PDA

View Full Version : Reuters: "Italy muzzled scientist who foresaw quake" -- spreading panic




FrankRep
04-06-2009, 11:11 AM
Italy muzzled scientist who foresaw quake

Reuters
Apr 6, 2009

ROME, April 6 (Reuters) - An Italian scientist predicted a major earthquake around L'Aquila weeks before disaster struck the city on Monday, killing dozens of people, but was reported to authorities for spreading panic among the population.

The first tremors in the region were felt in mid-January and continued at regular intervals, creating mounting alarm in the medieval city, about 100 km (60 miles) east of Rome.
...

Full Story:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/homepageCrisis/idUKL6566682._CH_.2420


Drudge Report:

http://www.drudgereport.com/

6.3 MAG; EAST OF ROME...
MAY HAVE 'VIRTUALLY DESTROYED' SOME ENTIRE TOWNS... DEVELOPING...
UPDATE: 150+ people killed; 1,500 injured...
'Nothing to see but devastation'...

2young2vote
04-06-2009, 11:20 AM
The government knows what is best for its people? I hate it when stuff like this happens. That scientist probably just feels horrible right now.

acptulsa
04-06-2009, 11:29 AM
Well, they had better dig up all the earth in town and put it in the same cell. It spread a whole lot of panic.

Aratus
04-06-2009, 11:49 AM
we've had active volcanos elsewhere, and the L.A area near the san andreas has been experiancing hundreds of small tremors. the scientist was proven sadly correct as the italian gov't was fatalistically and apathetically trying not to panic people. mount redoubt is again active in alaska.

Bern
04-06-2009, 12:15 PM
Well, if someone is yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater in anticipation of a fire breaking out at some undetermined point in the near future, is it reasonable?

Sounds like the real issue wasn't so much the prediction, but how it was delivered.

Aratus
04-06-2009, 12:20 PM
sometimes there are small tremors before or after a big quake...
the small tremors thusly detected may have been similar to the ones
a NOVA episode was recently done about. the scientists may have said
a very specific timeframe. the earthquake has now arrived... its in our news.

Mesogen
04-06-2009, 12:27 PM
This sounds like a movie script.

A. Havnes
04-06-2009, 12:49 PM
Well, if someone is yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater in anticipation of a fire breaking out at some undetermined point in the near future, is it reasonable?

Sounds like the real issue wasn't so much the prediction, but how it was delivered.

After reading more of the article I have to agree, but I still think word should have gotten out. Of course, that's easier to say in hindsight.

IPSecure
04-06-2009, 01:06 PM
With this logic, the next time there is a tornado warning...

torchbearer
04-06-2009, 01:11 PM
Reminds me of the FBI agents who were warning the government about the "potential" attack that eventually came on 9/11.

acptulsa
04-06-2009, 01:15 PM
Hell, they play tornadoes up for all the drama they can get out of them. Of course, tornadoes don't cause a mass exodus.

Meatwasp
04-06-2009, 01:29 PM
anyone else get dizzy before an earth quake?
I can tell when one is going to happy but never where. Ha!

freemarketblog
04-06-2009, 02:25 PM
So how exactly would the scientist manufacture his report? By saying, "There could be an earthquake somewhere in this region at a time either from now or months from now."

If the tremors were felt in January but it took until April for the earthquake to occur, how reasonable is it to ask all the citizens in that city to flee and seek refuge for months in another area? You do realize how impossible it is to get people down into their basements when they decide to walk outside on their porch to see a tornado, right? People decided to wait out Hurricane Katrina even though we had a heads-up 10 days in advance that this storm would be deadly.

Given the imminent threats like a Hurricane and a Tornado which you can see coming right for you, how can you possibly be outraged when it takes months for an earthquake to hit? You really think anyone would have fled the city? I bet after a month of leaving, most of the people would have returned so this catastrophe was unavoidable.

youngbuck
04-06-2009, 02:30 PM
anyone else get dizzy before an earth quake?
I can tell when one is going to happy but never where. Ha!

My dad told me he has a sixth sense where he gets this weird feeling, or some type of buzzing feeling before earthquakes happen. Depending on how big the earthquake is, and how far away it is depends on how strong the feeling is he gets. I don't think he's ever lied to me before, so I pretty much believe him.

Scofield
04-06-2009, 03:17 PM
So how exactly would the scientist manufacture his report? By saying, "There could be an earthquake somewhere in this region at a time either from now or months from now."


You let the people know that it is possible for a strong earthquake to occur within the near future. This allows the people to act accordingly. Some may leave for a while, some may prepare, some may not care. By giving the people the information, they have the ability to prepare (or not) for the situation.

Lives could have been saved had individuals known this was coming, as people could have adequately been prepared. Whether that be by having a safety kit at their disposal (something they probably wouldn't have without a warning of possible doom), being cognizant of their surroundings (knowing where the closest doorway is), or any other type of scenario you can think of.

