Seismologists Tried for Manslaughter for Not Predicting Earthquake

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earthquake
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the legal trial of Italian seismologists for manslaughter due to their failure to predict the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake, which resulted in significant loss of life. Participants explore the implications of accountability in scientific prediction, the nature of earthquake forecasting, and the broader cultural context of blame in society.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express disbelief at the trial, suggesting that predicting earthquakes is inherently uncertain and beyond human control.
  • Others argue that the legal action reflects a broader issue of blame culture, where responsibility is misplaced on individuals who cannot prevent natural disasters.
  • A few participants mention that while seismologists may not predict earthquakes accurately, there could be expectations regarding warning protocols that they might have failed to execute.
  • Some contributions highlight the inadequacy of building standards in earthquake-prone areas as a significant factor in the disaster's impact.
  • There are humorous remarks about the absurdity of suing seismologists and the potential for extending blame to other entities, such as "the earth" or physicists.
  • One participant recalls past instances of earthquakes in L'Aquila, suggesting a historical context that complicates the current legal situation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that predicting earthquakes is a complex and uncertain endeavor. However, there are competing views on the appropriateness of holding seismologists accountable, with some advocating for accountability and others viewing the trial as unjust.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the legal case may stem from a misunderstanding of the seismologists' responsibilities and the nature of earthquake prediction. There are references to historical earthquakes in L'Aquila and concerns about building standards that may have contributed to the disaster's severity.

  • #31
Evo said:
This is beyond absurd
I'll say.

I thought it was an April fool's joke when I opened the thread
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #32
. . . particularly with regard to information the committee may have had about which buildings were more likely to crumble.
Well, unless they are structural engineers, they are not responsible for the buildings, or the building codes, or the crappy construction. All the seismologist can say, is that we've had earthquakes, and we will have more. They cannot predict future earthquakes with high levels of certainty.
 
  • #33
They want someone to blame so that they won't feel guilty about their decisions. But this is outrageous. Good point about the seismologists not being engineers.
 
  • #34
Astronuc said:
Well, unless they are structural engineers, they are not responsible for the buildings, or the building codes, or the crappy construction. All the seismologist can say, is that we've had earthquakes, and we will have more. They cannot predict future earthquakes with high levels of certainty.

Excellent point,

When China had earthquake they went after structural engineers .. here, I wonder if all this trail is an idea coming from structural engineers :biggrin:
 
  • #35
All the seismologist can say, is that we've had earthquakes, and we will have more.
Of course I realize in the context the above quote is correct but it makes it sound like a third grade dropout could be a seismologist. Haha. Best laugh I've had on here for a while.
 
  • #36
Averagesupernova said:
Of course I realize in the context the above quote is correct but it makes it sound like a third grade dropout could be a seismologist. Haha. Best laugh I've had on here for a while.

I think their role is very important for long term policies but I don't understand why the heck they were doing meeting minutes and what is the purpose of those.
 
  • #37
The minutes of a meeting are like notes of what was discussed during the meeting--if that is the context in which it was used.
 

Similar threads

What evidence supports the theory of a hollow Earth?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
61K