4 ms·

Italy Finds Scientists Guilty Of Manslaughter For 2009 Earthquake Forecast

9 points by septerr 14y ago

denzil_correa 14y ago
Haven't heard something more stupid in a long, long time.
- bluedanieru 14y ago
  I envy you, and the species you belong to, and the planet you live on.
- retrogradeorbit 14y ago
  You're statement is actually much more stupid than the verdict. I can tell you have not studied law. You should start with Babylonian law... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi Fortunately for humanity, such principles have been the foundation of civilisation since the time of Babylon. What you think is stupid is actually a part of the foundation of civil society. I think the loss of principles such as these are a big part of the rot in our society. Take for instance Wall Street. Once there is a disconnection between the actions and behavior of people in positions of influence and authority and the consequences of that behavior, you get an economic moral hazard and the implicit license to do and say whatever pays your pockets for that day, ignoring all the downside risk. The correct answer the scientists should have given at the time is "yes, there may be an earthquake. Or there might not be. We can't tell." Not just saying what the politicians wanted to hear. Not just putting out a statement to placate people and make them feel safe. That is certainly negligent. This is not an attack on science. This is holding authority to account for their negligence. Personally I think the case should extend into the negligence of politicians who forced the scientists to release the statement as well. Also negligent may be the builders or building code authorities who allowed such fragile buildings to be built in a high quake area. There is more than one negligent party here. Also not covered in the article is the fact they arrested the non-scientist who made the prediction and locked him up, because he was driving around trying to convince people to relocate before the earthquake hit.
  - denzil_correa 14y ago
    > The correct answer the scientists should have given at the time is "yes, there may be an earthquake. Or there might not be. We can't tell." Not just saying what the politicians wanted to hear. Not just putting out a statement to placate people and make them feel safe. That is certainly negligent. This is not an attack on science. This is holding authority to account for their negligence. Please post and tell us what the scientists said with authentic appropriate references.
    - retrogradeorbit 14y ago
      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. http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html
      - denzil_correa 14y ago
        Selective amnesia? Here's another and more important snip from the article. The minutes of the 31 March meeting, though, reveal that at no point did any of the scientists say that there was "no danger" of a big quake. "A major earthquake in the area is unlikely but cannot be ruled out," Boschi said. Selvaggi is quoted as saying that "in recent times some recent earthquakes have been preceded by minor shocks days or weeks beforehand, but on the other hand many seismic swarms did not result in a major event". Eva added that "because L'Aquila is in a high-risk zone it is impossible to say with certainty that there will be no large earthquake". Summing up the meeting, Barberi said, "there is no reason to believe that a swarm of minor events is a sure predictor of a major shock". All the participants agreed that buildings in the area should be monitored urgently, to assess their capacity to sustain a major shock.

9 points by septerr 14y ago

denzil_correa 14y ago

Haven't heard something more stupid in a long, long time.

bluedanieru 14y ago
I envy you, and the species you belong to, and the planet you live on.
retrogradeorbit 14y ago
You're statement is actually much more stupid than the verdict. I can tell you have not studied law. You should start with Babylonian law... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi Fortunately for humanity, such principles have been the foundation of civilisation since the time of Babylon. What you think is stupid is actually a part of the foundation of civil society. I think the loss of principles such as these are a big part of the rot in our society. Take for instance Wall Street. Once there is a disconnection between the actions and behavior of people in positions of influence and authority and the consequences of that behavior, you get an economic moral hazard and the implicit license to do and say whatever pays your pockets for that day, ignoring all the downside risk. The correct answer the scientists should have given at the time is "yes, there may be an earthquake. Or there might not be. We can't tell." Not just saying what the politicians wanted to hear. Not just putting out a statement to placate people and make them feel safe. That is certainly negligent. This is not an attack on science. This is holding authority to account for their negligence. Personally I think the case should extend into the negligence of politicians who forced the scientists to release the statement as well. Also negligent may be the builders or building code authorities who allowed such fragile buildings to be built in a high quake area. There is more than one negligent party here. Also not covered in the article is the fact they arrested the non-scientist who made the prediction and locked him up, because he was driving around trying to convince people to relocate before the earthquake hit.
- denzil_correa 14y ago
  > The correct answer the scientists should have given at the time is "yes, there may be an earthquake. Or there might not be. We can't tell." Not just saying what the politicians wanted to hear. Not just putting out a statement to placate people and make them feel safe. That is certainly negligent. This is not an attack on science. This is holding authority to account for their negligence. Please post and tell us what the scientists said with authentic appropriate references.
  - retrogradeorbit 14y ago
    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. http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100622/full/465992a.html
    - denzil_correa 14y ago
      Selective amnesia? Here's another and more important snip from the article. The minutes of the 31 March meeting, though, reveal that at no point did any of the scientists say that there was "no danger" of a big quake. "A major earthquake in the area is unlikely but cannot be ruled out," Boschi said. Selvaggi is quoted as saying that "in recent times some recent earthquakes have been preceded by minor shocks days or weeks beforehand, but on the other hand many seismic swarms did not result in a major event". Eva added that "because L'Aquila is in a high-risk zone it is impossible to say with certainty that there will be no large earthquake". Summing up the meeting, Barberi said, "there is no reason to believe that a swarm of minor events is a sure predictor of a major shock". All the participants agreed that buildings in the area should be monitored urgently, to assess their capacity to sustain a major shock.