Let's try it with the stuff below 4M removed (The NEIC reports local
quakes from 2.5 M up non US quakes don't get in if they are below 4M.)

4.5 M. CHINA-RUSSIA-NORTH KOREA BORDER REGION
4.6 M. NEAR ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA
4.6 M. NORTHERN COLOMBIA
4.8 M. VANUATU
4.6 M. TONGA
5.0 M. NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN
4.9 M. NORTH OF HONDURAS

4.7 M. MYANMAR
4.7 M. GUAM REGION
5.4 M. VANUATU
5.1 M. KURIL ISLANDS
4.9 M. BATAN ISLANDS REGION, PHILIPPINES
4.4 M. IZU ISLANDS, JAPAN REGION
4.9 M. RYUKYU ISLANDS, JAPAN
4.9 M. JAVA, INDONESIA
4.9 M. WESTERN INDIAN-ANTARCTIC RIDGE
4.4 M. ANDREANOF ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN IS., ALASKA

4.4 M. NORTH SEA
5.0 M. TONGA
4.7 M. ECUADOR
5.4 M. TONGA
4.6 M. NORTHERN ALASKA
4.2 M. NORTHERN ALASKA
4.0 M. SOUTH OF ALASKA
4.8 M. ANDAMAN ISLANDS, INDIA REGION

5.2 M. KURIL ISLANDS
4.8 M. SOUTHERN IRAN
5.3 M. ANTOFAGASTA, CHILE
6.9 M. CHINA-RUSSIA-NORTH KOREA BORDER REGION

4.1 M. ANDREANOF ISLANDS, ALEUTIAN IS., ALASKA
5.9 M. KERMADEC ISLANDS, NEW ZEALAND
4.6 M. KURIL ISLANDS
4.6 M. BONIN ISLANDS, JAPAN REGION
4.7 M. POTOSI, BOLIVIA
4.9 M. FIJI REGION
5.1 M. IZU ISLANDS, JAPAN REGION

4.9 M. KOMANDORSKIYE OSTROVA, RUSSIA REGION
5.0 M. NEAR THE SOUTH COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN
5.1 M. OFF THE WEST COAST OF NORTHERN SUMATRA
5.1 M. BABUYAN ISLANDS REGION, PHILIPPINES
5.3 M. OFF THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN

6.2 M. KEPULAUAN BARAT DAYA, INDONESIA
4.5 M. ANTOFAGASTA, CHILE
4.7 M. HALMAHERA, INDONESIA
4.6 M. SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA
4.5 M. BANDA SEA
4.8 M. KURIL ISLANDS
5.4 M. MINDANAO, PHILIPPINES
4.9 M. FIJI REGION
4.7 M. JUJUY, ARGENTINA
4.1 M. CENTRAL CALIFORNIA

4.9 M. SOUTH OF THE MARIANA ISLANDS
4.8 M. OFF THE WEST COAST OF NORTHERN SUMATRA
4.5 M. BAJA CALIFORNIA, MEXICO
5.0 M. MINDANAO, PHILIPPINES
4.9 M. SOUTH OF JAVA, INDONESIA

There is a fall off but it isn't what I thought I saw. Maybe there is
a dearth of small quakes ...nope.

I have pointed this out before. I left the times out on this data.
Looking at the web page it is clear the dearth is quakes within a
certain time period depending on the magnitude of the quake.

Whatever you make of my ideas there is definitely a suspicious lapse
in what conventional ideas proclaim.
Maybe it's OK for them to proclaim if they only do so 21% of the time?
(uk.sci.weather fans, you'd have to have been there for that one.)