of the 20th century is a time when much wasunderstood and the necessary theoretical and practicalbackground appeared for the effective investigation ofnatural disasters and organization of large�scale mea�sures on this basis to mitigate losses. This was reflectedin the “International Decade for Natural DisasterReduction” adopted by the UN General Assembly in1989.

The urgency of the problem considered in thepaper is clear. It is worth noting that Russian scientistsmake an important contribution to its solution [Rod�kin, Shebalin, 1993; Myagkov, 1995; Shebalin, 1997;Laverov, 2005; Pisarenko, Rodkin, 2007; Gliko, 2010;Levi et al., 2010; and others]. It is not surprising thatthe Russian Academy of Sciences was one of the pro�moters of the World Forum on Natural Disasters(Istanbul, September 2011).

The data accumulated by humanity show that nat�ural disasters have a great influence on the biosphereand the existence of life. It is worth noting that, in onlythe last 500 million years, life on our planet died outalmost completely five times as a result of naturaldisasters. During the most catastrophic of these“reductions,” approximately 90% of all life disap�peared on Earth [Firestone et al., 2008].

V.I. Vernadskii (publ. [2009]) developed a doctrineabout the noosphere and showed how greatly theactivity of mankind influences the surrounding world.Modern data demonstrate that this influence only


GLOBAL DISASTERS: GEODYNAMICS AND SOCIETY 693

increases in time. The fundamentals of the interactionbetween the biosphere and society on the one handand solar activity on the other hand were developed inthe works of A.L. Chizhevskii [2007].

In the papers by K.G. Levi et al. [Levi et al., 2002,2003, 2010; Zadonina, Levi, 2008, 2009], theydevelop on the ideas of A.L. Chizhevskii and V.I. Ver�nadskii about the interactions and evolution of thebiosphere, noosphere, and solar activity on the basis ofa statistical analysis of natural and social disasters(without introducing their “weights”) on new qualita�tive and quantitative levels. They state “the fact of theexistence of different relations in nature and societyand demonstrate that the natural environment accu�mulates the influence or the amount of solar energy upto critical values, after which it cannot hold this energyin its interior and responds by the appearance ofanomalous natural phenomena” [Levi et al., 2003,p. 4, 374]. The existence of the close relations betweenthe natural and social phenomena is also figurativelydemonstrated in [Cherkasov, Romanovskii, 2003], inwhich the authors compare “geocycles” with “socio�cycles” on the basis of the data collected in the 16–20th centuries.

All these data confirm the fact that our planet isactually a living organism. However, in previous stud�ies [Myagkov, 1995; Levi et al., 2002, 2003, 2010;Cherkasov, Romanovskii, 2003; Zadonina, Levi,2008, 2009; Trifonov, Karakhanyun, 2008], theauthors did not take into account the strength of thedisasters and did not make quantitative estimates ofthe importance of the geo–social interaction.

It is necessary to take into account the combinationof the natural and social disasters as a unique criticaldestabilizing factor preventing the stable developmentof humanity. In this relation it is urgent to formulatethe problem of the search for the regularities and cri�teria that give us the possibility of forecasting and esti�mating the risk of material losses and victims in thetotal set of possible natural and social disasters.

In this work, natural and social disasters are, for thefirst time, estimated from common quantitative posi�tions. Such an approach allowed us to make a numberof conclusions relative to the possibility that theseevents are jointly caused and reveal specific regulari�ties.

We used all the available data on the disasters andanalyzed the set of “weighted” events: natural andsocial disasters. We investigate how they are interre�lated; i.e., we shall consider the interaction of the geo�dynamics and society as a common natural processwhich is quantitatively estimated within one scale.

We selected the most significant catastrophic geo�dynamic and social events on the planet, for which J =I, II, as the objects of our research. Such disastersaffected the entire Earth or sufficiently large regionsand a significant part of humanity on the planet. Thedata on the weather (droughts and floods) and social

disasters are presented without a discussion of refer�ences to the corresponding sources. We shall not con�sider in this work man�made disasters related to theanthropogenic activity, because their scale is muchsmaller than the most significant natural (geody�namic) and social disasters. A database constructed onthis basis is analyzed. The existence of a statisticallysignificant correlation is shown between natural andsocial disasters which manifests itself in both direc�tions: geodynamics ↔ society.

We present the following results on the basis of thisresearch:

(i) a database is developed of the most significantand quantitatively weighted events sorted by theiramount using the Rodkin–Shebalin scale [Rodkin,Shebalin, 1993] with the values J equal to I and II;

(ii) a phenomenological model of disaster cyclicityis suggested;

(iii) a new definition of global disaster is given;(iv) a conclusion is formulated about the prospects

of expert control in the model for managing globalrisks.

MAIN NATURAL DISASTERS

The Pacific igneous belt. The beginning of the mod�ern (in the geological sense) geodynamic history of theplanet can be related to the last largest geologicaldisaster: the formation (approximately 100 millionyears BP) and further rapid destruction (approxi�mately 70–60 million years BP) of the giant (up to10000 km long, 4000 km wide, and 2–3 km high) Dar�win Elevation in the middle of the Pacific Ocean[Vikulin, Melekestsev, 1997].

All geodynamic (volcanic, seismic, and tectonic)processes related to the formation and destruction ofsuch a giant structure eventually lead to the formationof the Pacific mobile belt, which is currently a rela�tively narrow tectonic region that is located along theborder of the conjunction between the Pacific Oceanand surrounding continents that goes over the globe inthe meridional direction. According to the availabledata, five reconstructions of the stress field occurredfrom the middle of the Oligocene (approximately 30million years ago) up to the present time, which werecharacterized by variations in the stress field and itsorientation [Maslov, 1996]. As a result, the PacificPlate, whose area is approximately 2/3 of the area ofthe planet, has rotated with alternating signs over thelast 30 million years. The center is located at theHawaii hot spot. The angle (amplitude) of such rota�tions is approximately 10°, which is approximatelyequal to displacements up to a few hundred kilometers(up to 500) at the radius connecting Honolulu with thePacific mobile belt.

Thus, after the last global disaster, which occurredapproximately 60–70 million years BP, and furtherdevelopment, the Pacific belt is currently a well orga�

694


VIKULIN et al.

nized structure of a planetary scale [Maslov, 1996]; itformed as a result of the Earth’s rotation, its block andplate structure, and owing to the strongly nonlinearproperties of the planet [Vikulin, Melekestsev, 1997].Such a seismic + volcanic + tectonic geodisaster cancorrespond possibly to the highest category (J = 0):planetary disaster. Its consequences correspond to thefrequently repeated world disasters over a sufficientlyshort time period (in the geological sense) (J = I,according to the Rodkin–Shebalin scale [Rodkin,Shebalin, 1993]).

Climate�forming volcanic eruptions. Strong volca�nic eruptions are described sufficiently well, and theirconsequences are well known [Bolt et al., 1975; Gush�chenko, 1979; Sukharev, 2004; One Hundred…, 2007;Vikulin et al., 2009; and others]. However, the possibleconsequences of the so�called climate�forming erup�tions are studied to a lesser degree. Let us briefly dis�cuss them.

Let us qualify volcanic eruptions according to theVolcanic Eruption Intensity (VEI) scale [Simkin, Sib�ert, 1993], which uses a number of criteria character�izing volcanic activity. The volumes of erupted mate�rial equal to 1012, 1011, …, 106, 104–5 m3 correspond tothe most energetic VEI part (W = 8, 7, …, 2, 1),respectively [Simkin, Sibert, 1993]. The maximumvalues Wmax ≈ 8(≈1000 km3) were recorded twice dur�ing the eruptions of the Taupo (New Zealand) andToba (Sumatra Island) volcanoes, approximately26000 and 74000 years BP, respectively [Levi et al.,2010, p. 402].

Eruptions with W = 7 (≈100 km3) have beenrecorded repeatedly. They include eruptions of theSantorini Volcano (Mediterranean Sea) approxi�mately 3500 years BP (J = II), which destroyed theMinoan civilization [Bolt et al., 1975, pp. 169–171;Sukharev, 2004, pp. 127–128], and Tambora (Indone�sia) in 1815, which caused the death of 100000 people(J = III), while 1816 is recorded as a year without sum�mer: crops suffered from the spring and summer frostson the soil in different regions and there was starvation[Sukharev, 2004, p. 208; One Hundred, 2007, pp. 22–23].

The last strong eruptions of Vesuvius were in 1780BC (W = 6–7; the first Pompeii literally “ploughed”most of the territory of the present Naples) and in theyear 79 (W = 5 (1 km3); the destruction of Pompeii andthe Herculaneum cities was a consequence of therecent (in the geological sense) disaster: the eruptionof the Phlegraean Fields that occurred approximatelyat the same place west of Naples approximately39000–35000 years BP, which resulted in the eruptionof approximately 100 km3 of pyroclastic material[Laverov, 2005, pp. 46–55] (W = 7 [Levi et al., 2010]).An ash layer a few centimeters thick from this eruptionwas found at a distance of 1500 km from the place ofthe explosion, near the towns of Penza, Tambov,Kharkov, and Rostov�on�Donu. The total area cov�

ered with ash (1 cm thick and greater) was 2.5–3 million km2 [Laverov, 2005, pp. 46–55].

According to the constructions of I.V. Melekestsev[Laverov, 2005, pp. 46–55], in regards to its parame�ters, the catastrophic disaster of the Phlegraean Fields(the mass of juvenile material on the order of 1012 t,released as water vapors on the order of 109 t, totalenergy up to 1028 erg) was a typical climate�formingeruption. The scale of the process and its intensitydemonstrate that the estimate of the Phlegraean Fieldseruption being equal to W = 7 is possibly the lowest(p.6).

The eruption of the Phlegraean Fields was not theonly eruption of this type at the time [Laverov, 2005,pp. 46–55]. In the Late Pleistocene, similar climate�forming eruptions (or even bigger ones, i.e., with theformation of Darwin minielevations in each case)occurred in Kamchatka, Japan, Indonesia, CentralAmerica, and elsewhere. It is very likely that the cli�mate�forming catastrophic eruptions of the globalLate Pleistocene (40000–30000 years BP) paroxysmexplosive volcanism also was one of the causes of theEarth’s climate cooling and consequently furtherexpansion of glaciers with a maximum of 20000–18000 years BP.

The available data demonstrate that volcanic erup�tions on the planet, as well as earthquakes, tend togroup in time. This tendency increases when thestrengths of eruptions increase [Vikulin, 2009]. Inother words, the whole set of data about strong earth�quakes confirms the hypothesis of I.V. Melekestsev[Laverov, 2005, pp. 46–55] that the eruption of thePhlegraean Fields with W ≥ 7 (100 km3) is most likelyone of the series of such eruptions of volcanoes duringthe period 40000–35000 years BP, which jointly couldcause a change of the climate on Earth.

According to the Rodkin–Shebalin scale [Rodkin,Shebalin, 1993], volcanic eruption of the scale of thePhlegraean Fields can be related to category J = II(II–I), while a series of such eruptions occurring oneafter another in a short periods of time can be consid�ered a climate forming disaster J = I (I–0).

Legendary Deukalion Noah Flood. Some scholarsassociate the ancient Greek Great Flood or Deluge mythwith a large tsunami that accompanied the explosion ofthe Santorini Volcano more than 3500 years BP [Boltet al., 1975, pp. 169–171]. The descriptions of thiseruption correspond well to an estimate of J = II.

In 2006, an international expedition to Madagas�car found the traces of one more event that could be aworld flood, a giant prehistorical tsunami that occurredin the Indian Ocean approximately in 2800 BC. Wavesup to 90 m high propagated deep into MadagascarIsland over a distance of 45 km, destroying everythingin their way. The source of such a tsunami could be anexplosion that caused the formation of an underwatercrater with a diameter of 29 km in the deep part of theIndian Ocean at a distance of 1500 km southeast of



Madagascar. As a result of a multidisciplinary study, weconfirmed the hypothesis about the nature of theGreat Madagascar Flood, which was caused by acomet colliding with earth in approximately 2800 BCin the southwestern part of the Indian Ocean [Gusya�kov, 2006].

Legends of many tribes and peoples, including themyth of Plato about the Great Deluge [Balandin,2004; Firestone et al., 2008], convincingly indicate theexistence of a giant flood or a series of floods. “Massdescribed the results of an analysis of 175 legends andmyths of different peoples from 40 countries of theworld. They describe a natural disaster of an unprece�dented force and territory. It started with a strongatmospheric storm, which was preceded in manyplaces by earthquakes and fires, continuing for manydays with strong rains and eventually resulting in aflood that covered all low parts of land. It is mostamazing that the details of the description and thesequence of events (earthquakes, fires, black sky,strong wind, atmospheric storm with lightning, giantwaves from the ocean, and a strong rain that continuedfor many days) frequently coincide in the legends oftribes living isolated in Patagonia, Brazil, Mexico,North America, Iceland, New Guinea, and Australia”[Gusyakov, 2012, p. 55]. The authors of [Firestoneet al., 2008] analyzed a large amount of differentmaterial (chemical, mineralogical, geological, andphilological) and logically link such a world flood or aseries of floods with a planetary disaster. It is the opin�ion of [Firestone et al., 2008; Gusyakov, 2012] thatsuch a disaster was caused by a giant space body (orseveral big pieces that were formed when the bodyapproached the Earth) falling to Earth. According toour estimates, such data correspond to J = I category.

