Quote:
Originally Posted by snas
Craig
I hope that your hope that people will turn more to science proves correct. However, my experience in medicine is that many people have become unable to grasp modern science based medicine's concepts, have been scared off from use of modern drugs (normally because of the rantings of people who seem to have some strong bent against modern science based medicine). As a result, I am sadly not making more room to house the sudden influx of "modern science converts".
Already I have seen a site saying that the quake was god's retribution against the Japanese for killing whales and for killing Americans in WW2. What the!? You can't deal with crazies!
Stuart
|
Hi Stuart;
My motivation is not so much in the hope that people will turn to Science (I don't really care what people turn to .. they have a free choice).
But when something like this happens, interrogative style questions invariably get directed at the scientific agencies who receive funding.
What can the agencies do in a situation which has no definitive predictable outcomes (over the long term)?
Its really a conundrum, I think.
But clearly, the focus at the moment is developing ways to warn of impending quakes, which give adequate preparation time for those at risk.
Which all makes good sense. It'll probably never result in sufficient warning to save as many lives as the general public might expect, however.
Defensive building codes, tsunami warning technologies and tsunami protection barriers are really the best we've come up with so far.
I think it would be great if people understood the true nature of the phenomenon, from a more theoretical forecasting perspective, however. This resets expectations, which on the whole, I think, aren't generally particularly realistic.
Cheers