4 ms·

This is unbelievable. Is there anywhere to find all of the facts? This article doesn't give background info. It took some digging to find that indeed the sci

This is unbelievable. Is there anywhere to find all of the facts? This article doesn't give background info. It took some digging to find that indeed the scientists had given a reassuring statement, though it had an expected but-we-cant-be-sure admonition, beforehand.

mturmon 14y ago
Here is a story with a good background on the events. It's more complex than you would guess: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html In particular, at least one member of the civil defense bureaucracy went out of his way to say there was a consensus that there was no danger (even though there was not such a strong consensus): "Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardinis and Barberi, acting president of the committee, held a press conference in L'Aquila, where De Bernardinis told reporters that "the scientific community tells us there is no danger, because there is an ongoing discharge of energy. The situation looks favorable". No other members of the committee were at the press conference." There should be consequences for such grave misrepresentations. I was surprised to see that the whole committee is being punished, though, and not just the official who misrepresented the state of knowledge. Maybe, as some other commenters have noted, this is part of a ritual of condemnation at the first judicial level and absolution upon appeal to the second or third level.
- engtech 14y ago
  Does anyone understand the title of Nature article? "Italy puts seismology in the dock" ? is it meant to be "in the dark" ?
  - arscan 14y ago
    It means to put on trial.
  - mikeash 14y ago
    "In the dock" means "on trial". http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/in+the+dock.html http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/in+the+dock.htm...
  - kirian 14y ago
    "in the dock" is an idiom meaning to be put on trial.
  - michaelhoffman 14y ago
    Definition of DOCK : the place in a criminal court where a prisoner stands or sits during trial — in the dock : on trial http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dock http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dock Commonly used in British/Commonwealth English, and Nature is based in London. I don't think I've ever heard it used in American English.
    - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
      "On the stand" would be the equivalent US idiom.
      - michaelhoffman 14y ago
        Not really, because any witness goes on the stand, whether they are a party to the case or not. Saying someone is "on the stand" does not mean they are a criminal defendant. Only criminal defendants are in the dock.
      - dmckeon 14y ago
        US and UK court idioms vary widely - a US defendant would be "on trial" while a UK accused would be "in the dock" Any witness would "on the stand" including a defendant who is called as a witness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_stand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_stand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtroom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtroom
  - mc32 14y ago
    The dock is where the person on trial sits. I.e put seismology on trial.
  - drone 14y ago
    It's an idiom, often used to express "putting on trial".
  - engtech 14y ago
    Thank you for the clarification, guys. I hadn't realized Nature was British/UK.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- Uchikoma 14y ago
  Your "at least" wording shows bias. There was one.
  - mturmon 14y ago
    Not really. I worded it that way because I was not sure if other civil defense bureaucrats might have made pronouncements. The article mentions only the one, but it does not claim to be comprehensive.
lbolla 14y ago
This is way more complex than it might appear. Italian speakers can watch this movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rROgB5QMgHs&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rROgB5QMgHs&feature=playe... It shows a telephone conversation between the chief of "Protezione Civile" (responsible to react and intervene in case of catastrophes) Guido Bertolaso and a politician in the region where the earthquake happened, Daniela Stati. Bertolaso first tells Stati that they did badly by saying the media that they didn't expect more earthquakes (as they did the day before, after a small shake that did no damage). Bertolaso added that he would fix this error with the media and send the most important scientists he knows to "quiet down" the population, upset by the previous message and by the continuous shakes. The accusation is that scientists didn't actually report what they knew, but they went in front of the media to "quiet" down the population. Unfortunately, the day after the big earthquake happened and 309 people died.

mturmon 14y ago

Here is a story with a good background on the events. It's more complex than you would guess: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html In particular, at least one member of the civil defense bureaucracy went out of his way to say there was a consensus that there was no danger (even though there was not such a strong consensus): "Immediately after that meeting, De Bernardinis and Barberi, acting president of the committee, held a press conference in L'Aquila, where De Bernardinis told reporters that "the scientific community tells us there is no danger, because there is an ongoing discharge of energy. The situation looks favorable". No other members of the committee were at the press conference." There should be consequences for such grave misrepresentations. I was surprised to see that the whole committee is being punished, though, and not just the official who misrepresented the state of knowledge. Maybe, as some other commenters have noted, this is part of a ritual of condemnation at the first judicial level and absolution upon appeal to the second or third level.

engtech 14y ago
Does anyone understand the title of Nature article? "Italy puts seismology in the dock" ? is it meant to be "in the dark" ?
- arscan 14y ago
  It means to put on trial.
- mikeash 14y ago
  "In the dock" means "on trial". http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/in+the+dock.html http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/in+the+dock.htm...
- kirian 14y ago
  "in the dock" is an idiom meaning to be put on trial.
- michaelhoffman 14y ago
  Definition of DOCK : the place in a criminal court where a prisoner stands or sits during trial — in the dock : on trial http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dock http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dock Commonly used in British/Commonwealth English, and Nature is based in London. I don't think I've ever heard it used in American English.
  - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
    "On the stand" would be the equivalent US idiom.
    - michaelhoffman 14y ago
      Not really, because any witness goes on the stand, whether they are a party to the case or not. Saying someone is "on the stand" does not mean they are a criminal defendant. Only criminal defendants are in the dock.
    - dmckeon 14y ago
      US and UK court idioms vary widely - a US defendant would be "on trial" while a UK accused would be "in the dock" Any witness would "on the stand" including a defendant who is called as a witness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_stand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_stand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtroom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtroom
- mc32 14y ago
  The dock is where the person on trial sits. I.e put seismology on trial.
- drone 14y ago
  It's an idiom, often used to express "putting on trial".
- engtech 14y ago
  Thank you for the clarification, guys. I hadn't realized Nature was British/UK.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
Uchikoma 14y ago
Your "at least" wording shows bias. There was one.
- mturmon 14y ago
  Not really. I worded it that way because I was not sure if other civil defense bureaucrats might have made pronouncements. The article mentions only the one, but it does not claim to be comprehensive.

lbolla 14y ago

This is way more complex than it might appear. Italian speakers can watch this movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rROgB5QMgHs&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rROgB5QMgHs&feature=playe... It shows a telephone conversation between the chief of "Protezione Civile" (responsible to react and intervene in case of catastrophes) Guido Bertolaso and a politician in the region where the earthquake happened, Daniela Stati. Bertolaso first tells Stati that they did badly by saying the media that they didn't expect more earthquakes (as they did the day before, after a small shake that did no damage). Bertolaso added that he would fix this error with the media and send the most important scientists he knows to "quiet down" the population, upset by the previous message and by the continuous shakes. The accusation is that scientists didn't actually report what they knew, but they went in front of the media to "quiet" down the population. Unfortunately, the day after the big earthquake happened and 309 people died.