Italian scientists earthquake verdict due.
Discussion
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/521634
Interesting case that's coming to an end. Whether or not the scientists could have done more, it will mean that every other Italian scientists, weatherman etc... will have to publicise the worst possible outcomes to cover their backs - and it could set the precedent for other countries should they be found guilty.
Interesting case that's coming to an end. Whether or not the scientists could have done more, it will mean that every other Italian scientists, weatherman etc... will have to publicise the worst possible outcomes to cover their backs - and it could set the precedent for other countries should they be found guilty.
Not being a scientist and fully understanding this. Are they negligent? That is is this a case of not preparing the residents for what could happen rather than predicting? If that were the case then would that not be the local authorities with direction from higher government having plans in place and the scientists should only have been advisors to the precautions?
Six Italian scientists and an ex-government official have been sentenced to six years in prison over the 2009 deadly earthquake in L'Aquila.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20025626
My god this is worrying and also in the new Italy's top court has ruled that a businessman developed a benign brain tumor because he held a cellphone to his ear for hours daily for his job and deserves worker's compensation
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-italian-court-blames-...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20025626
My god this is worrying and also in the new Italy's top court has ruled that a businessman developed a benign brain tumor because he held a cellphone to his ear for hours daily for his job and deserves worker's compensation
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2012-10-italian-court-blames-...
Genuine question then - where does this leave things like the IPCC assessments? If these scientists are guilty on the basis of providing "inexact, incomplete and contradictory" information, where does that leave those pumping out apocalyptic climate scenarios? Could it be argued that government use of inexact and alarmist climate models to underpin policy diverts funding from other areas that could have a much more immediate "on the ground" impact? If it could be shown that the "lost" funding could have saved lives, is there a similar case to answer?
hornet said:
Genuine question then - where does this leave things like the IPCC assessments? If these scientists are guilty on the basis of providing "inexact, incomplete and contradictory" information, where does that leave those pumping out apocalyptic climate scenarios? Could it be argued that government use of inexact and alarmist climate models to underpin policy diverts funding from other areas that could have a much more immediate "on the ground" impact? If it could be shown that the "lost" funding could have saved lives, is there a similar case to answer?
Isn't the closer and more interesting parallel with climate change deniers? Those who claim that everything will be OK and that no precautions need to be taken? On Radio 2 this afternoon on the Jeremy Vine show, someone emailed saying that they thought it was great they had been prosecuted, as it's about time Scientists were held accountable for their actions, just like people in the medical practice are. The expression "made my piss boil" doesn't even come close.
TheTurbonator said:
On Radio 2 this afternoon on the Jeremy Vine show, someone emailed saying that they thought it was great they had been prosecuted, as it's about time Scientists were held accountable for their actions, just like people in the medical practice are. The expression "made my piss boil" doesn't even come close.
Good grief! 
Proof that the stupid people are taking over the world.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff