If you look up the quakes that occurred following the severe one at Banda Atjeh at the end of 2004, you'd get the impression nothing much happened anywhere until a couple of weeks later. Actually quite a lot happened and almost all of it in Sumatra. Almost nowhere else had earthquakes for that time period well into January.
But no explanation of what did and didn't happen has ever been produced.
I don't know if you have heard this example of weather-lore but:
"One man's meat is another man's poison."
"One man's good weather is another man's bad."
I think that is true wherever you live. The exception of course is extreme weather.
Usually when it is raining on someone the sun is shining on someone else. That is a law of nature, clouds are only so big and tend to grow under the conditions required of/for their area, which conditions are required elsewhere for sunny weather.
And the weather when it is extreme in one area will almost always be extreme in the other manner, in that other place or places. We recently had a severe spell of bad weather. In Britain "bad weather" concerns rain. And the opposite conditions to severe bad weather here tends to be bush fires in Australia and SantaAna winds in California.
I haven't heard of any places stricken with drought but then I have been out of the loop for a while, still am.
Of course the saying can also apply that severe wet weather in Cumbria is accompanied by severe wet weather in the Asian Pacific or if I guess correctly, VietNam.
But I AM just guessing.
You can generally tell when a severe storm has hit the latitudes lower than the regions where they used to dump horses from the NEIC or Red Puma lists. The USGS allows you to browse their archives on-line, the USA despite all I have said about its third world class politics, is a stupendous scientific resource.
The Red Puma and NEIC lists are lists of earthquakes.
When a severe storm has hit the coast of for example the Philippines or Japan, Korea or VietNam there will be a resounding quake (actually a series -but the archives won't show that*) there will be a resounding series of quakes some 80 degrees from the harbours where a storm crashes home.
Don't ask me why. All I know about storms is that they build up severity out at sea and dispense it all at once once they reach shore. Then the components fall apart and go their own separate ways.
I have the idea it is something to do with tides. And since tides are just sonic shocks applied to the land coming out the ground, they would tend to build up in a spot under the ocean deeps where the sea floor reflects them to one focus. (Just guessing.)
#If you look up the quakes that occurred following the severe one at Banda Atjeh at the end of 2004, you'd get the impression nothing much happened anywhere until a couple of weeks later. Actually quite a lot happened and almost all of it in Sumatra. Almost nowhere else had earthquakes for that time period well into January.
Tides have this connection so that opposite shores on a channel no matter how close, have a slightly different behaviour pattern. if the channel is wide enough, by the time the acoustics have gone down to the sea floor and climbed up the other side, the harmony and timbre even the notes have changed.
It's either that or the amphidromic points* on one side of the channel go the long way around so that the tides move from southern Spain up through France into the Low Countries and Germany, up Denmark and through the ex USSR sea coasts to Finland, Sweden, Norway, Russia, China, Indo-China, India, Pakistan Arabia and all those African nations either up the Rift through Egypt and Lybia or down past South Africa and up the other side, detouring along both sides of absolutely EVER river and stream along the way to Morocco.
I plump for the straight line every time but both might be true too. In fact, both have to be true too. But that is another story. *An "ampidromic point" is a place on the sea where the tide is the same "state" of "high or low tide". You get one every six or so hours in most places. You can find charts of them on-line looking like contours (which is almost what they are.)
Its the tidal constants that give enclosed arms of seas the gyres which can develop (if the tides are so different either side of their channel or neck.) Don't take my word for it. Nobody is daft enough to do that. It's what gives me my free speech. If I had to prove all the things I say I'd have nothing to say on any subject.