seismologists charged with manslaughter

[snas (Stuart)]

Well, I know this is not exactly astronomy but I thought it may be of interest to some here. As for the accuracy of the report, surely this is not true, but....we are talking about Italy.

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/i...-manslaughter/

note that the blog site this comes from is that of Steve Novella, neurosurgeon and a member of the board of James Randi Educational Foundation. ie: this is a reputable site

Stuart

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

Man o man, that is just wrong.
I now know why the BOM puts generic warning on all of it's Severe Storm warnings.

[supernova1965 (Warren)]

This is ludicrous the quickest surest way to stop any scientist from trying to predict any occurance of an earthquake or any other natural disaster is to Sue them or try to charge them with manslaughter for failing to predict it is not a exact science yet and may never be.

[Barrykgerdes]

I saw that report in the paper.
"Blame the weatherman has taken on a new meaning"

Can we try a class action from all the members who have bought new scopes only to have the skies close up immediately for weeks on end!

Barry

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

Originally Posted by Barrykgerdes

Can we try a class action from all the members who have bought new scopes only to have the skies close up immediately for weeks on end!

Barry

Now you're talking.

[snas (Stuart)]

Now you're talking.


Bah hah hah. JJJ you and I would be rich if we could claim for cloudy skies the way the weather has been in QLD the last 8 months or so

Stuart

[h0ughy (David)]

Originally Posted by Barrykgerdes

I saw that report in the paper.
"Blame the weatherman has taken on a new meaning"

Can we try a class action from all the members who have bought new scopes only to have the skies close up immediately for weeks on end!

Barry

NOOOOOOO thats not a good idea

i suppose the world is flat too

[sally1jack (Phil)]

So can we charge wayne swan with something for not predicting the "GFC"" worth thinking about

[mjc (Mark)]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...aughter-charge

<<Asked whether residents should just sit back and relax with a glass of wine, he said, "Absolutely, a Montepulciano doc [a Tuscan red wine]. This seems important."
The charges filed by the prosecution contends that this assessment "persuaded the victims to stay at home", La Repubblica newspaper reported.>>


<<Melandri added that the panel "never said, 'stay calm, there is no risk'".>>
See first quote.

Manslaughter charge no - rebuke - deserved. The former quote could (in my perception) have led to citizens not judging the risks appropriately. I believe it was unprofessional language.

They could not have known that an earthquake was eminent and they did not cause it - but they could have given (and may have given) the citizens a better metric of the risks than the first quote portrays but that quote may have dominated the citizens interpretation of the risks.

Mark C.

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

So if they'd told them that it was a high risk of an earthquake, what about those people who's blood pressure goes up with the anxiety of it all , and they have heart attacks.
If the quake didn't happen, they should be able to sue???????

If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd be thinking someone is trying to discredit the scientists.

[mjc (Mark)]

Originally Posted by jjjnettie

So if they'd told them that it was a high risk of an earthquake, what about those people who's blood pressure goes up with the anxiety of it all , and they have heart attacks.
If the quake didn't happen, they should be able to sue???????

If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd be thinking someone is trying to discredit the scientists.

But why do you ask that? Why is it that the alternative is that scientists should rate something as high risk when the risk is not well known. I suggest that when the risk is not clear that a scientist declare it to be so and neither advocate relaxing and staying at home drinking wine - nor advocate running to the hills. It's up to the individual citizen to respond according to their understanding of science or the faith in the understanding of people they trust to understand science (e.g. the scientists or science journalists).

The point is (as I see it) that that there was a threat of an earthquake and seismologists were a wee bit too blasé in that one comment - and that could have been influential.

Science is good - but bad science (or bad reporting of) is bad. No conspiracy.

We're off topic in terms of astronomy - but the discipline should be the same - report things as they are - as best we can measure.

Mark C.

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

Originally Posted by mjc

But why do you ask that? Why is it that the alternative is that scientists should rate something as high risk when the risk is not well known. I suggest that when the risk is not clear that a scientist declare it to be so and neither advocate relaxing and staying at home drinking wine - nor advocate running to the hills. It's up to the individual citizen to respond according to their understanding of science or the faith in the understanding of people they trust to understand science (e.g. the scientists or science journalists).

The point is (as I see it) that that there was a threat of an earthquake and seismologists were a wee bit too blasé in that one comment - and that could have been influential.