A tsunami wave up to 250 m high occurred in theMediterranean Sea during the eruption of the San�torini Volcano 3500 years BP [Sukharev, 2004, p. 128].Even greater tsunamis reaching a height of 500 m andgreater were determined in Bay Lituya in southeasternAlaska. Estimates made on the basis of tree�ring dataindicate that, over the last 100 years, such wavesappeared at least four times in this inlet, which runsmore than 11 km into land [Sukharev, 2004, pp. 198–199]. A tsunami with a height of up to 40 m that circledthe globe twice was recorded during the eruption of theKrakatau Volcano in 1883. Waves up to 40–60 m afterstrong earthquakes and their physics are describedcompletely in the scientific literature [Levin, Nosov,2005]. They were repeatedly observed in different partsof the Earth [Soloviev, Go, 1974], in particular, inKamchatka and North Kuril Islands after the earth�quake on October 17, 1737 [Soloviev, 1978].

Thus, the tragedy in Southeast Asia in 2004 corre�sponds to J = II and is a quite expected event. Its deathtool was 600000 (approximately 300000 people diedimmediately and approximately the same number ofpeople died during the next year from starvation and

illnesses) [Levin, Nosov, 2005, p. 20], while lossesexceeded $100 billion [Pisarenko, Rodkin, 2007, p. 196].

Earthquakes that caused capitals to be moved. Themost destructive earthquake over the whole period ofthe humanity was the one that occurred in 1202 in theNear East. The oscillations of land were felt over anarea of 2 million km2. They covered a significant partof Eurasia. Egypt, Syria, Asia Minor (Anatolia), Sicily,Armenia, and Azerbaijan fell in the disaster area.Approximately 1200000 people died (J = II). Thisearthquake is included in the Guinness World RecordBook in the section “Gravest World Disasters”[Sukharev, 2004, p. 200]. However, in the paper [Gir,Shakh, 1988, p. 194], such number of victims is con�sidered “to a highest degree improbable,” and the dataof this earthquake are missing in the World Catalogueof Earthquakes [Bolt, 1978, p. 218].

It was noticed that the strongest earthquakes fre�quently occur in series over a large territory during asufficiently long time period, and then a long period ofsilence takes place. Therefore, an unprecedenteddense series of no less than 15 destructive earthquakesfollowing each other in 844–1319 is indirect confir�mation of the fact that the seismic disaster in 1202actually took place. These earthquakes occurred inNorth Africa, Asia Minor, the Middle East, the NearEast, Caucasus, India, China, and Japan. Tens ofthousands of people perished during each of theseearthquakes. During three of them, 100000 people ormore died: 180000 people in India in 893,100000 people in Syria in 1138, and 100000 people inChina in 1290 [Bolt, 1978, p. 218; [Gir, Shakh, 1988,p. 194]. After numerous destructive earthquakes in theCaucasus in 854–1319, the capital of Armenia wasmoved twice (Dvin → Ani → Yerevan) [Nikonov, 1989].

On December 8, 1988, a new seismic disasteroccurred in Armenia. The city of Spitak was destroyedcompletely; the death toll was 25000 people (J = III).

The Great Lisbon Earthquake. The Lisbon earth�quake on November 1, 1755, has no competitors inworld history in regards to the degree of its impact ontopography, buildings, and influence on society. It isactually a great and multiaspectual one [Tovaresh,2009]. Material losses in Lisbon alone were fantasticeven according to modern estimates. The lossesexceeded 1 billion francs in gold [Nikonov, 2005,p. 24]. The losses include the Royal Library with70000 books, numerous art galleries with hundreds ofinvaluable masterpieces of the greatest artists of theMiddle Ages and Renaissance time, and Royalarchives containing ship journals and notes of travelersand seafarers [One Hundred…, 2007, pp. 16–17].These countless treasures were accumulated owing tothe exploitation of the colonies in South Americawhich Portugal claimed throughout many centuriesand lost after the Lisbon earthquake.

The disaster in Lisbon made Europe anxious, notonly due to the fluctuations of the ground. A largenumber of brochures, articles, political essays, ser�

696


VIKULIN et al.

mons, and poems dedicated to the great earthquakeinundated literature up to the second half of the 19th cen�tury [Vikulin et al., 2007]. J. Goethe called this earth�quake “a terrible world event,” M.V. Lomonosov wroteabout the “cruel Lisbon fate,” and I. Kant and Voltairesent their condolence to the people of Portugal (Voltaireincluded an episode with the Lisbon earthquake in hisbrilliant story “Candide”). J.�J. Rousseau used theearthquake in his pamphlet. In his play “The Deacon’sMasterpiece, or the Wonderful One�Hoss Shay,”O.W. Holmes wrote about this earthquake.

The earthquake was felt on a giant territory cover�ing practically all of Europe (up to England and Fin�land) and North Africa. Lisbon was destroyed com�pletely. The death toll was 30000 to 60000 people. Thenumber of victims in settlements in Africa remainsunknown [Vikulin et al., 2007]. According to [OneHundred…, 2007, pp. 16–17], the total number of vic�tims of the earthquake was 100000 people, amongthem 90000 in Lisbon and 10000 in other cities. Thetsunami passed over the whole Atlantic Ocean andreached the coasts of America [Levin, Nosov, 2005].

The earthquake in 1755 was the first disaster toinspire civil protection based on purely pragmatic (notreligious or symbolic) priorities and led to the develop�ment of laws aimed at a warning system to preventsuch disasters and initiated the idea of a multidisci�plinary reconstruction that is now called “groundzero.” These actions were steadily and continuouslyimplemented by Pombal, the Portuguese prime minis�ter of the time. This led to the formation of a new ide�ology in the country that was called Pombalism. Thisconcept implied the application of “enormous mea�sures to control not only what is remembered, but alsowhat is forgotten” [Tavares, 2005, pp. 141, 160]. Somescholars consider the Lisbon earthquake to be thebeginning of the science of seismology [One Hun�dred…, 2007, p. 17].

The Lisbon earthquake, along with the GreatFrench Revolution, became the most sensationalevent in the 18th century [Neimar, 1899, p. 320]. Forphilosophers and naturalists, the disaster was one ofthe reasons for the switch from theoretical romanti�cism to pragmatism. Not only was Lisbon seen asdestroyed, but all of history was destroyed as well[Nikonov, 2005, p. 26]. Such a concept allows us toconsider the Lisbon disaster as J = II and actually con�sider it a geodynamic forerunner to the social disasterof the Great French Revolution.

The example of the Lisbon earthquake convinc�ingly demonstrates that, if the will of the state existspersonosified as a high ranking leader who is steadilyand continuously engaged in the problems of thedisaster, not only is significant success possible in theliquidation of the most terrible consequences, but sig�nificant and principal changes in society are also pos�sible. One of the authors of this paper felt this afteralmost 250 years during a visit to Portugal in 2005. The

tragedy radically changed the nation and significantlytransformed all of Europe [Vikulin et al., 2007].

During the recent visits of V.V. Putin to Petropav�lovsk Kamchatskii in September 2010 and byD.A. Medvedev in July 2012, a decision was adoptedthat is now being carried out: not to strengthen existingbuildings against seismic shocks, but to build new onesand move people into the new buildings from the oldones, which should be demolished. This decision, inthe opinion of the authors (one of them currently livesin this city and observes from the windows of his apart�ment the wide scale construction (unprecedented inKamchatka) of 12�story(!) apartment houses; theother authors lived there for many years) is correct inthe sense of ground zero.

It is worth noting that Medvedev visited the epicen�tral zone of the last destructive Olyutorsk earthquakein Kamchatka on December 12, 2006, immediatelyafter the disaster. We emphasize his consistent positionin the assessment of the possible social consequencesand material losses of a future destructive earthquakein Kamchatka. The liquidation of two settlements inthe epicentral region of the Olyutorsk earthquake andtransporting the regional center Tilichiki with a popu�lation of approximately 1000 people to a new placecost 5–10 billion rubles. The material losses from asimilarly intense earthquake in the region of Petropav�lovsk Kamchatskii, with a population of approxi�mately 200000 people, would be 1 trillion rubles.

GROUPING OF DISASTERS IN TIME

The data that we collected on the strongest disas�ters that occurred on the planet up to 2005 inclusivelyare presented in the Appendix. We used the data aboutthe strong disasters in this table as the basis. The deathtoll of the events in this table exceeds 300000 peopleand material losses exceed 1 billion dollars, which cor�responds to the categories J ≤ II according to the clas�sification of Rodkin–Shebalin [Rodkin, Shebalin,1993]. If the events occurred in the years of thesedisasters with a death toll of 10000 people or more(J = III), these events, as well as brief informationabout them for the completeness of the presentation,were also included in the table [Vikulin, Semenets,2011].

The Appendix contains the data of 47 unforgettabledates (years) for the planet, in which 104 disastersoccurred with J = I, II, and III. The table includesdata about events with J = III only if they happened inthe years of disasters with J = I and II. Exceptions weremade for 1755 and 1815, when the Lisbon earthquakeand Tambora eruption occurred, as the most charac�teristic disasters with J = III. The data presented hereallowed us to interpret the disaster that occurred in thePacific Ocean 70–60 million years BP as a “planetarygeological disaster” with J = 0, which in regards to itsconsequences was close to the frequently repeatedevents over a relatively short period of time (in this case



approximately 100000 years), each of which corre�sponds to a world disaster with J = I according to theRodkin–Shebalin scale [Rodkin, Shebalin, 1993].

The distribution of disasters presented in theAppendix by grade (J) in different centuries is given inTable 1. The data in column J = III are not complete.They include only those events which occurred in theyears of disasters with J = I and II. However, as a wholethey reflect the general regularity which is peculiar toall logarithmic distributions: the stronger the event is,the less frequently it happens. This law in seismology(volcanology) is known as the recurrence law of earth�quakes (volcano eruptions) [Vikulin, 2008, 2009]. Theexistence of the same law also for disasters convincesus of the fact that the total number of disasters in eachline of Table 1 reflects the state of the characteristic ofthe corresponding period of Earth.

The data about the disasters in the Middle Agespresented in the Appendix and Table 1 are also notcomplete. However, a peak of geo�social activity onthe planet in the 12–14th centuries is well distin�guished. This is related to the destructive earthquakein 1202, its foreshocks of the planetary scale and after�shocks in 844–1319, and the beginning of the Tatarand Mongol raids against Rus’ in 1243 and their min�imum in the 15th century, during which not a singledisaster with J = I or II was recorded on the planet. Inthe 16–20th centuries, the number of disasters withJ = I and II increases, gradually reaching 20 in the20th century. It is likely that this tendency will remainin the 21st century, which promises to be hard in thegeo�social sense. The earthquake and tsunami inSoutheast Asia in 2004; Hurricane Katrina in theUnited States in 2005; the Arab Spring in the begin�ning of 2011 (which ended with the revolutions inEgypt and Libya); and the earthquake in Sendai onMarch 11, 2011, in Japan can be considered confirma�tions of this conclusion.

Thus, the data we present here demonstrate thatstrong disasters in the last centuries have a tendency tobecome more frequent. This is confirmed by the dataof review works [Levi et al., 2002, 2003; Cherkasov,Romanovskii, 2003] and the Geochange Report of theInternational Committee on Issues of Global Changesof the Geological Environment [www.wosco.org].However, such a conclusion is true only for the part ofthe natural disasters related to earthquakes and volca�nic eruptions whose data are fully known from the lastcenturies (see the sources presented in the Appendix).It is likely that the data on social disasters (related toepidemics and starvation caused by revolutions, wars,etc.) by the beginning of the 19th century are not fullypresented. For example, frequent epidemics of plagueand other diseases which appeared regularly from theMiddle Ages throughout Europe and in individualcountries [Zadonina, Levi, 2009] killed a significantpercentage (up to 50% and greater) of the populationeach time they occurred. Detailed data on the numberof victims and material losses during such events are

not yet available to the authors. Nevertheless, the datapresented here confirming the existence of the law ofrecurrence of disasters make us think about a seditioussupposition that the number of natural and socialdisasters are interrelated: a “lack” of one of them iscompensated in some manner by an “excess” of theother and visa versa. This conclusion is confirmedbelow by statistical analysis.

