Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Predict earthquakes correct or else ....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Predict earthquakes correct or else ....



    Six Italian scientists and an ex-government official are sentenced to six years in prison over the deadly 2009 earthquake in L'Aquila.


    L'Aquila quake: Italy scientists guilty of manslaughter

    Six Italian scientists and an ex-government official have been sentenced to six years in prison over the 2009 deadly earthquake in L'Aquila.

    A regional court found them guilty of multiple manslaughter.

    Prosecutors said the defendants gave a falsely reassuring statement before the quake, while the defence maintained there was no way to predict major quakes.

    The 6.3 magnitude quake devastated the city and killed 309 people.

    Many smaller tremors had rattled the area in the months before the quake that destroyed much of the historic centre.

    It took Judge Marco Billi slightly more than four hours to reach the verdict in the trial, which had begun in September 2011.

    Lawyers have said that they will appeal against the sentence. As convictions are not definitive until after at least one level of appeal in Italy, it is unlikely any of the defendants will immediately face prison.

    'Alarming' case

    Survivor Giustino Parisse spoke to Newsnight in 2011

    The seven - all members of the National Commission for the Forecast and Prevention of Major Risks - were accused of having provided "inexact, incomplete and contradictory" information about the danger of the tremors felt ahead of 6 April 2009 quake, Italian media report.

    In addition to their sentences, all have been barred from ever holding public office again, La Repubblica reports.

    In the closing statement, the prosecution quoted one of its witnesses, whose father died in the earthquake.

    It described how Guido Fioravanti had called his mother at about 11pm on the night of the earthquake - straight after the first tremor.

    "I remember the fear in her voice. On other occasions they would have fled but that night, with my father, they repeated to themselves what the risk commission had said. And they stayed."
    'Hasty sentence'

    The judge also ordered the defendants to pay court costs and damages.

    Reacting to the verdict against him, Bernardo De Bernardinis said: "I believe myself to be innocent before God and men."

    "My life from tomorrow will change," the former vice-president of the Civil Protection Agency's technical department said, according to La Repubblica.

    "But, if I am judged by all stages of the judicial process to be guilty, I will accept my responsibility."

    Another, Enzo Boschi, described himself as "dejected" and "desperate" after the verdict was read.

    "I thought I would have been acquitted. I still don't understand what I was convicted of."

    One of the lawyers for the defence, Marcello Petrelli, described the sentences as "hasty" and "incomprehensible".

    'Inherently unpredictable'

    The case has alarmed many in the scientific community, who feel science itself has been put on trial.

    Some scientists have warned that the case might set a damaging precedent, deterring experts from sharing their knowledge with the public for fear of being targeted in lawsuits, the BBC's Alan Johnston in Rome reports.

    Among those convicted were some of Italy's most prominent and internationally respected seismologists and geological experts.

    Earlier, more than 5,000 scientists signed an open letter to Italian President Giorgio Napolitano in support of the group in the dock.

    After the verdict was announced, David Rothery, of the UK's Open University, said earthquakes were "inherently unpredictable".

    "The best estimate at the time was that the low-level seismicity was not likely to herald a bigger quake, but there are no certainties in this game," he said.

    Malcolm Sperrin, director of medical physics at the UK's Royal Berkshire Hospital said that the sentence was surprising and could set a worrying precedent.

    "If the scientific community is to be penalised for making predictions that turn out to be incorrect, or for not accurately predicting an event that subsequently occurs, then scientific endeavour will be restricted to certainties only and the benefits that are associated with findings from medicine to physics will be stalled."
    With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