Science is good - but bad science (or bad reporting of) is bad. No conspiracy.

We're off topic in terms of astronomy - but the discipline should be the same - report things as they are - as best we can measure.

Mark C.

I was just turning their own unreasonable statements back onto themselves.
Just to show how stupid it is.
If I lived in an earthquake prone region, one would think a nice glass of red would ease the anxiety don't you think?

[space oddity]

Perhaps we should sue all those who voted for NSW's last state government? While we are at it, we should sue every German-they should have predicted that Hitler was going to be a bad egg.
I hope this stupid claim is laughed out of court. If they somehow win, the floodgates could open in to a free-for-all lawyer orgy .Quick, where is the barf bag.

[CraigS]

I'm bemused by the numbers of apparent scientists adding posts to this thread!
(Or is this just because this thread was posted in the Science Forum?)

People will often do what they were always going to do .. regardless of what the known information is, or how its presented. … So who cares what the scientists had to say about it all, (and how), when the outlook didn't look too good in the first place ?

If it was me, I would've done whatever it took, and moved to a safer bit of ground years before any quake hit. (Or built a close-to-100% quake proof house, and gotten real about accepting the remaining risk).

We are all in a inextricably locked into a struggle for survival against nature.

There is no information, formula or model in control of it all. It seems these folk may have transferred their 'faith' from one form to another, and been surprised when the new faith wasn't what they thought it was all about. Appeals to the 'Judge' subsequently tells me they are still thinking the same way .. and so it goes on, and on, and on ….
Who is in control of that vicious circle of thinking ?

Cheers

[Barrykgerdes]

It all gets down to the modern thinking.
When ever anything goes wrong is always a SEP

Barry

[mithrandir (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by CraigS

If it was me, I would've done whatever it took, and moved to a safer bit of ground years before any quake hit. (Or built a close-to-100% quake proof house, and gotten real about accepting the remaining risk).

We are all in a inextricably locked into a struggle for survival against nature.

If we all followed the "move somewhere else strategy" the countries along the plate boundaries, and the mid USA would be uninhabited.

Volcanic soils are highly productive which goes a long way to explaining why so many people live in those places. That includes the mid USA where the plume now under Yellowstone used to be under what is now the food bowl. The last glaciation planed the whole area flat and tornadoes seem to like the open country.

Originally Posted by Barrykgerdes

When ever anything goes wrong is always a SEP

... and everyone goes off to find a lawyer to sue them.

[Gem (Grant)]

Originally Posted by CraigS

I'm bemused by the numbers of apparent scientists adding posts to this thread!
(Or is this just because this thread was posted in the Science Forum?)

Not sure what you are trying to say by that comment... Are you trying to imply that you are a "real" scientist and the rest of us aren't? That is how the comment came across.

I'm confused...

[CraigS]

Originally Posted by Gem

Not sure what you are trying to say by that comment... Are you trying to imply that you are a "real" scientist and the rest of us aren't? That is how the comment came across.

I'm confused...

Hi Grant;

No … not trying to imply anything like that .. anyone can practice science.

Mostly, this forum is very quiet, with not so many posters.

Most posters in this thread, seem to be defending the scientists in the article, (which is fine by me ), ... hence it appears that those folk might be scientists, or supporters of science. ('Appears' = apparent).

In the past in this forum, mostly we find ourselves having to defend mainstream science and its nice to see others doing the same this time 'round in this thread. Also in the past, I have attempted to request support for the idea that we declare this forum to be about supporting mainstream science, but this was met with opposition from not-in-the-mainstream science folk.


We all define ourselves by the words we use in our posts .. at the end of the day, who or what our background is, doesn't really matter (from my perspective).

No offense intended. The opposite, actually.

Cheers

[Alchemy (Clive)]

The charges are a complete load of rubbish, 2 years ago, the then premier mr Brumby warned the day before black Saturday it could be the worst day on record.... And it was.... Not a whole load of people took much notice.

So from now on every time the slightest tremor, storm, hot day etc they will have to warn about the 1 in a million potential .

Oh then they will say authorities cried wolf too many times.

How many finance advisors saw the GFC coming.... A whole lot more predictable, don't see them being taken to task.

Complete rot, Italy is broke, you reckon they could spend their money better, than going after these guys. ( politics is probably why)

[Gem (Grant)]

Understood.