Let us analyze the distribution of strong (J = I, II)disasters in the 19–21st centuries over time intervalsbetween them. The data about them are most fullypresented in the Appendix and Table 1. Table 2 dem�onstrates the time distribution of all disasters (geody�namic and social together). It is seen that the meaninterval between all disasters TALL = 6.4 ± 5.3 yearsand this distribution is quite stable because the inter�vals of maximum length between two subsequentdisasters, including maximally long ones Tmax, do notfall beyond two sigmas: Tmax = 17 years ≤ TALL + 2σALL =17 years, where σALL is a root�mean�square deviation.The value of probability at which such a distributioncan differ from a uniform one does not exceed P = 0.7.

Data on the distribution of only natural disasters(ND) in the 19–21st centuries over time intervalsbetween them are given in Table 3. One can see thatthe mean recurrence period TND = 15.2 ± 12.0 yearsand the distribution of only natural disasters formallycorresponds to the condition of uniformity Tmax, ND =39 years ≤ TND + 2σALL = 39 years. However, only nat�ural disasters do not have a grouping tendency: the twolongest intervals (37 and 39 years) of the total 12 arelocated close to the value of 2σ. It is possible to show[Sachs, 1272 ] that such an outlier is not random. It issignificant with a probability of P = 0.95. These dataallow us to estimate the nonuniformity of the distribu�tion of only natural disasters in the 19th–21st centu�ries on the basis of the time intervals between themwith a probability of P = 0.70–0.95. The grouping ten�

Table 1. Time distribution of the number of disasters bytheir force and grade (J) according to the Rodkin–Shebalinscale [Rodkin, Shebalin, 1993]

Time intervalGrade (J)

Total0 I II III

BC 1 2 1 – 4

13th–14th centuries – 1 1 15 17

15th century – – – – 0

16th century – – 1 – 1

17th century – – 3 1 4

18th century – 1 2 5 8

19th century – – 12 11 23

20th century – 4 16 19 39

21st century – – 2 2 4

total 1 8 38 50 104

698


VIKULIN et al.

dency is even more clearly pronounced if we consideronly the social disasters in the 19th–21st centuries(Table 4): the mean recurrence period is TSD = 10.1 ±10.8 years; the longest interval between the disastersfalls out of “two sigmas”: Tmax, SD = 40 years > TSD +2σSD = 32 years. By estimating individual deviation itis possible to show [Sachs, 1272 ] that such an outlieris not random with a probability of no less than P =0.95. We see that all (natural + social together) disas�ters are approximately uniformly distributed in time.However, only natural and only social disasters atapproximately the same mean intervals of their recur�rence TND ≈ TSD have a tendency to group in time.

Let us analyze the time distribution of disastersonly in the 20th century and only in the 19th century.It is seen from the data in Table 2 that the distributionsof all disasters (natural + social) only in the 20th cen�tury (Tmax = 13 years ≈ TALL, XX +2σALL, XX = 12.3 years)and only in the 19th century (Tmax = 17 years < TALL, XIX +2σALL, XIX = 22 years) almost do not differ from the uni�form distribution: P = 0.7. At the same time (Tables 3, 4)the values of probabilities are no less than 0.95 for the

distributions of disasters in the 20th century only forthe natural (Tmax = 39 years > TND, XX +2σND, XX =38 years), only for the social (Tmax = 32 years > TSD, XX +2σSD, XX = 26 years), and only for the distribution ofthe social disasters in the 19th century (Tmax = 40 years >TSD, XIX + 2σSD, XIX = 39.8 years). A reliable estimate ofthe distribution of only natural disasters in the19th century is difficult because they were not numerous.

The data on the distribution of disasters in the19th–21st centuries according to the time intervalsbetween them are presented in Table 5. It is seen thatall the disasters as a whole are distributed quite uni�formly, but taken individually they have a tendency togroup in time. Thus, there is a mechanism which oper�ates according to the logarithmic law and regularly“mixes” the grouping natural and social disasters intoa unique aggregate so that the formed aggregatebecomes uniform. In other words, the data demon�strate that the natural (geodynamic) and social disas�ters are interrelated.

A significant correlation between the two mostremarkable events in the 18th century in Europe, thedestructive Lisbon earthquake in 1755 and the GreatFrench Revolution in 1789, which was noted before[Neimar, 1899, p. 320] (TND–SD = 44 years), wasdescribed above. The other disasters occurred approx�imately with the same time intervals. For example, thebeginning of the Tatar–Mongol raids against Rus’ in1243 were preceded by the most destructive earth�quake in the Near East in 1202 over the whole histori�cal period (TND–SD = 41 years). The first bourgeoisrevolution in the Netherlands in 1609 was preceded bythe second (after the Lisbon earthquake) mostdestructive earthquake in China in 1556 (TND–SD =55 years). Finally, the state coup in 1689 in England,which terminated the first bourgeois revolution ofEuropean scale, was preceded by a series of the stron�gest earthquakes and a catastrophic flood in 1641–1642 in China (TND–SD = 48 years) (see Appendix). Wesee that in all the cases considered here a geodynamicdisaster with J ≤ II occurred approximately over the sametime period before a similar social disaster (TND–SD =47 ± 5 years). This is also a confirmation of the formu�lated conclusion about the existence of the correlationbetween natural and social disasters. The significantdistance between the “epicenters” of the events inthese pairs indicates that the scale of this correlation isplanetary.

Double disasters are found over short periods oftime [Vikulin, 2009, 2010]. For example, in 1876,there was an epidemic of cholera and starvation (socialdisaster) in India with a death toll of 6 million peopleand drought (natural disaster) in China, whichresulted in 13 million victims. In 1907, the abundanceof rains and destruction of harvests in China (naturaldisaster) led to 20 million deaths. Five million peopledied around the world as a result of the third plaguepandemic (see the Appendix).

Table 2. Duration of time intervals between all naturaldisasters and global social events with J = I, II in the 19th–21st centuries

Year T, years Year T, years

1789 – 1921 1

1805 16 1923 2

1822 17 1931 8

1839 17 1932 1

1845 6 1939 7

1847 2 1942 3

1849 2 1944 2

1866 17 1947 3

1876 10 1957 10

1876 0 1966 9

1877 1 1970 4

1887 10 1976 6

1898 11 1985 9

1907 9 1998 13

1907 0 2004 6

1911 4 2005 1

1917 6 Total number over the period N(n) = 35(34)

1919 2 years 6.4

1920 1 σALL, years 5.3

is the mean time interval and σALL is the root�mean�square deviation determined over the entire set of data on thedisasters (see Appendix); N(n) is the number of disasters (timeintervals).

TALL,

TALL



Thus, the data on disasters presented in this workand their statistical analysis demonstrate that thehypothesis about the existence of correlation (interac�tion) between the natural and social disasters is valid.This interaction is of a global scale; geo�social interac�tion characterizes the planet as a whole.

It is likely that some most important events in sci�ence and technology can also be linked in time andconsequences for humanity with geodynamic disas�ters. For example, in 1755 socially important eventsrelated to the foundation of Moscow University (Jan�uary 24) and the publishing of Nebular Hypothesis byI. Kant that initiated the modern models of the struc�ture of the Universe occurred immediately before theLisbon earthquake. A catastrophic drought with adeath toll of 9 million people in China in 1877 was pre�ceded by the invention of the telephone by A.G. Bellin 1876 and accompanied by the creation of statisticalthermodynamics by L. Boltzman in 1877 and theincandescent electric lamp by T. Edison in 1878. Thefundamental and revolutionary physical inventions byE. Rutherford, H. Kamerlingh�Onnes, and R.A. Mil�likan in 1911 that laid the foundations of the modernphysics correlate in time with natural disasters: theflood of the Yangtze River (400000 people died), anearthquake in Japan (100000 people died), and one ofthe strongest eruptions of the 20th century (Novarupta(Katmai) in Alaska) in 1912. The data presented hereallow us to suppose that geodynamic disasters are fre�quently preceded by such social events whose “price”for society is very high. They accumulate a large num�ber of the previous achievements of humanity andeventually irretrievably change its life.

The developed database of natural and social disas�ters and its analysis confirm the known truth: every�thing in the world is interrelated.

A QUANTITATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN NATURAL

AND SOCIAL DISASTERS

It was already discussed above that this paper pre�sents the data of such events that were accompanied bydisasters: a large number of deaths and/or significantmaterial losses. The data were adopted from differentsources. All disasters were classified using the uniqueRodkin–Shebalin scale [Rodkin, Shebalin, 1993].The database developed on this basis includes data on47 dates when the most important events occurred onEarth over the entire historical period up to 2005inclusively (see the Appendix and Table 1). Such aselection (relatively large by the number of weightedevents) has been prepared possibly for the first time.We also present poorly known descriptions of thestrongest disasters that occurred on the planet. Themost significant among them is the formation of thePacific mobile belt that appeared approximately 70–60 million years BP. At present, it is the most geody�namically active region of the planet.

The seismic disaster that occurred in the beginningof the 13th century has been poorly studied so far. It islikely that it was the strongest over the historical periodof humanity existence. The earthquake of 1202,together with the preceding and following strongestearthquakes, influenced a giant territory of the Earthextending over many thousands of kilometers from theterritories surrounding the Mediterranean Sea toIndia, China, and Japan. The Lisbon earthquake in1755 had an unprecedented social resonance. Alongwith enormous material losses, it perturbed the popu�

Table 3. Duration of time intervals only between naturaldisasters with J = I, II in the 19th–21st centuries


1822 – 1970 39

1839 17 1976 6

1876 37 1985 11

1887 11 2004 19

1907 20 2005 1

1911 4 The total number over the period N(n) = 13(12)

1923 12 years 15.0

1931 18 σND, years 12.0

is the mean time interval and σND is the root�mean�squaredeviation determined over the data set of natural disasters (seeAppendix); N(n) is the number of disasters (time intervals).

TND,

TND

Table 4. Duration of time intervals only between globalsocial events with J = I, II in the 19th–21st centuries


1805 – 1921 1

1845 40 1932 11

1847 2 1939 7

1849 2 1942 3

1866 17 1944 2

1876 10 1947 3

1877 1 1957 10

1898 21 1966 9

1907 18 1998 32

1917 10 Total number over the period N(n) = 21(20)

1919 2 years 10.1

1920 1 σSD, years 10.8

is the mean time interval and σSD is the root�mean�squaredeviation determined over the data set of global social events (seeAppendix); N(n) is the number of disasters (time intervals).

TSD,

TSD

700


VIKULIN et al.

lation of all of Europe and in essence the entire popu�lated world at the time.

The database of disasters developed by the authorsallowed us to use the material of the 19th–21st centu�ries and quantitatively (statistically) estimate the highsignificance of the interaction between the geody�namic and social disasters.

The problems of the correlation between the geo�dynamics and society were repeatedly the object ofdiscussion and assessment. However, quantitative esti�mates were performed either only for natural disastersfor weighted seismic disasters as the most well studied[Shebalin, 1997; Pisarenko, Rodkin, 2007] or for alldisasters without account for their individual quantita�tive characteristics [Levi et al., 2002, 2003, 2010;Cherkasov, Romanovskii, 2003; Zadonina, Levi,2009]. Such estimates calculated without account forthe strength of the disasters can lead to incorrect con�clusions. For example, if we analyze the disasters in844–1319 over a vast territory of the planet; the disas�ters in 1641 and 1642 in China; and disasters in 1737in Iran, India, and Kamchatka (see Appendix) with�out accounting for their strength, this will lead to a sig�nificant underestimation of their recurrence periods.

MODERN CONCEPTS OF THE GLOBAL CHARACTER OF DISASTERS

It was already mentioned that a quantitative loga�rithmic scale of disasters based on the number of vic�tims and amount of material losses was suggested inthe works by N.V. Shebalin and other authors [Sheba�lin, 1997; Pisarenko, Rodkin, 2007]. They developednew methods of seismic risk assessment and forecast�ing the losses caused by earthquakes. It is likely thatthese methods can be also used for quantitative esti�mates of other natural and social disasters and theirforecast. A continuous increase in the number ofdisasters in recent centuries can be considered a con�firmation of the viewpoint of the known Russian eco�nomical geographer S.M. Myagkov that “all economicgrowth would be absorbed by the end of the next cen�tury by the increasing losses caused by natural disas�ters” [Shebalin, 1997; Pisarenko, Rodkin, 2007].J. Forrester and other scholars [Kovalchuk, Naraikin,2011] came to similar conclusions. The whole planet istaken into account in this concept. “To stop this pro�cess it is necessary to change the perception psychol�ogy of risk and response to the risk” [Myagkov, 1995,p. 41]. The importance of the problem analyzed in thepaper would only increase in time.

