Comments on: Are Seismologists Responsible for People's Deaths in an Earthquake? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/ Mon, 22 Apr 2013 21:34:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Ravi http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27391 Ravi Sun, 05 Jun 2011 13:08:34 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27391 The only reason for chain earthquakes is at www.avasaramda1.blogspot.com Thanking you, yours Ravi The only reason for chain earthquakes is at http://www.avasaramda1.blogspot.com
Thanking you,
yours Ravi

]]> By: scott http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27390 scott Thu, 02 Jun 2011 21:31:15 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27390 The real problem is an ignorant, superstitious public, the masses that flip around between prayers and science and have little clue to goings on of the planet (does not matter where they live). Also, people need someone to blame, no matter what it is, its a form of closure the ego needs. Quake prediction - down to the weeks, days and hours is a dangerous game that I think is futile to win and dangerous to try to predict. Best to keep it like this (to protect your ass, I am sure I am leaving something out) - "Sometime in the future, be it next week, the next few years or few decades, there is a possible likelyhood that there will be a large quake that might cause injury and death due to infrastructure failure. At any time there could be small quakes that might or might not relieve stresses and might or might not predict the coming of a larger event, so everyone should be prepared for a quake as they would any possible disaster that can strike at any time" The real problem is an ignorant, superstitious public, the masses that flip around between prayers and science and have little clue to goings on of the planet (does not matter where they live). Also, people need someone to blame, no matter what it is, its a form of closure the ego needs.

Quake prediction – down to the weeks, days and hours is a dangerous game that I think is futile to win and dangerous to try to predict. Best to keep it like this (to protect your ass, I am sure I am leaving something out) -

“Sometime in the future, be it next week, the next few years or few decades, there is a possible likelyhood that there will be a large quake that might cause injury and death due to infrastructure failure. At any time there could be small quakes that might or might not relieve stresses and might or might not predict the coming of a larger event, so everyone should be prepared for a quake as they would any possible disaster that can strike at any time”

]]> By: Jody http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27389 Jody Thu, 02 Jun 2011 10:56:41 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27389 I've become increasingly convinced that this trial isn't a bad thing. It essentially comes down to the prossecution needing to prove that the seismologists provided scientifically unsound advice to the government. This one article makes it sound like they did not, so they should be fine. But if there is evidence or documentation that they did tell the government small earthquakes reduce the chance of a larger earthquake, then they are culpable. Scientists who offer advice to citizens or the government no longer work in the protective cocoon of pure research. If they present scientifically unsound information, or fail to present readily available information, there should be consequences. Any other type of consultant would be held accountable if their advice was wrong. I would hold a meteorologist working for NOAA partially responsible if he didn't send out a tornado warning when scientifically established criteria for such a warning had been met. I would hold a doctor accountable if he blantanly misdiagnosed a disease. On the flip side, I complain all the time when the government DOESN'T listen to scientists about global warming. There are real world consequences to what scientists do, and they need to be explicitly clear about what they know and don't know. Hopefully the scientists in this case did not provide unsound advice, and will be found not guilty. I’ve become increasingly convinced that this trial isn’t a bad thing. It essentially comes down to the prossecution needing to prove that the seismologists provided scientifically unsound advice to the government. This one article makes it sound like they did not, so they should be fine. But if there is evidence or documentation that they did tell the government small earthquakes reduce the chance of a larger earthquake, then they are culpable.

Scientists who offer advice to citizens or the government no longer work in the protective cocoon of pure research. If they present scientifically unsound information, or fail to present readily available information, there should be consequences. Any other type of consultant would be held accountable if their advice was wrong.

I would hold a meteorologist working for NOAA partially responsible if he didn’t send out a tornado warning when scientifically established criteria for such a warning had been met. I would hold a doctor accountable if he blantanly misdiagnosed a disease. On the flip side, I complain all the time when the government DOESN’T listen to scientists about global warming. There are real world consequences to what scientists do, and they need to be explicitly clear about what they know and don’t know.

Hopefully the scientists in this case did not provide unsound advice, and will be found not guilty.