By not bringing the people up to speed about the situation, the Italian government can now be considered an accessory to murder (albeit, the murderer was nature).

freemarketblog
04-06-2009, 04:29 PM
You let the people know that it is possible for a strong earthquake to occur within the near future. This allows the people to act accordingly. Some may leave for a while, some may prepare, some may not care. By giving the people the information, they have the ability to prepare (or not) for the situation.

Lives could have been saved had individuals known this was coming, as people could have adequately been prepared. Whether that be by having a safety kit at their disposal (something they probably wouldn't have without a warning of possible doom), being cognizant of their surroundings (knowing where the closest doorway is), or any other type of scenario you can think of.

By not bringing the people up to speed about the situation, the Italian government can now be considered an accessory to murder (albeit, the murderer was nature).

Not even the most paranoid of us would have waited this out for three months by taking refuge in another city. You just can't simply expect people to get up and leave their home, their job, or their family based on a "possibility" something will happen in the future.

I don't know. Where you live, you might have an F4 tornado hit your house. I don't know when, but it could happen. Would you move? It's just not practical to blame government for this one. Even if people were made aware, I doubt anyone would be out of the city for three months. It's an unfortunate event, but life isn't supposed to be lived in fear. We all can't just pack up and leave, and those of us who can, it would probably be best to pick a safer place to live. I don't know of too many people who can get up and leave for months on end trying to wait out a possibility an earthquake will occur at some indefinite point. Unless you're a millionaire with a house in another country, you're screwed. No one would walk away from their job just to listen to a scientist giving arbitrary predictions.

jmdrake
04-06-2009, 06:20 PM
Well, if someone is yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater in anticipation of a fire breaking out at some undetermined point in the near future, is it reasonable?


Horribly flawed analogy. A better one would be "Well, if someone actually smelled smoke and is yelling 'Fire' in a crowded theater in anticipation of a fire breaking out sometime in the immediate future."

The scientist hadn't been running around for years yelling "earthquake" and he didn't yell "earthquake" this time for no reason. There was a real threat. But hey, I guess he was a "conspiracy theorist".



Sounds like the real issue wasn't so much the prediction, but how it was delivered.

Maybe he tried other methods but had been shut down? Perhaps he tried getting on the news but was censored? One report I heard on NPR said he had been forced to take down a website! The van and the bullhorn was probably the only tool he had left.

It's funny how the mainstream media is spending must of its time "debunking" the fact that the earthquake was actually predicted instead of looking to see if there might be some useful lesson here.

jmdrake
04-06-2009, 06:25 PM
Not even the most paranoid of us would have waited this out for three months by taking refuge in another city. You just can't simply expect people to get up and leave their home, their job, or their family based on a "possibility" something will happen in the future.

I don't know. Where you live, you might have an F4 tornado hit your house. I don't know when, but it could happen. Would you move?


I'd build a storm shelter.



It's just not practical to blame government for this one. Even if people were made aware, I doubt anyone would be out of the city for three months. It's an unfortunate event, but life isn't supposed to be lived in fear. We all can't just pack up and leave, and those of us who can, it would probably be best to pick a safer place to live. I don't know of too many people who can get up and leave for months on end trying to wait out a possibility an earthquake will occur at some indefinite point. Unless you're a millionaire with a house in another country, you're screwed. No one would walk away from their job just to listen to a scientist giving arbitrary predictions.

Fine. Then let the scientist make his predictions. No harm done right? Really your argument is self contradictory. The best course of action is always to allow freedom of information and let individuals make up their own minds.

freemarketblog
04-06-2009, 08:24 PM
I'd build a storm shelter.



Fine. Then let the scientist make his predictions. No harm done right? Really your argument is self contradictory. The best course of action is always to allow freedom of information and let individuals make up their own minds.

Of course, I think it's wrong that the government squelched this scientist's observations, but I'm not going to sit here blaming the fact that 150+ people (currently) died because the government didn't make the public aware of an arbitrary date that some random earthquake could occur. My entire point is that even when humans are shown that disasters are coming, they many times refuse to take refuge, let alone leave their residence behind. Before Katrina hit, we had 10 days of pre-notice yet millions of people stayed home on the coast. Not only that, but before the 2005 hurricane season, it was predicted to be the worst in recent history. Did you see an exodus of residents for four months until the season passed? Absolutely not. So why would we expect a mass exodus if this were announced back in January? People would have stayed, very few would have fled, and those that would have fled would have returned long before the actual earthquake hit.

My entire point is that although government did wrong by squelching expertise, it would have done very little in the grand scheme of things. People would have ignored it just as they have throughout history. We as humans welcome disaster thinking it won't hit us, and is something on the 10 o'clock news. It isn't until we die or lose everything that we say, "Damn that government" when obviously the advice would not have been heeded regardless.

acptulsa
04-07-2009, 06:26 AM
Squelching the information was wrong and the excuse of fearing mass panic was lame. Let the guy speak, let people be forewarned for what good it can do (no matter how much or how little) and if the government gets too nosy cut that nose off to spite it to its face.

Aratus
04-07-2009, 08:19 AM
the computer model that had new orleans in a hurricane's path
had this guy trying to warn people. volcanos sometimes give out
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/volcano/about.html seismic signals.