Such a conclusion allows us to make a newapproach to the definition of a global disaster. Above

Table 5. Distribution of disaster by the time intervals between them

Indicator Time interval 19th–21st centuries 19th century 20th century

All natural and global social disasters

N (n) 35 (34) 20 (21) 12 (13)

T, years 6.4 5.0 9.1

σ, years 5.3 3.7 6.4

Tmax, years 17 13 17

P 0.7 0.7 0.7

Only natural disasters

N (n) 13 (12) 7 (8) 4 (4)

T, years 15.0 16.1 21.2

σ, years 12.0 10.9 11.1


P 0.7–0.95 0.95 (?)

Only global social disasters

N (n) 21 (20) 13 (13) 8 (8)

T, years 10.2 8.4 13.8

σ, years 10.9 8.7 13.0


P 0.95 0.95 0.95

N(n) is the number of disasters (time intervals), σ is the root�mean�square deviation, Tmax is the maximum duration of the intervalbetween the disasters, and P is the probability related to the difference between the distribution of disasters over the time intervalsbetween them and the uniform distribution.



we already mentioned the possible consequences of aglobal social disaster “which can be caused by carelessactivity of civilizations. Atomic bombardment andexplosions of atomic power stations are not the onlythings that can be created without thinking hard aboutthe consequences. We would not like to discuss thepossibility of its deliberate suicide performed evenwith the best motives” [Burlachkov, 2012, p. 136]. Letus give two definitions that are most frequently refer�enced by investigators and specialists: (1) a globaldisaster is a threat when a negative end either destroysintelligent life on Earth or irreversibly and significantlyreduces its potential [Bostrom, 2002]; (2) a globaldisaster is an event that leads to the irreversible extinc�tion of all people [Turchin, 2011].

The results of our investigation allow us to suggesta new definition, which actually unites the previoustwo definitions: a global disaster is an event whosedamage to humanity cannot be eliminated by jointresource (financial and material) potential and whoseconsequence can be an irreversible process of thedeath of civilization.

It is our opinion that, at the present stage, such adefinition completely corresponds to the concept of“global disaster”; we suggest it as the main definitionwhen considering jointly natural and social disastersbecause it completely explains the real essence of thephenomenon.

THE UNIFIED PLANETARY GEO�SOCIAL PROCESS

It was demonstrated above on the basis of our esti�mates and the results of other investigators that a sta�tistically significant correlation exists between naturaland social disasters which is traced far into the previ�ous centuries. It is very clear for the period up to thebeginning of the 13th century (before the events of1202–1243), when people were not a force capable ofsignificantly changing the surrounding world in themodern understanding of this process.

Thus, the data obtained in this work confirmed theresults of other investigators and allowed the authors toformulate for the first time a quantitatively groundedconclusion that geodynamics and society closelyinteract with each other [Vikulin, Semenets, 2011;Semenets et al., 2011]. The formulated conclusiondoes not contradict the concept of V.I. Vernadskii[2009] about the noosphere; the significant influenceof people on nature; or that “the life in general, andhuman life, in particular, is a space phenomenon, andthat the intellect of people is a powerful space force”[Vernadskii, 1991; A Russian…, 1993].

Our conclusions allow us to significantly decreasethe role of the transforming scientific and physicalhuman force and plan methods to solve the problem ofthe interaction between the geodynamic and socialdisasters. It is likely that the concepts of natural cyclescan become the basis for solving the problem of the

interaction between geodynamics and society [Leviet al., 2002, 2003, 2010; Cherkasov, Romanovskii,2003; Zadonina et al., 2008, 2009] and momentarybiophysical and geodynamic motions characteristic ofindividual life and society as a whole and the geody�namic processes [Vikulin, Melekestsev, 2007; Vikulin,2008, 2010]. It seems that life on the Earth, includingsociety, develops according to the previously writtenscenario. However, this thought is not new; it has beenrepeatedly formulated by many scholars [Galimov,2006].

The influence of geodynamic disasters on life andsociety is obvious. It is confirmed by a large number ofpublications referenced in our work, including the lat�est (at the time of this writing) seismic disaster thatoccurred in Japan on March 11, 2011. However, thestatistically determined interaction between the geo�dynamics and society should “operate” in both direc�tions; i.e., a reverse phenomenon should also takeplace: society should influence the geodynamic pro�cesses. Examples of such an interaction are also given.They include, first and foremost, those scientific andtechnological achievements and discoveries whichprincipally changed the life of humanity as a whole.Such a formulation of the problem does not contradictthe concept of a “living” Earth [Gol’din, 2003;Mikhail Aleksandrovich Sadovskii…, 2004] or the con�cepts of the most general scope and makes their fur�ther development possible on a new basis. Therefore,the concept about the influence of the biosphere andsociety on the geodynamic processes is a principallynew concept, which is likely to be formulated for thefirst time by the authors in their presentations [Viku�lin, Semenets, 2011; Semenets et al., 2011] and in thiswork.

Thus, disasters can be considered as “quanta” thatnature uses to “visualize” the “geodynamic processes”“biosphere–society” interaction that occurs in bothdirections.

It is worth noting specially that we analyzed theaggregate of weighted disasters with respect to theirstrength in terms of geophysical magnitude, intensity,and category of disaster suggested by N.V. Shebalin[Pisarenko, Rodkin, 2007, p. 7]. This allows us to sup�pose that the formulated conclusion about the exist�ence of an interaction between the natural and socialdisasters is an important (fundamental) regularity ofthe unique planetary geosocial process.

It is likely that human beings have been the spaceforce in the formulation by V.I. Vernadskii [1991,2009] since the beginning of their appearance as indi�viduals approximately 7 million years BP. The mainproperties, including the most important of them,asymmetry of the brain [Yaglom, 1983; Vikulin, 2008],human beings actually inherited from animals [Roten�berg, 1984]. They used the surrounding world only forimproving the conditions of their life and self�improvement. Frequently it was done not in the best(most optimal) way. Therefore, the line of events that

702


VIKULIN et al.

allows us to understand the mechanism of the interac�tion between the geodynamics and society should bepossibly continued at least to the moment of theappearance of life on the Earth approximately 3.5–4 billion years BP. In this case, the understanding ofthe interaction mechanism between natural and socialdisasters is similar to the understanding of the bound�ary between living and nonliving and between biologyand physics and geodynamics; i.e., it is similar to thesolution of the multidisciplinary biophysical–geody�namical problem of the appearance of life [Vikulin,Melekestsev, 2007; Vikulin, 2008].

The noosphere is not something unusual relatedonly to human activity and/or the biosphere. In thelight of the data obtained in this work, it is not even acomponent of the biosphere but rather the last (at leastfor now) phase of the unique “bio–socio–geody�namic life” on Earth determined from the moment ofits appearance on the planet. The energetic capabili�ties of society are strongly limited [Pisarenko, Rodkin,2007]. Helpfully, so far the society cannot significantlyinfluence geodynamic processes (although such a sit�uation may occur in future). We think that the degreeof the physical influence of society on the surroundingworld at present is exaggerated by V.I. Vernadskii[2009] despite the seeming evidence. In the future wehave to find a mechanism (which is likely to have avortex momentum nature [Vikulin, Melekestsev, 2007;Vikulin, 2008, 2010]) that explains the biosphere–societal influence on the geodynamic processes andunderstand the objectives of this interaction. Naturecreated this mechanism and triggered it.

If the approach to the problem of finding the inter�action mechanism between the geodynamic and socialdisasters is cognitive [Godfrua, 1996; Dubov, 2006;Gobchanskii, Efimov, 2007], it is similar to the under�standing of the boundary between the physical fieldsand information. In this case, it is the object ofanother, not geo–social, but physical approach to theinvestigation (see, for example, [Kadomtsev, 1994;Vikulin, 2008]). It is our opinion that in the develop�ment of such a physical (geodynamic) theory of theinteraction between geodynamics and society it is nec�essary to take into account the following. A high cor�relation between the natural and social phenomenaand solar activity, which has been known from thetimes of W. Herschel (1738–1822), S. Schwabe(1789–1875), W.S. Jevons (1835–1882), andA.L. Chizhevskii (1897–1964), actually exists [Leviet al., 2002, 2003; Cherkasov, Romanovskii, 2003].However, this does not help us in finding a specificphysical mechanism [Timashev, 2003] because theactivity of the Sun as a star is determined in its turn bythe momentum dynamics of the entire Solar System[Dolgacheva et al., 1991] and, first and foremost, bythe motion of the giant planets, mainly Jupiter [Viku�lin, Melekestsev, 2007; Vikulin, 2008, pp. 90–93].

THEORY OF DISASTERS AND EXPERT CONTROL

The facts discussed above unambiguously and con�vincingly prove that disasters, including very severeones based on the consequences occurred, occur andwill occur in the future. In the course of time, thenumber of victims and the amount of material lossescaused by disasters will not only not decrease but,according to our data and the data obtained by otherresearchers, will have a tendency to increase. Indeed,this is evidenced by the disastrous earthquakes inChina in 1556 and 1976, which occurred with aninterval of 400 years, and the disastrous tsunami inSoutheast Asia in 2004, i.e., 28 years after the previousunprecedented event in world history. This conclusionis confirmed in the works [Shebalin, 1997; Levi et al.,2002, 2003; Zadonina, Levi, 2009] and presentationsin 2010–2011 of the Geochange International Com�mittee on Issues of Global Changes of the GeologicalEnvironment [www.wosco.org]. Therefore, theimportance of disaster theory, which can at least partlyexplain their mechanism and mitigate their influenceon society, should gradually increase in time.

The current achievements in the field of disasterresearch are very modest. The progress currentlyobserved is based on the possibility of using new theo�retical approaches developed in the second half of the20th century in some fields of physics and mathemat�ics and also on the development of the modern moni�toring systems of the environment. The mathematicaltheory of catastrophes by R. Toma, the theory of dissi�pative structure by I. Prigozhine, the concept of self�organizing criticality by P. Baka, the hierarchy con�cept and internal activity of the geological medium byA.V. Peive and M.A. Sadovskii, and a number of otherapproaches made strong contributions to the under�standing of the nature of disasters [Pisarenko, Rodkin,2007, p. 7]. As the methods of disaster theory applica�ble for investigating the organized complexity develop,social sciences will proportionally reap the benefits[Poston, Stewart, 1980, p. 542].

It is still very early to make practical forecasts basedon the theory of disasters. However, some specificconclusions applied to society can be made. It is clearthat the usual methods of management, when theresults are proportional to the efforts, cannot beapplied in extraordinary situations. We have to learnhow to develop specific solutions based, for example,on the conclusions of the nonlinear theory, which aresometimes paradoxical. If it is not possible to make animmediate (but not gradual) transition of the systemfrom the “poor” stable condition to a condition closeto a “good” one, then the system will transform itselfand evolve to a “better” state [Arnold, 1990, pp. 100–101]. We think that this is precisely what Prime Minis�ter Pompalu managed to do after the Lisbon disaster in1755.



The global model of management contains the glo�bal risks which humanity will face. Each period ofsocietal development generates a combination of nat�ural and social–political facts leading to the appear�ance of new natural cataclysms and the appearance ofnew ideas and scientific discoveries that cause newmenaces. Thus, in addition to the constantly existingthreats and risks common for all living beings, thereare temporary and specific ones for territories andpeople and combined factors influencing the safetylevel of humanity.

A list of the global threats was published in thereport of the World Economic Forum “Global Risks2011.” A conclusion was also made there that “thecurrent high�ranking management at the internationallevel cannot cope with the shocks which the world sys�tem expects.” The weakness and inadequacy of theglobal institutions cannot smooth the macroeconomi�cal risks; resource restrictions of growth; and conse�quences of natural, man�made, and social disasters.

It is necessary to add to the five main risks of socialdisasters: cyber safety, the high increment of popula�tion growth, retreating from globalization, andnuclear and biological weapons and account for therisk of global disasters so that their synergetic effectwould not cause a global disaster. Expert managementis a hierarchy based on the criteria of importance ofthe problems, which should be solved by providing thenecessary amount of the national or world resources.

The president and prime minister of the RussianFederation repeatedly mentioned the prospects ofexpert management in their presentations. Hence, theleaders of Russia are aware of the importance and sig�nificance of this problem. Effective activities to miti�gate the consequences of global disasters, as well asforecast them, can be developed only at the state andinternational levels.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) We suggest the following phenomenologicalmodel based on the database (uniform with respect tothe quantitative classification) that includes the data ofthe 104 weighted strongest and significant natural andsocial disasters which occurred on the planet in the19th–21st centuries (up to 2005):

(i) the scale of disasters does not decrease with time(earthquakes in China in 1556 and 1976; the tsunamiafter the Sumatra earthquake in 2004, which can becompared in regards to the level of consequences onlywith the World Flood or a series of floods that occurredapproximately 13000 years BP.