]]> By: Thomas Makedon http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27388 Thomas Makedon Tue, 31 May 2011 16:33:25 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27388 This sounds more like the Spanish (in this case Italian) Inquisition to me. The judgement as to whether the people should or shouldn't be warned and evacuated lies entirely on the State officials and not the scientists. They are the ones that, having listened to the scientists, must evaluate the feasibility and the cost of an evacuation (with the possibility of panic) if such a measure is to be taken. Having said that, any geologist can tell you that the buildings are not the only danger for people in the case of an earthquake. There can be also landslides and mass movements, rock falls, soil ruptures and depressions, road failures etc. Evacuating people from one area might possibly protect them from their own homes (if they indeed get severely damaged), but might send them to other hazardous areas. This sounds more like the Spanish (in this case Italian) Inquisition to me. The judgement as to whether the people should or shouldn’t be warned and evacuated lies entirely on the State officials and not the scientists. They are the ones that, having listened to the scientists, must evaluate the feasibility and the cost of an evacuation (with the possibility of panic) if such a measure is to be taken. Having said that, any geologist can tell you that the buildings are not the only danger for people in the case of an earthquake. There can be also landslides and mass movements, rock falls, soil ruptures and depressions, road failures etc. Evacuating people from one area might possibly protect them from their own homes (if they indeed get severely damaged), but might send them to other hazardous areas.

]]> By: Geack http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27387 Geack Tue, 31 May 2011 15:33:38 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27387 Jennifer Angela - You're drawing some false conclusions about the simple facts of the case here. Apparently (based solely on what's in the article) the seismologists didn't make any public statements - they advised the Civil Protection Agency, whose spokesman then made the public statements which are the source of the trouble. "The scientists have since said the statement misrepresented their opinions". So a govt agency requested information from the scientists; their information was apparently complicated and inconclusive, as earthquake science tends to be; and then the govt agency made a statement that "The scientific community tells me there is no danger..." And now the scientists are on trial. The "misperception" you consider so damning was on the part of the govt official, not the scientists. In what way did the scientists not fulfill their "obligations?" And how on earth can you feel the scientist are even partially responsible for what happened? It was an EARTHQUAKE. The people who were harmed live in a seismic zone - it's not like they were completely unaware of that. They have chosen for generations not to improve their buildings or strengthen their building codes. What would they really have done differently if that govt official had said "The scientists tell me there is a small chance of a large earthquake"? And look at it the opposite way - what if the seismologists and the govt had come out and said "Run for your lives - there might be an earthquake!" And then the earthquake didn't happen. Would they be responsible for the lost wages and travel costs of the people who fled due to their "failed obligation" in creating an unnecessary panic? Despite one's sypathy for the victims, it's simply WRONG to hold people legally culpable for the simple act of studying and teaching about unpredictable natural events. There might be a vague case agaisnt the govt agent if he truly misrepresented the scientists' statements - but even that puts an awful lot of weight on a person for making an educated guess about something outside his control. Jennifer Angela -

You’re drawing some false conclusions about the simple facts of the case here. Apparently (based solely on what’s in the article) the seismologists didn’t make any public statements – they advised the Civil Protection Agency, whose spokesman then made the public statements which are the source of the trouble. “The scientists have since said the statement misrepresented their opinions”.

So a govt agency requested information from the scientists; their information was apparently complicated and inconclusive, as earthquake science tends to be; and then the govt agency made a statement that “The scientific community tells me there is no danger…” And now the scientists are on trial. The “misperception” you consider so damning was on the part of the govt official, not the scientists. In what way did the scientists not fulfill their “obligations?”

And how on earth can you feel the scientist are even partially responsible for what happened? It was an EARTHQUAKE. The people who were harmed live in a seismic zone – it’s not like they were completely unaware of that. They have chosen for generations not to improve their buildings or strengthen their building codes. What would they really have done differently if that govt official had said “The scientists tell me there is a small chance of a large earthquake”? And look at it the opposite way – what if the seismologists and the govt had come out and said “Run for your lives – there might be an earthquake!” And then the earthquake didn’t happen. Would they be responsible for the lost wages and travel costs of the people who fled due to their “failed obligation” in creating an unnecessary panic?

Despite one’s sypathy for the victims, it’s simply WRONG to hold people legally culpable for the simple act of studying and teaching about unpredictable natural events. There might be a vague case agaisnt the govt agent if he truly misrepresented the scientists’ statements – but even that puts an awful lot of weight on a person for making an educated guess about something outside his control.

