This is insane to bring criminal charges like this. Good grief, what next. Charging or suing the weatherman if he says it's going to be a sunny day and it rains? INSANITY!!!!!!
=========================================================
September 19, 2011
Scientists to go on trial over 2009 L’Aquila earthquake; face manslaughter charges
Nearly 4,000 scientists from around the world are supporting six Italian geophysicists and a government official who go on trial Tuesday for manslaughter for not predicting a devastating 2009 earthquake.
The 6.3 magnitude quake killed 309 people in the central Italian city of L’Aquila and towns nearby, injured more than 1,500 and destroyed 20,000 buildings.
Although the verdict could take months or even years, the case has already sent a chill through the scientific community.
more here......
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/1056276
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
| Quoting photopilot (Thread starter): |
Surprised that this was allowed to go through. Did nobody bother to tell them that we are not yet able to predict the size and location of an upcoming earthquake?
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
| Quoting photopilot (Thread starter): |
I don't really know all the details behind the manslaughter charge, though on the surface it sounds absolutely horrible and will certainly set a detrimental precedent, at least in Italy.
But this quote stood out (emphasis added):
Journalist Giustino Parisse, who lost a teenage son and daughter, is also a party to the lawsuit.
“Science did not do what it was required to do,” he told the BBC.
I guess someone should go have a word with science....maybe put it on probation or something.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
I guess Italians will have to do without science in the future then. Good luck to them!
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
I wonder if by the end of this trial the judge will declare that science must stay 500 meters away from Italy at all times...
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
As someone who has lived through THREE quakes of equal or greater magnitude in the past year, I have to make a major BS call on whoever is filing these charges. This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.
If anyone should face criminal charges it should perhaps be whoever is responsible for building codes that saw so much damage in an area known for being seismically active. By comparison take the city of Christchurch, while NZ is no stranger to earthquakes, the Christchurch/Canterbury region was considered relatively quiet seismically speaking prior to the Sept 4 Mag 7.1 quake. In that quake (40 km from the city and 11 km deep) there was no loss of life and moderate damage to buildings. The much more damaging Feb 22 quake while 'only' Mag 6.3 was very close at 10 km from the city centre and very shallow at 5 km. More significantly the Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) was one of the highest ever recorded at 2.05g at the epicentre and 1.85 in the city centre. While there was great damage and the loss of life was considerable, it is really surprising that the toll was not greater. The reason for this? NZ has one of the strictest building codes and this undoubtedly saved many lives.
Fact is earthquakes happen, they will continue to happen and no one can accurately predict them. Anyone who thinks otherwise is sadly in need of a major reality check.
If anyone should face criminal charges it should perhaps be whoever is responsible for building codes that saw so much damage in an area known for being seismically active. By comparison take the city of Christchurch, while NZ is no stranger to earthquakes, the Christchurch/Canterbury region was considered relatively quiet seismically speaking prior to the Sept 4 Mag 7.1 quake. In that quake (40 km from the city and 11 km deep) there was no loss of life and moderate damage to buildings. The much more damaging Feb 22 quake while 'only' Mag 6.3 was very close at 10 km from the city centre and very shallow at 5 km. More significantly the Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) was one of the highest ever recorded at 2.05g at the epicentre and 1.85 in the city centre. While there was great damage and the loss of life was considerable, it is really surprising that the toll was not greater. The reason for this? NZ has one of the strictest building codes and this undoubtedly saved many lives.
Fact is earthquakes happen, they will continue to happen and no one can accurately predict them. Anyone who thinks otherwise is sadly in need of a major reality check.
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
-
- janmnastami
- Posts: 379
- Joined:
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
The whole story is completely different.
The seven men are not accused for not predicting the earthquake, they're accused because, according to the prosecutors, their analysis was superficial and inaccurate. L'Aquila was object of hundreds of small earthquakes before the "big one"; the commission had a meeting of just an hour before assuring the public that there wasn't any real risk.
The seven men are not accused for not predicting the earthquake, they're accused because, according to the prosecutors, their analysis was superficial and inaccurate. L'Aquila was object of hundreds of small earthquakes before the "big one"; the commission had a meeting of just an hour before assuring the public that there wasn't any real risk.
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
| Quoting photopilot (Thread starter): sent a chill through the scientific community. |
Indeed.
| Quoting lewis (Reply 1): Surprised that this was allowed to go through. Did nobody bother to tell them that we are not yet able to predict the size and location of an upcoming earthquake? |
This has been in all the papers.
| Quoting EDICHC (Reply 5): If anyone should face criminal charges it should perhaps be whoever is responsible for building codes that saw so much damage in an area known for being seismically active. By comparison take the city of Christchurch, while NZ is no stranger to earthquakes, the Christchurch/Canterbury region was considered relatively quiet seismically speaking prior to the Sept 4 Mag 7.1 quake. In that quake (40 km from the city and 11 km deep) there was no loss of life and moderate damage to buildings. The much more damaging Feb 22 quake while 'only' Mag 6.3 was very close at 10 km from the city centre and very shallow at 5 km. More significantly the Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) was one of the highest ever recorded at 2.05g at the epicentre and 1.85 in the city centre. While there was great damage and the loss of life was considerable, it is really surprising that the toll was not greater. The reason for this? NZ has one of the strictest building codes and this undoubtedly saved many lives. |
Even if you could predict them, you still need suitable building codes. So either way it is not the Geewhiz* folk.