(ii) there were a minimal number of disasters in the15th century, during which there were not a singledisaster with J = I and II; from that time the numberof such disasters gradually increases; in the 20th cen�tury there were 20;

(iii) the number of disasters is characterized bycycles, which are a few thousand years long; the avail�able long�term measurements confirm this (for exam�ple, the overflow of the Nile observed over more than5000 years or deformations of the Earth’s surface inthe last few thousand years based on the geodynamic,seismotectonic, and paleoseismic data) [Trofimovet al., 2002; Trofimov, Karakhanyan, 2008; Prob�lems…, 2011];

(iv) natural and social disasters together are distrib�uted uniformly in time, while only natural and onlysocial disasters are distributed nonuniformly, i.e.,disasters group;

(v) the proportion of the social disasters has a ten�dency to increase in time, which confirms the view�point of V.I. Vernadskii about the constantly increasingrole of humans and society in the noosphere.

(2) It was shown that natural and social disastersare interrelated. The Earth from the point of view ofthe disaster theory evolves according to the definitelaws of the unique bio–socio–geodynamics. Theinvestigation and understanding of the nature of thismechanism that “mixes the disasters” will allows us inthe future to formulate a scientific hypothesis and/or alaw on the basis of the phenomenological model thatwe suggest in this work and use it in the system ofexpert global�process management.

(3) In the aspects of modern methods to study glo�bal disasters, the authors suggest an approach tounderstanding global disasters based on modern dataas events the damage from which cannot be liquidatedby the joint resource potentials of humanity (financialand material) and which can result in an irreversibleprocess of the modern civilization extinction.

APPENDIX

The strongest natural disasters and global socialevents (social disasters) and their classification basedon the Rodkin–Shebalin scale ([Rodkin, Shebalin,1993] with additions).

(1) The table contains the data of 47 unforgettabledates (years) for the planet in which 104 disastersoccurred with J = 0–III. The table includes data aboutthe events with J = III only if they happened in theyears of disasters with J = I and II. The exceptionswere made for two events: the eruption of TamboraVolcano in 1815 and the Lisbon earthquake in 1755,which are typical geodynamic disasters and, possibly,underestimated. It is possible that later they can betransferred to category J = II.

(2) The dates of the events are given according tothe sources. It is possible that discrepancies with theother sources can exist. It should be taken into accountthat deviations of a few years are not significant for thegeneral line of our considerations and do not influencethe accuracy of the assessments given in the paper.

704


VIKULIN et al.

Yea

rR

egio

nN

atu

ral d

isas

ters

Glo

bal s

oci

al p

hen

omen

aC

ateg

ory

(J)

So

urc

e70

–60

mil

lio

n

year

s B

PP

acif

ic O

cean

Fo

rmat

ion

of t

he

mar

gin

; by

its

geo

dyn

amic

pro

p�

erti

es (

seis

mic

+ v

olc

anic

+ t

ecto

nic

) cl

ose

to

th

e m

od

ern

on

e

(0)*

[14]

40–

30 t

ho

u�

san

d y

ears

BP

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leP

aro

xysm

of

volc

anic

act

ivit

y: s

tro

nge

st e

xplo

sive

cl

imat

e�fo

rmin

g vo

lcan

o e

rup

tio

ns

(San

tori

ni

typ

e in

150

0 B

C a

nd

/or

Tam

bora

in 1

815)

occ

ur�

rin

g ap

pro

xim

atel

y at

th

e sa

me

tim

e in

dif

fere

nt

regi

on

s o

f th

e p

lan

et (

Kam

chat

ka, J

apan

, In

do

ne�

sia,

Cen

tral

Am

eric

a, a

nd

oth

ers)

th

at le

dto

a c

han

ge in

th

e E

arth

’s c

lim

ate

in t

he

coo

lin

g d

irec

tio

n w

ith

th

e fu

rth

er e

xpan

sio

n o

f gl

acie

rs

(I)

[41,

45]

Eu

rop

eIt

is p

oss

ible

th

at t

he

acti

vati

on

of

the

volc

anic

act

ivit

y an

d t

he

foll

ow

ing

coo

lin

g br

ou

ght

on

th

e ex

tin

ctio

n o

f th

e N

ean

der

thal

s

(I)

[18]

13 t

ho

usa

nd

ye

ars

BP

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leW

orl

d f

loo

d a

nd

/or

a se

ries

of

gian

t fl

oo

ds

that

o

ccu

rred

ap

pro

xim

atel

y at

the

sam

e ti

me

in d

iffe

r�en

t te

rrit

ori

es. A

cco

rdin

g to

nu

mer

ou

s le

gen

ds

on

ly “

a fe

w p

eop

le t

akin

g sh

elte

r o

n t

he

hig

hes

t m

ou

nta

in o

r o

n a

bo

at–

ark

surv

ived

”

(I)

[72]

3500

BP

Med

iter

ra�

nea

n S

eaE

rupt

ion

of t

he

volc

ano

on S

anto

rin

i Isl

and

that

h

ad g

loba

l con

sequ

ence

s: a

tsu

nam

i in

th

e M

edi�

terr

anea

n S

ea w

ith

a h

eigh

t up

to 2

50 m

, “9

days

of

dark

nes

s” in

Egy

pt,

and

trac

es o

f th

e er

upti

on in

po

lar

glac

iers

an

d in

sed

imen

ts o

n t

he

terr

itor

y of

C

alif

orn

ia a

nd

Irel

and.

Des

truc

tion

of t

he

Min

oan

civ

iliz

atio

n

(II)

[4,

9, 6

6]

1202

Nea

r E

ast

Th

e m

ost

dest

ruct

ive

eart

hqu

ake

in t

he

his

tory

of m

anki

nd:

th

e sh

ocks

cov

ered

an

are

aof

2 m

illi

on k

m2 ,

incl

udin

g A

sia

Min

or;

Sic

ily;

an

d te

rrit

orie

s of

mod

ern

Egy

pt,

Syr

ia,

Arm

enia

, A

zerb

aija

n. N

o le

ss t

han

1.2

mil

lion

peo

ple

died

II[2

0, 6

6]

(844

–13

19)

Pla

net

as

a w

hol

e (?

)A

ser

ies

from

no

t le

ss t

han

15

des

tru

ctiv

e ea

rth

�qu

akes

in t

he

exte

nsi

ve r

egio

n n

ot

hav

ing

anal

ogs

in

the

his

tory

(N

ort

h A

fric

a, A

sia

Min

or,

the

Mid

�d

le E

ast,

th

e C

auca

sus,

In

dia

, C

hin

a, J

apan

).

Aft

er e

ach

ear

thqu

ake

die

d o

f 23

th

ou

san

d t

o

180

tho

usa

nd

peo

ple

. Bet

wee

n 8

54–

1319

tra

ns�

ferr

ed t

he

cap

ital

of

Arm

enia

tw

ice

III

[3, 9

, 13,

20]

[3

4, 4

9]

1243

Asi

a, K

iev

Ru

s B

egin

nin

g of

th

e T

atar

–M

ongo

l rai

ds a

gain

st

Rus

’. T

he

resi

stan

ce o

f Rus

sian

s sa

ved

Eur

ope

from

inva

sion

(I)

[62]

1556

Ch

ina

Th

e ea

rth

quak

e oc

curr

ed a

t n

igh

t in

th

e de

nse

ly

popu

late

d re

gion

of S

haa

nxi

; th

ere

wer

e th

ousa

nds

of

lan

dsli

des

on th

e sl

opes

of h

ills

an

d 83

000

0 pe

o�pl

e pe

rish

ed. A

lmos

t all

of t

hem

live

d in

cav

es a

nd

wer

e bu

ried

ali

ve

II[3

, 9,

20]



Yea

rR

egio

nN

atu

ral d

isas

ters

Glo

bal s

oci

al p

hen

omen

aC

ateg

ory

(J)

So

urc

e

1609

Net

her

lan

ds

Th

e fi

rst

“suc

cess

ful”

bou

rgeo

is r

evol

utio

n in

his

tory

(II)

2 *[6

2]

1641

–16

42C

hin

a16

41. S

tron

g ea

rth

quak

es h

appe

ned

in F

ujia

n

(Apr

il 2

, Ju

ne

29),

Hug

uan

g (M

ay 2

0),

Gan

su

(Jun

e 17

), a

nd

Sic

hua

n (

Sep

tem

ber

25)

prov

ince

s

III

[32]

1642

. Flo

od,

mor

e th

an 3

0000

0 pe

ople

die

dII

3 *[3

2]

1688

–16

89E

ngl

and

A c

oup

term

inat

ed t

he

firs

t E

urop

e�w

ide

bour

geoi

s re

volu

tion

II2 *,

4 *[6

2]

1737

Iran

Jun

e 7.

Des

truc

tive

ear

thqu

ake;

dea

th t

oll

4000

0 pe

ople

III

[32]

Ind

iaO

ctob

er 7

. A s

torm

y su

rge

in t

he

Bay

of B

enga

l ca

used

th

e de

ath

of 3

0000

0 pe

ople

II[3

2]

Oct

ober

11.

Ear

thqu

ake

in t

he

vici

nit

ies

of C

alcu

tta:

300

000

peop

le p

eris

hed

II[3

, 20

, 32

]

1737

–17

42. R

egio

nal

nat

ura

l dis

aste

r: a

ser

ies

of

stro

ng

eart

hqu

akes

an

d e

rup

tio

ns

of

15 v

olc

ano

es

(II)

[45]

1737

Kam

chat

ka,

No

rth

Ku

ril

Isla

nd

s

Oct

ober

17,

Nov

embe

r 4, a

nd

Dec

embe

r 17:

thre

e st

ron

g ea

rth

quak

es w

hos

e so

urce

s co

vere

d al

l K

amch

atka

an

d th

e n

orth

ern

Kur

il I

slan

ds. T

he

eart

hqu

ake

of O

ctob

er 1

7, 1

737

rem

ain

s th

e st

ron

�ge

st in

the

regi

on. I

t was

acc

ompa

nie

d by

shoc

ks o

f m

agn

itud

e 10

on

lan

d an

d a

60�m

tsu

nam

i on

th

e co

ast o

f th

e P

acif

ic O

cean

. Th

e le

ngt

h o

f its

sour

ce

was

700

km

(II)

[51]

1755

Iran

Jun

e 7.

Des

truc

tive

ear

thqu

ake,

40

000

peop

le

died

III

[32]

Eu

rop

e,

No

rth

Afr

ica

Th

e L

isbo

n e

arth

quak

e. A

ccor

din

g to

dif

fere

nt

esti

mat

es,

from

30

000

to 1

0000

0 pe

ople

die

d. A

ll

of E

urop

e w

as a

ffec

ted;

mat

eria

l los

ses

wer

e fa

n�

tast

ic e

ven

com

pare

d to

th

e pr

esen

t da

y

III

(II–

III)

[3,

9, 1

2,

20,

60,

65]

Ru

ssia

Fou

nda

tion

of M

osco

w U

niv

ersi

tyII

I[9

]

Eu

rop

eP

ubli

shin

g of

th

e N

ebul

ar H

ypot

hes

is b

y I.

Kan

t;

it b

ecam

e th

e fo

unda

tion

of

mod

ern

mod

els

of t

he

stru

ctur

eof

th

e U

niv

erse

1789

Eu

rop

eB

egin

nin

g of

th

e G

reat

Fre

nch

Rev

olut

ion

I2 *, 4 *

[32]

Ind

iaS

umm

er. A

cyc

lon

e de

stro

ys th

e to

wn

of C

orin

ga;

2000

0 pe

ople

die

dII

I[3

2]

706


VIKULIN et al.

Tabl

e 6.

Con

td.

Yea

rR

egio

nN

atu

ral d

isas

ters

Glo

bal s

oci

al p

hen

omen

aC

ateg

ory

(J)

So

urc

e

1805

(1

802–

1808

)E

urop

e,

Afr

ica,

In

dia

Epi

dem

ic o

f pla

gue

in R

ussi

a, I

taly

, G

reec

e, T

ur�

key,

In

dia,

an

d A

lgie

rs. I

nfl

uen

za e

pide

mic

in E

urop

e

(II)

[32]

1815

Indo

nes

ia,

plan

et

as a

wh

ole

(?)

Eru

ptio

n o

f th

e T

ambo

ra V

olca

no.

100

000

peop

le

died

. Coo

lin

g is

rec

orde

d on

th

e pl

anet

, as

wel

l as

poor

har

vest

an

d st

arva

tion

III

[4,

9, 6

5,

66]

US

, E

urop

eS

umm

er. D

roug

ht

on t

he

Gre

at P

lain

s (9

200

0 pe

ople

die

d); d

roug

ht i

n U

krai

ne

and

poor

h

arve

st in

Fra

nce

III

[32]

Bal

i Isl

and

Nov

embe

r. A

str

ong

eart

hqu

ake,

mor

e th

an

1000

0 vi

ctim

sII

I[3

2]

1815

Eur

ope

Fou

nda

tion

of t

he

Ger

man

Un

ion

, w

hic

h u

nit

ed

38 in

depe

nde

nt

stat

es a

nd

the

Kin

gdom

of

th

e N

eth

erla

nds

III

[32]

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leB

egin

nin

g of

th

e li

bera

tion

war

s in

th

e st

ates

of S

outh

Am

eric

aII

I[3

2]

1822

Ind

iaIn

Ban

glad

esh

, 60

cyc

lon

es t

oo

k th

e li

ves

of

1.6

mil

lio

n p

eop

leII

3 *[3

2]

Nea

r E

ast

Au

gust

13.

