Italian court convicts 7 for no quake warning

[CaptainJaneway]

All i have to say to this is WTF???!!!

http://news.yahoo.com/italian-court-...153822654.html

[lordlundar]

Yeah I had posted about the original charges. It's insane that they were actually convicted though.

[CaptainJaneway]

I thought i had seen that on here.

People are crazy that is all i have to say. I am not sure how one is to predict a earthquake or an eruption of a volcano or any other natural diasters. THere are warning signs sometimes but even then it takes a long while before something actually happens.

The only thing i can think of, if you watch the wild life. They usually know whats up.

[HYHYBT]

So: in that line of work, you are required under penalty of law to do what is known to be, at least for now, impossible. Good luck getting sane people to take the job.

[gremcint]

Actually my understanding is that they are in a quake prone area and specifically told people there wouldn't be a quake. People died because they didn't prepare.

At least that's the arguement. I don't like the precedent, they were wrong, that's all.

[bara]

It is impossible to predict earthquakes. While there are generally signs that it may be ready to 'blow', its like predicting exactly where and when a tornado or hurricane is going to strike.

You can tell that the conditions are right, but that's all you can do.

Live in earthquake, mudslide, hurricane/tornado, flood plains and I am afraid I can have little sympathy for you. I will mourn the loss as I would the victims of any tragedy. But to some how hold scientist responsible for something they cannot possibly predict is criminal.

[Rapscallion]

I bet Italian weathermen are shitting themselves.

Rapscallion

[draco664]

So: in that line of work, you are required under penalty of law to do what is known to be, at least for now, impossible. Good luck getting sane people to take the job.

No. It sounds like you've been listening to the soundbites and not following the story.

It is impossible to predict earthquakes. While there are generally signs that it may be ready to 'blow', its like predicting exactly where and when a tornado or hurricane is going to strike.

You can tell that the conditions are right, but that's all you can do.

Live in earthquake, mudslide, hurricane/tornado, flood plains and I am afraid I can have little sympathy for you. I will mourn the loss as I would the victims of any tragedy. But to some how hold scientist responsible for something they cannot possibly predict is criminal.

They are not holding them responsible for failing to predict an earthquake. They are being held responsible because a scientist did predict it, and they went on record to downplay the risks - even suggesting that the residents should relax with a nice bottle of wine. (Apparently, they had been feuding with the scientist who made the prediction)


Check out this link

From the Article

On March 31, 2009, in L’Aquila, six days before a deadly magnitude 6.3 earthquake killed 308 people, Bernardo De Bernardinis, then deputy chief of Italy’s Civil Protection Department , and six scientists who were members of a scientific advisory body to the Department (the Major Risks Committee) participated in an official meeting and press conference in response to public concerns about short-term earthquake risks.

The public concerns were the result of at least two factors: One was the recent occurrence of a number of small earthquakes. A second factor was the prediction of a pending large earthquake issued by Gioacchino Giuliani, who was not a seismologist and worked as a technician at Italy’s National Institute of Nuclear Physics.

The deputy chief and scientists held a short one-hour meeting and then a press conference, during which they downplayed the possibility of an earthquake. For instance, De Bernardinis went so far as to claim that the recent tremors actually reduced earthquake risks: “[T]he scientific community continues to confirm to me that in fact it is a favourable situation, that is to say a continuous discharge of energy.”[1] When asked directly by the media if the public should sit back and enjoy a glass of wine rather than worry about earthquakes, De Bernardinis acted as sommelier: “Absolutely, absolutely a Montepulciano doc. This seems important.”

...

Media reports of the Major Risk Committee meeting and thesubsequent press conference seem to focus on countering the views offered by Mr. Giuliani, whom they viewed as unscientific and had been battling in preceding months. Thus, one interpretation of the Major Risks Committee’s statements is that they were not specifically about earthquakes at all, but instead were about which individuals the public should view as legitimate and authoritative and which they should not.

So once again, it's the headline that gets people worked up, but when you get the details, it's suddenly nothing like what you thought.

I bet Italian weathermen are shitting themselves.

Rapscallion

Why? No one dies when they get the weather forecast wrong.

[Panacea]

So: in that line of work, you are required under penalty of law to do what is known to be, at least for now, impossible. Good luck getting sane people to take the job.

People are already quitting over it, in Italy.

They are not holding them responsible for failing to predict an earthquake. They are being held responsible because a scientist did predict it, and they went on record to downplay the risks - even suggesting that the residents should relax with a nice bottle of wine. (Apparently, they had been feuding with the scientist who made the prediction)

Even taking that into consideration, what this really tells us is the public needs to be better educated about earthquakes and the limitations of predicting them. Personally, if I were really that worried, I wouldn't have taken a suggestion to drink wine to heart.

Why? No one dies when they get the weather forecast wrong.

No, but they could. A forecaster could predict sunny skies, and someone could die in a flash flood when a sudden storm pops up. Should we criminally charge the forecaster?

In the Netherlands, one guy wants the government to fine forecasters when they get it wrong: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...forecasts.html

That's just insane.

[Nekojin]

It's worth noting that the original prediction of the earthquake was made by a technician (not a seismologist), using methodology that is known to be flawed. That's why the Institute went out of its way to oppose it and declare that the prediction was wrong.

The fact that a major earthquake did end up happening close to the time and place predicted by the non-seismologist in the first place is nothing more than a coincidence - he got lucky. Stopped clocks, and all of that.

Sadly, having watched a similar phenomenon happen in gambling, people who end up being right for the wrong reason tend to double down on their conviction that they were never wrong in the first place.

[TheHuckster]

In the Netherlands, one guy wants the government to fine forecasters when they get it wrong: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...forecasts.html

That's just insane.

Because we all know weather forecasters are really all just half-assing it and if you threaten them with financial punishment, they'll all "shape up."