    Steven Weinberg

  • #2
    Seems like an inefficient way to permanently disband that Commission. Oh wait, Italy. Never mind.
    Pool Manager - Lombardi Handicappers League - An NFL Pick 'Em Pool

    https://youtu.be/HLNhPMQnWu4

    Comment


    • #3
      I wonder if this is being slightly misrepresented in the Western media (and no, I don't consider modern Italy terribly western; and being of Italian heritage I feel a right to hold that belief). Reading between the lines I see something to the effect of 'Italian scientists tell everyone not to worry, you will be safe; then they all die'. Not correctly predicting an earthquake is one thing, but if they gave overly-reassuring statements despite earthquakes being inherently unpredictable, it's not necessarily entirely unreasonable that they have some degree of guilt here for what is essentially fraudulent statements. There are plenty of science-types who over-represent the scope of their knowledge and its accuracy...
      <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
      I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by snoopy369 View Post
        Reading between the lines I see something to the effect of 'Italian scientists tell everyone not to worry, you will be safe; then they all die'.
        That's kind of what I saw as well. One thing to say, this is an unpredictable science but we don't see any significant activity right now, and another to say, don't worry, no earthquake will happen.

        Here is some interesting other info:

        Six scientists and government official given six years in jail for underestimating risks of L’Aquila earthquake in 2009.


        One of them even got carried away and said that the small tremors were a good thing, because they would dissipate the energy and make it unlikely for a major earthquake to come."

        The then vice-director of Italy's Civil Protection department, Bernardo De Bernardinis, told reporters the seismic activity in L'Aquila posed "no danger" and advised residents to relax with a glass of wine.
        So perhaps some responsibility to be had (but not 6 years of jail worth - in fact the prosecution just asked for 4 years and I'm sure they weren't expecting to even get that).
        “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
        - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

        Comment


        • #5
          Let me see if I get you guys right - 9 out of 10 times the glass of wine is the correct answer, but after this verdict, they have to cry wolf 10 out of 10 times to ensure that they aren't prosecuted. I bet that they will end up with charges on disrupting socitety unnessecary, spreading panic etc. Nice catch 22
          With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

          Steven Weinberg

          Comment


          • #6
            BC, I'm not saying that at all.

            There's a massive difference between saying "Hmm, those tremors don't seem to be related to a massive earthquake, but who knows", and "Oh, don't worry, those tremors are no problem." The latter is dangerously misleading - and exactly what we don't want public servants doing (acting as if they know more than they do). It's basically the opposite of what they're arguing before the court - they may well have claimed to be sure of something that they couldn't be sure of.

            Common people do not know how sure scientists can be of their information; so when the scientists, particularly public servants who are also scientists, claim something in a tone that sounds as if they are sure of it, people believe them and take actions based on it. It's sort of like if your stock advisor told you 'Don't worry, that stock there is a sure thing, put all your money in it' and then it went bankrupt the next day. Sure, the stock market is always unpredictable - but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a legal and ethical responsibility to remind you of that, and to not make misleadingly strong 'forward looking statements'.

            Honestly their biggest defense should've been that they're in Italy; nobody trusts the government there
            <Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
            I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.

            Comment


            • #7
              Well, this is dumb. "Do the impossible or I will send you to jail!"
              Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

              Comment


              • #8
                About damn time!
                “As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
                "Capitalism ho!"

                Comment


                • #9
                  If we make prophets of scientists, people may become a little displeased if their prophecies do not come true.
                  Last edited by Zevico; October 22, 2012, 21:36.
                  "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    WT.... is wrong with Italy? That's insane!
                    I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                    - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      So...will this apply to meteorologists? Can we jail them when it rains or snows?
                      There's nothing wrong with the dream, my friend, the problem lies with the dreamer.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Uncle Sparky View Post
                        So...will this apply to meteorologists? Can we jail them when it rains or snows?
                        If the science is 'settled', why not?
                        "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Uncle Sparky View Post
                          So...will this apply to meteorologists? Can we jail them when it rains or snows?
                          Maybe we should just let the farmers sue them.
                          I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                          - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I would love to be able to sue weathermen.

                            Anything to get those useless people off the television.
                            Last edited by pchang; October 25, 2012, 11:36.
                            “It is no use trying to 'see through' first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To 'see through' all things is the same as not to see.”

                            ― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X