Ear

thqu

ake

in S

yria

an

d T

urk

ey,

2000

0 vi

ctim

sII

I[3

2]

Sep

tem

ber

5. E

arth

quak

e in

Syr

ia,

2000

0 vi

ctim

sII

I[3

2]

Ind

on

esia

Oct

obe

r. E

rup

tio

n o

f G

alu

ngg

un

g Vo

lcan

o a

nd

ea

rth

quak

es: 1

14 v

illa

ges

des

tro

yed

, 12

000

peo

ple

d

ead

, 1.

7 m

illi

on

co

ffee

tre

es d

estr

oye

d

III

[32]

Ch

ile

Nov

embe

r. D

estr

uct

ive

eart

hqu

ake

in V

alp

arai

so,

1000

0 p

eop

le d

ied

III

[32]

1839

Ind

iaA

cyc

lon

e d

estr

oye

d t

he

tow

n o

f C

ori

nga

, 30

000

0 vi

ctim

sII

[32]

1845

Irel

and

Gre

at I

rish

Po

tato

Fam

ine,

on

e�qu

arte

r o

f th

e p

op

ula

tio

n d

ied

(ap

pro

xim

atel

y 1

mil

lio

n p

eop

le)

II3 *

[32]

1847

Ru

ssia

Ch

ole

ra e

pid

emic

s (1

847–

1848

); a

pp

roxi

mat

ely

800

000

peo

ple

per

ish

edII

3 *[3

2]

Jap

anE

arth

quak

e o

n H

on

shu

Isl

and

; 12

000

peo

ple

per

�is

hed

III

[32]

1849

(1

848–

1850

)Ir

elan

dP

oo

r p

ota

to h

arve

st;

1.8

mil

lio

n p

eop

le d

ied

fro

m

hu

nge

r an

d d

isea

ses

II3 *

[32]

1866

Ind

iaA

pp

roxi

mat

ely

1.5

mil

lio

n p

eop

le d

ied

fro

m h

un

�ge

rII

[32]



Yea

rR

egio

nN

atu

ral d

isas

ters

Glo

bal s

oci

al p

hen

omen

aC

ateg

ory

(J)

So

urc

e

1876

Ind

iaM

arch

. Ear

thqu

ake,

215

000

peo

ple

die

dII

I[3

8]

Sum

mer

. Typ

hoo

n in

th

e B

ay o

f Ben

gal c

ause

da

gian

t fl

ood;

th

e se

a le

vel i

ncr

ease

d by

12

m,

100

000–

200

000

peop

le p

eris

hed

III

[32,

66]

Ch

ole

ra e

pid

emic

s, s

tarv

atio

n,

6 m

illi

on

peo

ple

d

ied

II[3

2]

Ch

ina

Dro

ugh

t an

d s

tarv

atio

n;

13 m

illi

on

peo

ple

die

dII

[32]

Ecu

ado

rE

arth

quak

e; 7

000

0 p

eop

le d

ied

III

[32]

1877

(1

876–

1878

)C

hin

aD

isas

tro

us d

rou

ght,

po

or h

arve

st in

nin

e p

rovi

nce

s ov

er a

squ

are

of

1 m

ln. k

m2 ;

9 m

illi

on

peo

ple

die

dII

3 *[6

5]

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leM

ost

imp

ort

ant

pro

gres

s in

sci

ence

an

d t

ech

no

l�o

gy t

hat

rad

ical

ly c

han

ged

th

e li

fe o

f so

ciet

y:

A.G

. Bel

l in

ven

ted

tel

eph

on

e (1

876)

; T.

A. E

di�

son

’s in

can

des

cen

t la

mp

(18

78),

L. B

olt

zman

n

dev

elo

ped

a t

heo

ry o

f st

atis

tica

l th

erm

od

ynam

ics

(187

7)

[32]

1887

Ch

ina

Oct

obe

r. C

atas

tro

ph

ic f

loo

d o

n t

he

Hu

ang

He

Riv

er;

2.5

mil

lio

n p

eop

le d

ied

II3 *

[32]

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leG

. Dai

mle

r in

ven

ts c

arbu

reto

r an

d t

oge

ther

wit

h

W. M

ayba

ch c

on

stru

cts

a tw

o s

tro

ke m

oto

r[3

2]

1898

Ind

iaF

loo

ds

and

sta

rvat

ion

; 1

mil

lio

n p

eop

le d

ied

II3 *

[32]

1907

Ch

ina

Abu

nd

ance

of

rain

s le

ads

to a

po

or

har

vest

. A

pp

roxi

mat

ely

20 m

illi

on

peo

ple

die

d f

rom

sta

r�va

tio

n

II3 *

[65]

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leT

hir

d p

lagu

e p

and

emic

; 5

mil

lio

n p

eop

lep

eris

hed

II3 *

[32]

1911

Ch

ina

Su

mm

er. F

loo

d o

n t

he

Yan

gtze

Riv

er,

200

000

per

ish

edII

3 *[3

2]

Sep

tem

ber.

Flo

od

s o

n t

he

Yan

gtze

Riv

er;

100

000

dro

wn

ed a

nd

ap

pro

xim

atel

y 10

000

0 p

eop

le d

ied

of

star

vati

on

III

[32]

Jap

anJu

ne

15. E

arth

quak

e o

n R

yuky

u I

slan

d;

100

000

peo

ple

per

ish

edII

I[3

2]

Ala

ska

1912

. Eru

pti

on

of

Nov

aru

pta

(K

atm

ai)

Volc

ano

, w

hic

h is

sim

ilar

to

th

e K

raka

tau

eru

pti

on

in 1

883

in r

egar

ds

to c

on

sequ

ence

s

III

[10]

708


VIKULIN et al.

Yea

rR

egio

nN

atu

ral d

isas

ters

Glo

bal s

oci

al p

hen

omen

aC

ateg

ory

(J)

So

urc

e

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leR

evol

utio

n in

phy

sics

. Fun

dam

enta

l in

ven

tion

s th

at

dete

rmin

ed th

e pr

esen

t sta

te o

f sci

ence

: E

. Rut

herf

ord

deve

lops

a th

eory

of t

he a

tom

ic n

ucle

i;

Kam

erlin

gh�O

nn

es d

isco

vers

sup

erco

ndu

ctiv

ity,

an

d R

.A. M

illik

an m

easu

res t

he e

lect

ric

char

ge o

f ele

ctro

n

III

[32]

1917

Eu

rop

eT

yph

us

epid

emic

; 15

000

0 p

eop

le p

eris

hed

III

[32]

Bal

i Isl

and

Des

tru

ctiv

e ea

rth

quak

e; 1

500

0 p

eop

le p

eris

hed

III

[20]

Ru

ssia

Oct

obe

r 25

. Th

e re

volu

tio

n t

hat

ch

ange

d

the

wh

ole

wo

rld

I2 *, 5 *

1919

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

le19

18–

1920

. His

pan

iola

infl

uen

za p

and

emic

; 50

to

100

mil

lio

n p

eop

le d

ied

I3 *[3

2,35

,81]

1920

Ch

ina

Dec

embe

r 16

. A t

erri

tory

th

e si

ze o

f F

ran

ce is

d

evas

tate

d a

s a

resu

lt o

f an

ear

thqu

ake;

20

000

0 vi

ctim

s

III

[3,

20,

32,

60]

Yea

rs 1

920–

1921

. Sta

rvat

ion

; te

ns

of

tho

usa

nd

s ch

ild

ren

wer

e so

ld a

nd

500

000

peo

ple

per

ish

edII

3 *[6

5]

1921

(1

921–

1922

)R

uss

iaU

krai

ne,

Vol

ga r

egio

n. D

roug

ht,

30

mill

ion

peo

ple

star

ved;

can

nib

alis

m; c

onse

quen

ces o

f th

e re

volu

tion

in

191

7, th

e ci

vil w

ar th

at fo

llow

ed it

, an

d B

olsh

evik

st

rugg

le fo

r po

wer

; 5.

1 m

illio

n p

eopl

e pe

rish

ed.

Th

e go

vern

men

t can

not

ass

ist t

he

suff

erin

g pe

ople

; a

new

eco

nom

ic p

olic

y is

intr

oduc

ed in

th

e co

untr

y (N

EP

)

II3 *

[32,

65]

Eu

rop

eH

itle

r be

com

es th

e le

ader

of t

he

nat

ion

al�s

oci

alis

t p

arty

[32]

Asi

aT

he

Com

mu

nis

t P

arty

is o

rgan

ized

in C

hin

a[3

2]

1923

Jap

anS

epte

mbe

r 1.

On

e of

the

mos

t des

truc

tive

ear

th�

quak

es in

the

hist

ory

of th

e co

untr

y: th

e fi

re d

estr

oyed

th

e ca

pita

l Tok

yo a

nd

its

vici

nit

y Yo

koha

ma.

Acc

ordi

ng

to th

e of

fici

al d

ata,

14

600

0 pe

ople

per

ishe

d; a

ccor

din

g to

the

othe

r da

ta6 *,

ther

e w

ere

up to

170

000

vict

ims

and

mor

e th

an 0

.5 m

illio

n p

eopl

e m

issi

ng

as a

res

ult

of th

e ts

unam

i

II[6

4]

1931

Ch

ina

Su

mm

er. F

loo

d o

n t

he

Yan

gtze

Riv

er,

5.5

ho

use

s ca

rrie

d d

ow

n,

app

roxi

mat

ely

60 m

illi

on

peo

ple

su

ffer

ed a

nd

3.7

mil

lio

n p

eop

le p

eris

hed

II3 *

[65]

Ru

ssia

Dec

embe

r 5.

Th

e C

ath

edra

l of

Ch

rist

th

e S

avio

r w

as b

low

n u

p in

Mo

sco

w[3

2]



Yea

rR

egio

nN

atu

ral d

isas

ters

Glo

bal s

oci

al p

hen

omen

aC

ateg

ory

(J)

So

urc

e

1932

Ch

ile

Str

on

gest

eru

pti

on

of C

erro

Azu

l Vo

lcan

o, s

imil

ar

to t

he

eru

pti

on

of

Kra

kata

u in

188

3 in

reg

ard

s t

o it

s co

nse

quen

ces

III

[10]

Ru

ssia

Th

e ba

d p

oli

cy o

f le

ader

s le

d t

o s

tarv

atio

n

(193

2–19

33);

ap

pro

xim

atel

y 5

mil

lio

n p

eop

le

die

d

II3 *

[65]

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leT

he

culm

inat

ion

of t

he

Gre

at D

epre

ssio

n t

hat

st

arte

d in

192

9 in

th

e U

nit

ed S

tate

s. A

tot

alof

40

mil

lion

un

empl

oyed

in in

dust

rial

ly d

evel

�op

ed c

oun

trie

s

[32]

1939

Ch

ina

Su

mm

er. F

loo

d,

200

000

peo

ple

per

ish

edII

I[3

2]P

lan

et

as a

wh

ole

Sep

tem

ber

1. B

egin

nin

g o

f W

orl

d W

ar I

I (1

939–

1945

), w

hic

h in

volv

ed 7

2 co

un

trie

s. A

to

tal

of

110

mln

peo

ple

mo

bili

zed

an

d 5

5 m

illi

on

peo

�p

le p

eris

hed

. Th

e w

orl

d w

as r

eorg

aniz

ed a

s a

resu

lt

of

the

war

. A w

orl

d�w

ide

soci

alis

t sy

stem

was

fo

rmed

(it

occ

up

ied

26%

o

f th

e E

arth

’s te

rrit

ory

an

d 3

3% o

f th

e p

lan

et p

op

�u

lati

on

live

d t

her

e)

I2 *, 3 *

[62]

Eu

rop

eN

ovem

ber

30. B

egin

nin

g o

f th

e S

ovie

t–F

inn

ish

W

inte

r W

ar[3

2]

Tu

rkey

Dec

embe

r 26

. Ear

thqu

ake

in E

rzin

can

; des

tro

yed

15

to

wn

s an

d 9

0 vi

llag

es;

3300

0 p

eop

le p

eris

hed

; 70

000

0 p

eop

le lo

st t

hei

r h

omes

III

[32]

1942

Ch

ina

Jap

an o

ccu

pie

d C

hin

a. T

hre

e m

illi

on

peo

ple

die

d

of s

tarv

atio

n (

the

reas

on

for

the

loss

of p

eop

le w

as

a so

cial

on

e)

II3 *

[32]

1944

Ind

iaIn

dia

was

a c

olon

y of

En

glan

d, w

hic

h a

ctiv

ely

par�

tici

pate

d in

th

e S

econ

d W

orld

War

. Sta

rvat

ion

(1

942–

1944

); u

p to

5 m

illi

on p

eopl

e di

ed

(th

e re

ason

for

the

loss

of p

eopl

e w

as a

soc

ial o

ne)

II3 *

[32,

65]

1947

Ind

iaE

pid

emic

of

yell

ow

fev

er;

75 m

illi

on

peo

ple

die

dI3 *

[32]

1957

Pla

net

as

a w

ho

leP

ande

mic

of A

sian

infl

uen

za. I

t st

arte

d in

Feb

ru�

ary

in C

hin

a (2

mil

lion

peo

ple

died

) an

d qu

ickl

y sp

read

ove

r th

e en

tire

pla

net

. A t

otal

of

70

000

peop

le d

ied

alon

e in

th

e U

S

II3 *

(II)

[32,

80,

82]

1966

Ind

iaD

rou

ght,

sta

rvat

ion

(19

65–

1967

);1.