]]> By: Jennifer Angela http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27386 Jennifer Angela Tue, 31 May 2011 14:28:38 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27386 These scientists were aware of increasing seismic activities and minor earth quakes. As we all know, it is better to be safe than sorry. It was expected of the scientists to stick to that rule and they didn´t. They did NOT advise people to take precautions, even though they were aware of increasing seismic activities and minor earth quakes. It was their obligation to provide people with reasonable advice. And not to merely diagnose seismic activities and minor earth quakes and do nothing about it. However, I agree that these particular seismologists were in a tricky situation. On the one hand, they wanted to avoid causing mass hysteria, but on the other hand, they were obliged to warn citizens rather than to wait for a disaster. But what if they only kept their concerns to themselves, because they were afraid that might ridicule them as scientists? Cowardly motives never justify putting peoples´ lives at risk. And truly brilliant scientists should never be afraid of ridiculing themselves when human lives are at stake. WHAT EVENTUALLY CONVINCED ME OF THE CORRECTNESS OF THE LEGAL RESPONSE TO THIS EVENT is, that according to the geophysicist Susan Hough, seismologists ARE aware of the fact, that is a common misperception to assume, that minor earthquakes discharge the energy of earthquakes and thus no major ones will follow. Or in other words: Seismologists are aware, that small earthquakes lead to bigger ones. Knowing that, and being aware, that minor earthquakes had taken place, these scientists decided against warning citizens about the risks of major earthquakes occurring right after minor ones. Therefore, I honestly believe these scientists are partially responsible for what happened. And I don´t feel good about realising that. It´s always easier to be in favour of people. Yet I wonder whether sentencing these seismologists to 12 years imprisonment is the right way of motivating these and other seismologists to bear responsibility for what they do, when they are being irresponsible? What if they were sentenced to do charity work for that particular town instead of using up peoples´ taxes, so they can be kept in jail? When it comes to doctors being sued, I consider that a necessity, so those doctors who had become power-obsessed, realise that they are not almighty and that every patient´s life is valuable. Doctors can´t be sued, if patients were warned about risks of a potential operation or other medical treatment and provided with a contract to sign in reference to that matter. Doctors unlike patients are perfectly aware of these risks. Therefore it is their obligation to inform patients about them. But if doctors don´t even bother to warn patients about potential risks of a specific operation or medical treatment - well of course they are being sued. Patients have to defend their human rights somehow These scientists were aware of increasing seismic activities and minor earth quakes. As we all know, it is better to be safe than sorry. It was expected of the scientists to stick to that rule and they didn´t. They did NOT advise people to take precautions, even though they were aware of increasing seismic activities and minor earth quakes. It was their obligation to provide people with reasonable advice. And not to merely diagnose seismic activities and minor earth quakes and do nothing about it. However, I agree that these particular seismologists were in a tricky situation. On the one hand, they wanted to avoid causing mass hysteria, but on the other hand, they were obliged to warn citizens rather than to wait for a disaster. But what if they only kept their concerns to themselves, because they were afraid that might ridicule them as scientists? Cowardly motives never justify putting peoples´ lives at risk. And truly brilliant scientists should never be afraid of ridiculing themselves when human lives are at stake. WHAT EVENTUALLY CONVINCED ME OF THE CORRECTNESS OF THE LEGAL RESPONSE TO THIS EVENT is, that according to the geophysicist Susan Hough, seismologists ARE aware of the fact, that is a common misperception to assume, that minor earthquakes discharge the energy of earthquakes and thus no major ones will follow. Or in other words: Seismologists are aware, that small earthquakes lead to bigger ones. Knowing that, and being aware, that minor earthquakes had taken place, these scientists decided against warning citizens about the risks of major earthquakes occurring right after minor ones. Therefore, I honestly believe these scientists are partially responsible for what happened. And I don´t feel good about realising that. It´s always easier to be in favour of people. Yet I wonder whether sentencing these seismologists to 12 years imprisonment is the right way of motivating these and other seismologists to bear responsibility for what they do, when they are being irresponsible? What if they were sentenced to do charity work for that particular town instead of using up peoples´ taxes, so they can be kept in jail?