*Common term for Geophysicists from the less numerate of us.
-
- Sepultallica
- Posts: 217
- Joined:
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
Who does the translation of the articles from Italian to English? Bunch of clowns.
Exactly.
I live near L'Aquila (100kms away) and the case isn't about condemning the scientists for not predicting the major earthquake that happened in 2007. As janmnastami said, its going after them for having denied the likelihood of a major earthquake (albeit in a fairly callous and dismissive way) inspite of the fact that there were many major tremors just prior to it. Essentially they are being asked to justify their not having erred on the side of caution, given the severity of the preceding warning signs.
The same type of tribunal was set up shortly after the Vajont Dam Disaster of 1963 whereby the engineers and geologists of Vajont were called to account for their failure to take adequate measures in warning the town of Longarone of the potential for mudslides near the damwall, given their prior knowledge of the area's geology AND the occurrence of other smaller landslides shortly before the 'Big One' occurred.
In any case, how does one actually prove accountability here? The only ones to honestly win anything in this case, will be the lawyers (making mad cash moniez yo).
| Quoting janmnastami (Reply 6): The whole story is completely different. The seven men are not accused for not predicting the earthquake, they're accused because, according to the prosecutors, their analysis was superficial and inaccurate. L'Aquila was object of hundreds of small earthquakes before the "big one"; the commission had a meeting of just an hour before assuring the public that there wasn't any real risk. |
Exactly.
I live near L'Aquila (100kms away) and the case isn't about condemning the scientists for not predicting the major earthquake that happened in 2007. As janmnastami said, its going after them for having denied the likelihood of a major earthquake (albeit in a fairly callous and dismissive way) inspite of the fact that there were many major tremors just prior to it. Essentially they are being asked to justify their not having erred on the side of caution, given the severity of the preceding warning signs.
The same type of tribunal was set up shortly after the Vajont Dam Disaster of 1963 whereby the engineers and geologists of Vajont were called to account for their failure to take adequate measures in warning the town of Longarone of the potential for mudslides near the damwall, given their prior knowledge of the area's geology AND the occurrence of other smaller landslides shortly before the 'Big One' occurred.
In any case, how does one actually prove accountability here? The only ones to honestly win anything in this case, will be the lawyers (making mad cash moniez yo).
Chinokanganwa idemo; Chitsiga hachikanganwe. ✈
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
| Quoting SepulTALLICA (Reply 8): As janmnastami said, its going after them for having denied the likelihood of a major earthquake (albeit in a fairly callous and dismissive way) inspite of the fact that there were many major tremors just prior to it. Essentially they are being asked to justify their not having erred on the side of caution, given the severity of the preceding warning signs. |
But they did not deny the possibility.
According to the minutes of the now infamous March 31, Boschi was asked if the seismic rumblings could flatten the city as in 1703 and replied it was “unlikely, but the possibility cannot be totally excluded.”
They did not exclude it and it happened. No????
-
- sprout5199
- Posts: 1681
- Joined:
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
And I thought the court system here in the states was screwed up. Guess what Italy, no scientist will EVER make a prediction about earthquakes again in your country, find out the hard way.
How STUPID.
Dan in Jupiter
PS there will be a MAJOR earthquake in Italy, I just dont know when---you have been warned.
How STUPID.
Dan in Jupiter
PS there will be a MAJOR earthquake in Italy, I just dont know when---you have been warned.
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
| Quoting sprout5199 (Reply 10): PS there will be a MAJOR earthquake in Italy, I just dont know when---you have been warned. |
Now you're going to get prosecuted if there ISN'T a major earthquake!
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
| Quoting SepulTALLICA (Reply 8): |
To play the "devil's advocate" now, no scientist can predict a major one even if there are many small earthquakes around the area. In Greece, or even LA where I now live, there are constant small-scale earthquakes that do not end up being followed by a bigger, catastrophic one. If those scientists had come out and said that a large-scale earthquake was imminent - without concrete proof, causing mass evacuations in various locations-since epicenter cannot be predicted, there would be people that would sue them for giving out a false alarm, causing panic, disrupting businesses etc. The science is just not there yet.
| Quoting SepulTALLICA (Reply 8): The same type of tribunal was set up shortly after the Vajont Dam Disaster of 1963 whereby the engineers and geologists of Vajont were called to account for their failure to take adequate measures in warning the town of Longarone of the potential for mudslides near the damwall, given their prior knowledge of the area's geology AND the occurrence of other smaller landslides shortly before the 'Big One' occurred. |
Geology in terms of predicting erosion based on things you can see and measure is a completely different story. You can't compare it to scientists working with earthquakes since there is not an accurate way to predict them. In the case of the earthquake, they could have gone either way, probably their experience up to that time led them to conclude that no big earthquake would follow. They were wrong, but not guilty of something.
RE: Murder Charges For Failing To Predict Earthquake
Just plain silly...
Were they indicted by name or as Medicine Men?
Were they indicted by name or as Medicine Men?
harder than woodpecker lips...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: aerosreenivas, ArchGuy1, Baidu [Spider], bpatus297, JJJ, N965UW, petertenthije, StarAC17 and 31 guests