5 m

illi

on

peo

ple

per

ish

edII

3 *[6

5]

Jun

e 1.

Str

om in

Ban

glad

esh

, 30

000

peo

ple

per

�is

hed

III

[32]

710


VIKULIN et al.

Yea

rR

egio

nN

atu

ral d

isas

ters

Glo

bal s

oci

al p

hen

omen

aC

ateg

ory

(J)

So

urc

e

1970

Ch

ina

Jan

uar

y 4.

Ear

thqu

ake

in T

on

ghai

; 15

600

peo

ple

p

eris

hed

Jan

uar

y 7.

Ear

thqu

ake

in Y

un

nan

pro

vin

ce;

1600

0 p

eop

le d

eath

to

ll

III

[32]

Ind

iaS

pri

ng.

Cyc

lon

e an

d f

loo

d t

hat

fo

llo

wed

it

in B

angl

ades

h;

dea

th t

oll

300

000–

500

000

peo

�p

le

II3 *

[32,

65]

Sto

rm s

urg

e, f

loo

d;

dea

th t

oll

15

000

peo

ple

III

[32]

1976

Gu

atem

ala

Feb

ruar

y 4.

Des

tru

ctiv

e ea

rth

quak

e; d

eath

to

ll

2200

0 p

eop

le;

1 m

illi

on

peo

ple

lost

th

eir

hom

esII

I[4

, 32

]

Ch

ina

July

27.

Des

tru

ctiv

e ea

rth

quak

e d

estr

oye

d th

e ci

ty

of

Tan

gsh

an;

dea

th t

oll

was

700

000

peo

ple

, w

ith

m

ore

th

an 1

mil

lio

n p

eop

le w

ou

nd

ed

II[4

, 65

]

Dea

th o

f M

ao Z

edo

ng.

In

ten

sifi

cati

on

o

f th

e st

rugg

le f

or

po

wer

[32]

1985

Afr

ica

Dro

ugh

t in

Su

dan

an

d E

thio

pia

, d

eath

to

ll

1–2

mil

lio

n p

eop

leII

3 *[3

2, 6

5]

Mex

ico

Ear

thqu

ake;

dea

th t

oll

10

000

peo

ple

III

[32]

Ind

iaM

ay. A

to

tal o

f 15

000

peo

ple

was

hed

aw

ay

to t

he

Bay

of

Ben

gal

III

[32]

Co

lum

bia

Eru

pti

on

of

Nev

ado

del

Ru

iz V

olc

ano

cau

sed

a

lan

dsl

ide;

dea

th t

oll

22

500

peo

ple

III

[32]

Ru

ssia

, E

uro

pe,

pla

net

as

a w

ho

le

Ap

ril 2

3. P

len

um

of t

he

Cen

tral

Com

mit

tee

of t

he

Com

mu

nis

t Par

ty o

f th

e S

ovie

t Un

ion

that

sta

rted

p

eres

tro

ika

and

th

e fo

llo

win

g d

isso

luti

on

of

the

cou

ntr

y an

d t

he

un

ion

of

soci

alis

t co

un

trie

s. I

t st

ron

gly

chan

ged

Eu

rop

e’s

po

liti

cal m

ap

III

[32]

1998

So

uth

Am

eric

aS

pri

ng.

A to

tal o

f 21

000

peo

ple

per

ish

ed a

s a

resu

lt

of

chan

ge o

f E

l Nin

o;

the

loss

es w

ere

$81

bill

ion

III

[32]

Cen

tral

Am

eric

aO

cto

ber.

Hu

rric

ane

Mit

chel

l; d

eath

to

ll

1600

0p

eop

le a

nd

700

000

peo

ple

lost

thei

r hom

es.

Th

e in

fras

tru

ctu

re o

f H

on

du

ras

was

com

ple

tely

d

estr

oye

d;

loss

es w

ere

$5 b

illi

on

III

[32,

65]

1998

Ch

ina

Au

gust

20.

Flo

od

; d

eath

to

ll 2

000

peo

ple

, 14

mil

lio

n p

eop

le e

vacu

ated

, an

d 2

40 m

illi

on

peo

�p

le s

uff

ered

mat

eria

l lo

sses

III

[32]



Yea

rR

egio

nN

atu

ral d

isas

ters

Glo

bal s

oci

al p

hen

omen

aC

ateg

ory

(J)

So

urc

e

Ru

ssia

Au

gust

. Dev

alu

atio

n o

f th

e ru

ble

and

def

ault

. F

rom

Au

gust

14

to 2

7, t

he

gold

an

d f

ore

ign

ex

chan

ge r

eser

ves

of

the

cou

ntr

y d

ecre

ased

by

1.7

bil

lio

n d

oll

ars;

mo

re th

an 4

4 m

illi

on

peo

ple

fe

ll b

elo

w t

he

pov

erty

lin

e

II2 *

[32]

2004

US

Sep

tem

ber.

Hu

rric

ane

Jean

ne.

Mo

re t

han

30

00 v

icti

ms

in F

lori

da

and

mo

re t

han

5 m

illi

on

p

eop

le w

ith

ou

t el

ectr

icit

y; m

ater

ial l

oss

es

wer

e $7

bil

lio

n

III

[65]

So

uth

east

Asi

aS

tro

ng

eart

hqu

akes

an

d t

sun

amis

wit

h w

ave

hei

ghts

rea

chin

g 36

m;

man

y co

un

trie

s o

f th

e re

gio

n s

uff

er f

rom

sta

rvat

ion

an

d d

isea

ses;

th

e so

cial

an

d e

con

omic

sta

tes

of

the

regi

on

d

ecre

ase

shar

ply

. A t

ota

l of

320

000

peo

ple

per

�is

hed

an

d 1

mil

lio

n p

eop

le lo

st t

hei

r h

omes

(i

t is

po

ssib

le th

at 3

0000

0 m

ore

peo

ple

die

d d

uri

ng

the

nex

t ye

ar f

rom

dis

ease

s)

II[3

2, 4

3, 6

5]

2005

US

Au

gust

. Hu

rric

ane

Kat

rin

a; d

eath

to

ll

1000

peo

ple

; m

ater

ial l

oss

es e

xcee

d 2

00 b

illi

on

d

oll

ars

(th

e gr

eate

st lo

sses

in t

he

his

tory

of

the

Un

ited

Sta

tes)

II5 *

[65]

Pak

ista

nE

arth

quak

e in

Kas

hm

ir in

the

war

reg

ion

bet

wee

n

Indi

a an

d P

akis

tan

; de

ath

tol

l 75

000

peop

le.

Num

ber

of d

eath

s am

ong

mil

itar

y m

en

is u

nkn

own

(a

tota

l of 1

0000

0 m

ilit

ary

men

wer

e lo

cate

d in

th

e co

nfl

ict

zon

e). T

he

tota

l in

tern

a�ti

onal

con

trib

utio

n o

f aid

was

5 b

illi

on d

olla

rs

III

[65]

*C

ateg

ory

J =

0 w

as i

ntr

oduc

ed b

y th

e au

thor

s of

th

is a

rtic

le;

it c

orre

spon

ds t

o a

“pla

net

ary

geol

ogic

al d

isas

ter”

wh

ose

con

sequ

ence

s ar

e si

mil

ar t

o di

sast

ers

that

fre

quen

tly

repe

atw

ith

in a

suf

fici

entl

y sh

ort

tim

e pe

riod

wit

h J

= 1

acc

ordi

ng

to t

he

Rod

kin

–S

heb

alin

sca

le [

Rod

kin

, S

heb

alin

, 19

93].

Th

e m

ost

prob

able

gra

de v

alue

is g

iven

in b

rack

ets.

2 *B

ased

on

th

e m

enta

l psy

chol

ogic

al in

flue

nce

on

soc

iety

.3 *

Bas

ed o

n t

he

num

ber

of v

icti

ms.

4 *B

ased

on

th

e sc

ale

of m

anif

esta

tion

of

con

sequ

ence

s on

th

e su

rfac

e of

th

e E

arth

.5 *

Bas

ed o

n m

ater

ial l

osse

s.6 *

An

inte

rvie

w g

iven

by

I. V

ykh

ukh

olev

to

TV

ch

ann

el R

ussi

a on

Mar

ch 1

1, 2

011.

He

wor

ked

as a

cor

resp

onde

nt

in J

apan

for

7 ye

ars

in t

he

1980

s.

712


VIKULIN et al.

(3) The authors of this paper are aware that theselection of the material related to the social eventsdoes not claim to be complete and that their assess�ment is objective and correct. However, we selectedthose events which in our opinion actually influencedthe development of human civilization before the20th century. First and foremost, these are the eventson continent of Eurasia. Of course, the table can andshould be supplemented and corrected. In the existingform it is a good basis for the construction of a hypoth�esis and/or phenomenological model of an objectiveprocess.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The results of this paper were obtained throughenormous work with respect to the scale and volume ofdata on the natural (geodynamic) and social phenom�ena in the history of world civilization carried out inover the last decade by a group of authors headed byK.G. Levi [Levi et al., 2002, 2003, 2010; Zadonina,Levi, 2008, 2009]. No doubt these data will become abasis for many interesting and important works on theborder between geodynamics and society.

The authors thank I.V. Melekestsev and G.A. Kar�pov for discussions and remarks on the goal of thepaper and K.G. Levi and N.V. Zadonina for the dataon the natural and social phenomena and disasters.

REFERENCES

A Russian genius: Excerpts of V.I. Vernadsky’s diaries andletters, Nauka Zhizn, 1993, no. 6, pp. 2–5.

Arnol’d, V.I., Teoriya katastrof (Catastrophe Theory), Mos�cow: Nauka, 1990.

Balandin, R., Tainy Vsemirnogo potopa (The Secrets ofNoah’s Flood), Moscow: Veche, 2004.

Bolt, B.A., Earthquakes: A Primer, San Francisco: W. H.Freeman and Company, 1978.

Bolt, B.A., Horn, W.L., MacDonald, G.A., and Scott, R.F.,Geological Hazards: Earthquakes, Tsunamis, Volcanoes,Avalanches, Landslides, Floods, Berlin�New York:Springer, 1975.

Bostrom, N., Existential risks analyzing human extinctionscenarios and related hazards, J. Evol. Technol., 2002,vol. 9, no. 1.

Burlachkov, V.K., Energiya, vremya, informatsiya: Evoly�utsiya nauchnykh predstavlenii (Energy, Time, andInformation: Evolution of Scientific Views), Moscow:Librokom, 2012.

Cherkasov, R.F. and Romanovskii, N.P., Natural and socialrhythms, Geologicheskie etyudy (Geological Etudes),Magadan: SVKNII DVO RAN, 2003, pp. 85–91.

Chizhevsky, A.L., Na beregu Vselennoi: Vospominaniya oK.E. Tsiolkovskom (On Shore of the Universe. Memoirsabout K.E. Tsiolkovsky), Moscow: Airis�press, 2007.

Dolgacheva, V.A., Domozhilova, L.M., and Khlystov, A.I.,Specific features of the motion of Sun’s center of massrelative to the barycenter, Tr. P.K. Shternberg Gos.Astron. Inst., 1991, vol. 62, pp. 111–115.

Dubov, A.P., Kognitivnaya psikhofizika: Osnovy (CognitivePsychophysics), Rostov on Don: Feniks, 2006.

Earthquakes: lessons learned and problems, Priroda, 1989,no. 12.

Ekstremal’nye prirodnye yavleniya i katastrofy (ExtremeNatural Phenomena and Catastrophes), Gliko, A.O.,Ed., Moscow: IFZ RAN, 2010.

Firestone, R., West, A., and Warwick�Smith, S., The Cycleof Cosmic Catastrophes: Flood, Fire and Famine in theHistory of Civilization, Bear and Company, 2006.