When it comes to doctors being sued, I consider that a necessity, so those doctors who had become power-obsessed, realise that they are not almighty and that every patient´s life is valuable. Doctors can´t be sued, if patients were warned about risks of a potential operation or other medical treatment and provided with a contract to sign in reference to that matter. Doctors unlike patients are perfectly aware of these risks. Therefore it is their obligation to inform patients about them. But if doctors don´t even bother to warn patients about potential risks of a specific operation or medical treatment – well of course they are being sued. Patients have to defend their human rights somehow

]]> By: GuruOfChem http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27385 GuruOfChem Tue, 31 May 2011 12:54:45 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27385 European courts do tend to work differently than American ones - they serve a more investigatory function in and of themselves, rather than simply weighing the (frequently slanted) evidence presented by attorneys. Nonetheless, this particular "trial" is an absurdity, but unfortunately I suspect it won't be the last attempt to pin blame on scientists who provide comments couched in scientific language. When a scientist says, "I don't know," it is often presented in terms that the scientifically illiterate, sound-bite driven media do not comprehend and context gets lost, words get twisted and misrepresented. The non-scientific population wants science to give them an "answer" in absolute terms, which all readers of this site should understand is simply not possible. We have to do a better job educating individuals about what science can and cannot tell us, and how to interpret what scientists do actually say in a way that helps people make informed decisions. European courts do tend to work differently than American ones – they serve a more investigatory function in and of themselves, rather than simply weighing the (frequently slanted) evidence presented by attorneys. Nonetheless, this particular “trial” is an absurdity, but unfortunately I suspect it won’t be the last attempt to pin blame on scientists who provide comments couched in scientific language. When a scientist says, “I don’t know,” it is often presented in terms that the scientifically illiterate, sound-bite driven media do not comprehend and context gets lost, words get twisted and misrepresented. The non-scientific population wants science to give them an “answer” in absolute terms, which all readers of this site should understand is simply not possible. We have to do a better job educating individuals about what science can and cannot tell us, and how to interpret what scientists do actually say in a way that helps people make informed decisions.

]]> By: Holden http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27384 Holden Tue, 31 May 2011 02:56:20 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27384 At the time of Ayrton Senna's death on an Italian racetrack, in 1994, I remember a similar uproar and disbelief at the murder(!) charges that followed, aimed at the team. It was explained at the time in the motoring press that according to Italian law this was legally mandatory; to paraphrase, if there's a death an investigation *will* follow. I don't remember the nuances that surely exist. I think we're on the outside looking in, once again, at a surprising legal and cultural difference. It's absurd to us, but there's more to the story than what's written in this article. At the time of Ayrton Senna’s death on an Italian racetrack, in 1994, I remember a similar uproar and disbelief at the murder(!) charges that followed, aimed at the team. It was explained at the time in the motoring press that according to Italian law this was legally mandatory; to paraphrase, if there’s a death an investigation *will* follow. I don’t remember the nuances that surely exist.
I think we’re on the outside looking in, once again, at a surprising legal and cultural difference. It’s absurd to us, but there’s more to the story than what’s written in this article.

]]> By: Jay Fox http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27383 Jay Fox Mon, 30 May 2011 16:01:41 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27383 Scientifically ignorant people prefer to remain so. Rather than address the scientific issues at hand, they shoot the messenger, then clap their hands over their ears and holler "La la la la." The mess over climate change was just the beginning. Now seismologists. People want to do what they want, and resent scientists coming along and telling them they should change their ways. Especially if the preferred behavior should cost them money or a change in lifestyle. Apparently, it is not enough to predict that something will eventually happen. One must provide a date and time, and accurately predict consequences. Otherwise, anything said will be ignored, made fun of, or outright denied. And should the prediction be wrong, everything said after that will be ignored. People seem to prefer warm fuzzy lies over cold, hard scientific truth. Scientifically ignorant people prefer to remain so. Rather than address the scientific issues at hand, they shoot the messenger, then clap their hands over their ears and holler “La la la la.” The mess over climate change was just the beginning. Now seismologists.

People want to do what they want, and resent scientists coming along and telling them they should change their ways. Especially if the preferred behavior should cost them money or a change in lifestyle.

Apparently, it is not enough to predict that something will eventually happen. One must provide a date and time, and accurately predict consequences. Otherwise, anything said will be ignored, made fun of, or outright denied. And should the prediction be wrong, everything said after that will be ignored.

People seem to prefer warm fuzzy lies over cold, hard scientific truth.

]]> By: Iain http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/05/27/are-seismologists-responsible-for-peoples-deaths-in-an-earthquake/#comment-27382 Iain Sun, 29 May 2011 02:01:57 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/?p=29273#comment-27382 If this goes through, does it set a precedence for people suing religious advisors over bad advice? If this goes through, does it set a precedence for people suing religious advisors over bad advice?

]]>