Galimov, E.M., Fenomen zhizni: Mezhdu ravnovesiem i neli�neinost’yu. Proiskhozhdenie i printsipy evolyutsii (ThePhenomenon of Life: Between Equilibrium and Non�linearity. Origin and Principles of Evolution), Moscow:Editorial URSS, 2006.

Geologicheskii slovar’ (Dictionary of Geology), Moscow:Nedra, 1978, vol. 1, p. 478.

Gere, J.M. and Shah, H.S., Terra Non Firma: Understand�ing and Preparing for Earthquakes, W.H. Freeman andCompany, 1984.

Gobchanskii, O.P. and Efimov, V.N., Al’ternativnye sposobypolucheniya informatsii: Eksperimenty s ispol’zovaniemelektropunktury po R. Follyu i apparata kvantovoi terapii(Alternative Techniques of Information Acquisition:Experiments with the Use of Electropuncture accord�ing to Voll and a Quantum Therapy Device), Moscow:Russkoe slovo, 2007.

Godefroid, J., Les chemins de la psychologie: (Approaches toPsychology), vol. 1, Pierre Mardaga, 1988.

Gol’din, S.V., Physics of the “living” Earth, Problemygeofiziki XXI veka (Problems in Geophysics of the 21stCentury) Nikolaev, A.V., Ed., Moscow: Nauka, 2003,vol. 1, pp. 17–36.

Gushchenko, I.I., Izverzheniya vulkanov mira: Katalog(World Volcanic Eruptions: A Directiry), Moscow:Nauka, 1979.

Gusyakov, V.K., From Tunguska to Chicxulub, V MireNauki, 2012, no. 3, pp. 50–57.

Gusyakov, V.K., In the wake of ancient tsunamis, NaukaSib., 2006, no. 39, p. 8.

http://www.rusmg.ruhttp://www.warning.dp.uahttp://www.wikipedia.ruhttp://www.wosco.orgInterlandi, J., Finding a killer’s Achilles’ heel: clues from a

pandemic, Sci. Am., 2010, no. 11.Kadomtsev, B.B., Dynamics and information, Phys.�Usp.,

1994, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 425–500.Klyachko, M.A., Zemletryaseniya i my (Earthquakes and

Us), St. Petersburg: Integraf, 1999.Koval’chuk, M. and Naraikin, O., A constructor for the

future, V Mire Nauki, 2011, no. 9, pp. 24–31.Levi, K.G., Yazev, S.A., Zadonina, N.V., et al., Sovremen�

naya geodinamika i geliogeodinamika: Uchebnoe posobie(Modern Geodynamics and Heliogeodynamics: ATextbook), Irkutsk: IrGU, 2002.

Levi, K.G., Zadonina, N.V., and Yazev, S.A., Radiouglerod�naya khronologiya prirodnykh i sotsial’nykh fenomenovSevernogo polushariya (Radiocarbon Chronology ofNatural and Social Phenomena in the Northern Hemi�sphere), Irkutsk: IrGU, 2010, vol. 1.



Levi, K.G., Zadonina, N.V., Berdnikova, N.E., et al.,Sovremennaya geodinamika i geliogeodinamika. 500�letnyaya khronologiya anomal’nykh yavlenii v prirode isotsiume Sibiri i Mongolii: Uchebnoe posobie dlya vuzov(Modern Geodynamics and Heliogeodynamics. A 500�Year Chronology of Anomalous Natural and SocialPhenomena in Siberia and Mongolia: A Textbook forUniversities), Irkutsk: IrGU, 2003, vol. 2.

Levin, B.V. and Nosov, M.A., Fizika tsunami (TsunamiPhysics), Moscow: Yanus�K, 2005.

Maslov, L.A., Geodinamika litosfery tikhookeanskogo pod�vizhnogo poyasa. Khabarovsk (Geodynamics of theLithosphere of the Pacific Mobile Belt), Vladivostok:Dal’nauka, 1996.

Melekestsev, I.V., The 1737–1742 natural catastrophe inKamchatka as a model for future regional catastropheson island arcs of Northwestern Pacific, Noveishii isovremennyi vulkanizm na territorii Rossii (Emergentand Modern Volcanism in Russia), Laverov, N.P., Ed.,Moscow: Nauka, 2005, pp. 553–571.

Mikhail Aleksandrovich Sadovskii: ocherki, vospominaniya,materialy (Mikhail Aleksandrovich Sadovskii:Sketches, Memoirs, and Data), Moscow: Nauka, 2004.

Myagkov, S.M., Geografiya prirodnogo riska (Geography ofthe Natural Risk), Moscow: IGU, 1995.

Neimar, M., Istoriya Zemli (History of the Earth),St. Petersburg: Prosveshchenie, 1899, vol. 1 (GeneralGeology).

Nikonov, A.A., The terrible shock of Europe: the Lisboaearthquake of November 1, 1755, Priroda, 2005, no. 11,pp. 21–29.

Nikonov, A.A., The territory of earthquakes, Priroda, 1989,no. 12, pp. 39–46.

Noveishii i sovremennyi vulkanizm na territorii Rossii (Emer�gent and Modern Volcanism in Russia), Laverov, N.P.,Ed., Moscow: Nauka, 2005.

Novyi katalog sil’nykh zemletryasenii na territorii SSSR sdrevneishikh vremen po 1974 g. (New Directory ofStrong Earthquakes in the USSR Territory fromAncient Times to 1974), Kondorskaya, N.V. and She�balin, N.V., Eds., Moscow: Nauka, 1977.

Pisarenko, V.F. and Rodkin, M.V., Raspredeleniya s tyazhe�lymi khvostami: Prilozheniya k analizu katastrof(Heavy�Tailed Distributions: Application to Catastro�phe Analysis), Moscow: GEOS, 2007.

Politologicheskii slovar’ (Dictionary of Political Science),Moscow: Vysshaya shkola, 1995.

Poston, T. and Stuart, I., Catastrophe Theory and Its Appli�cations London: Pitman, 1978.

Problemy seismotektoniki: Materialy XVII Vserossiiskoi kon�ferentsii s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem (Problems inSeismotectonics: Proceedings of the XVII All�RussianConference with International Participation), Gliko,A.O., Rogozhin, E.A., and Shchukin, Yu.K., Eds.,Moscow: IFZ RAN, 2011.

Rikitake, T., Earthquake Prediction, New York: Elsevier,1976.

Rodkin, M.V. and Shebalin, N.V., Problems in the mea�surement of catastrophes, Izv. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr.,1993, no. 5, pp. 106–116.

Rotenberg, V., Brain: The strategy of hemispheres, NaukaZhizn, 1984, no. 6, pp. 54–57.

Rousseau, P., Les tremblements de terre (Earthquakes) Paris:Hachette, 1961.

Sachs, L., Statistische Auswertungsmethoden (Methods ofStatistical Evaluation), Berlin: Springer, 1972.

Scheidegger, A., Principles of Geodynamics, Berlin�NewYork: Springer, 1982.

Semenets, N.V., Vikulin, A.V., and Vikulina, M.A., Seis�motectonics, geodynamics and the socium, Problemyseismotektoniki: Materialy XVII Vserossiiskoi konferen�tsii s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem (Problems in Seismo�tectonics: Proceedings of the XVII All�Russian Confer�ence with International Participation), Gliko, A.O,Rogozhin, E.A, and Shchukin, Yu.K., Eds., Moscow:IFZ RAN, 2011, pp. 471–476.

Shebalin, N.V., Sil’nye zemletryaseniya: Izbrannye trudy(Strong Earthquakes: Selected Works), Moscow: Aka�demiya gornykh nauk, 1997.

Simkin, T. and Sibert, L., Volcanoes of the World: Catalogue,Tuscon (Arizona): Geoscience Press, SmithsonianInstitute, 1993.

Solov’ev, S.L. and Go, Ch.N., Katalog tsunami na zapad�nom poberezh’e Tikhogo okeana (Directory of Tsunamisin the Western Pacific), Moscow: Nauka, 1974.

Solov’ev, S.L., Basic data on tsunami in the Pacific coast ofthe USSR: 1737–1976, Izuchenie tsunami v otkrytomokeane (Analysis of Tsunamis in the Open Ocean),Moscow: Nauka, 1978, pp. 61–136.

Sovetskii Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar’ (Soviet EncyclopedicDictionary), Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya,1985.

Sto velichaishikh katastrof mira (The World’s 100 WorstCatastrophes), Moscow: Mir knigi, 2007.

Sukharev, V., Vse katastrofy Zemli (intellektual’noe nou�khau) (All Catastrophes of the World: An IntellectualKnow�How), Odessa: Enio, 2004.

Tavares, R., O pequeno livro do grande terramoto. Ensaiosobre 1755 (A Small Book about a Great Earthquake: ASketch of 1755), Tinta de China, 2005.

Timashev, S.F., On basic principles of the “new dialog withnature” Problemy geofiziki XXI veka. V 2�kh kn. (Prob�lems in Geophysics of the 21st Century. In Two Vol�umes), Nikolaev, A.V., Ed., Moscow: Nauka, 2003.

Trifonov, V.G. and Karakhanyan, A.S., Dinamika Zemli irazvitie obshchestva (The Earth’s Dynamics and SocialEvolution), Moscow: OGI, 2008.

Trifonov, V.G., Soboleva, O.V., Trifonov, R.V., and Vos�trikov, G.A., Sovremennaya geodinamika Al’piisko�Gimalaiskogo kollizionnogo poyasa (Modern Geody�namics of the Alpine�Himalaya Collision Belt), Mos�cow: GEOS, 2002.

Turchin, A.V., Struktura global’noi katastrofy: Riski vymi�raniya chelovechestva v XXI veke (The Structure of aGlobal Catastrophe: Human Extinction Risks in the21st Century), Moscow: LKI, 2011.

Vernadskii, V.I., Biosfera i noosfera (Biosphere andNoosphere), Moscow: Airis�press, 2009.

Vernadskii, V.I., Nauchnaya mysl' kak planetnoe yavlenie(Scientific Thought as a Planetary Phenomenon),Moscow: Nauka, 1991.

714


VIKULIN et al.

Vikulin, A.V. and Melekestsev, I.V., Seismichnost’, Pacificvolcanism and planetary rotation, Bulg. Geofiz. Spis.,1997, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 62–68.

Vikulin, A.V. and Melekestsev, I.V., Vortices and life, Rotat�sionnye protsessy v geologii i fizike (Rotational Processesin Geology and Physics), Milanovskii, E.E., Ed., Mos�cow: KomKniga, 2007, pp. 39–101.

Vikulin, A.V. and Semenets, N.V., http://khain2011.web.ru

Vikulin, A.V., Fizika Zemli i geodinamika: Uchebnoe posobie(Physics of the Earth and Geodynamics: A Textbook),Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskii: KamGU, 2009.

Vikulin, A.V., Mir vikhrevykh dvizhenii (The World of EddyCurrents), Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskii: Kamchat�GTU, 2008.

Vikulin, A.V., Drozdyuk, V.N., Semenets, N.V., and Shi�rokov, V.A., K zemletryaseniyu bez riska (Toward a SafeEarthquake), Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskii: SETO�ST,1997.

Vikulin, A.V., New type of elastic rotational waves in geo�medium and vortex geodynamics Geodin. Tektonofiz.,2010, vol. 1., no. 2, pp. 119–141.

Vikulin, A.V., Seismic poles, Problemy seismichnostiDal’nego Vostoka (Seismicity Problems in the Far East),

Vikulin, A.V., Ed., Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskii:KOMSP GS RAN, 2000.

Vikulin, A.V., Semenets, N.V., and Shirokov, V.A., Zemletr�yasenie budet zavtra (The Earthquake Will Hit Tomor�row), Petropavlovsk�Kamchatskii: KGS IFZ RAN,1989.

Vikulin, A.V., Vikulina, S.A., and Artigas, L., NewLisboa 1.11.1755 earthquake data, Vestn. KRAUNTs.Nauki Zemle, 2007, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 74–86.

Wong, K., Out with a Bang: Volcanic eruptions may havewiped out neandertals, Sci. Am., 2010, no. 12.

Yaglom, I.M., Why higher mathematics was invented con�currently by Newton and Leibniz: Reflections onmathematical though and ways of world cognition,Znanie Chislo Mysl, 1983, no. 6.

Zadonina, N.V. and Levi, K.G., Khronologiya prirodnykh isotsial’nykh fenomenov v Sibiri i Mongolii (Chronologyof Natural and Social Phenomena in Siberia and Mon�golia), Irkutsk: IrGU, 2008.

Zadonina, N.V. and Levi, K.G., Khronologiya prirodnykh isotsial’nykh fenomenov v istorii mirovoi tsivilizatsii(Chronology of Natural and Social Phenomena in theHistory of World Civilization), Irkutsk: IrGU, 2009.

Translated by E. Morozov

Documents

Global disasters: Geodynamics and society