When, oh when, are we going to accept responsibility for our own actions?
If you want to build in a flood prone zone, an earthquake fault line or a bushfire risk area then do.
BUT don`t expect anybody but yourself to take the blame if things go wrong.
What`s the next step, wrap everybody in cotton wool and prohibit getting out of bed?
Our legal profession has much to be answerable for.
And it`s not all good.

All this will do is to drive our scientists to expand their predictions to include the worst possible case scenario. Rather than take a reasonable guesstimate, they will need to cloud the issue so as to protect themselves against the possibility of legal action. Many of todays professionals now need to include their "Get Out of Jail" indemnity clauses.

The court's verdict and Don Atkin's article raises some interesting questions.

Basically with earthquake forecasting the way it is, the scientists concerned should have known better than to say the unfortunate things they did say.. they were trying to please the authorities. But a jail sentence still seems harsh.

At the same time, the people who build in such places should build knowing that an earthquake will eventually occur, and that they are unpredictable..

As for the Brisbane floods.. the problem was not so much the flooding but the release strategy followed when the Wyvenhoe dam (built as a response to the 1974 flood)filled up. The resulting flood was actually about 2 metres less than the '74 floods although there was arguably more rain, because Wyvenhoe was there. If they go back and review their release strategies next time it may be less..

However, those who build in the flood plain of teh Brisbane river can still expect to get flooded every few decades..

'Scientists' -- real or self-proclaimed -- have now attained the same status in the public regard as the clergy. Like the jesters in a medieval court, they are permitted to get away with outrageous nonsense, but nobody gets offended because nobody takes what they say seriously, not even themselves. The idea that scientists should actually bear some responsibility for what they claim and predict is a hangover from the days when they used to work with data rather than models, and got on with the job rather than focusing on their blogs and media profiles.

Let me point out, by the way, that if the same rules are applied in Australia, then Tim Flannery for one will be looking at a long jail sentence.

The scientists, were imprisoned for not predicting a disaster; in fact, for claiming there was no danger?
Imagine what would ensue, if our dam engineers claimed, even as repeated warning signs were in plain evidence, that the people of Brisbane could rest safely in their beds, that they could rest assured there was no danger whatsoever, of a life and property threatening flood event!?
That said, the scientists in question are probably carrying the can for decades of neglect and or proper planning?
As others have mentioned, it was a known earthquake zone?
When heritage listing trumps pragmatism and earthquake resistant building, eventually, but particularly in an earthquake zone, there will be loss of life and or property!?
If anyone should be mouldering in some prison cell, it ought to be the former city fathers, who left this ticking time bomb legacy!?
Is there going to be many more record breaking flood events and flash floods that rip through previously non-flooded areas, or unstoppable wild fire that take out whole suburbs or cities?
You betcha!
But only as longer as we build on historical models, rather than a predictable future, which would then require quite massive flood mitigation; and or, tens of billions dedicated to myriad dam/levy bank building and very independent, very local power supply, superior road and rail links?
Well, you may need to evacuate entire populations and do need ultra reliable power for emergency lighting, food storage, pumps and communication!
Wires just don't cut it; and or, can contribute to the lists of possible problems; unless they are underground in a non earthquake prone area! Even then?
Dams provide both flood mitigation as well as providing essential fire fighting water supplies!
If many small dams then allow the planning of previously impractical hydro schemes, that would be a welcome bonus, that would allow some of the costs to be defrayed!
Even so, any and all outlays would likely be far less than the bankrupting insurance claims, the resulting premium hikes and the eventual repair bills, that almost always come, when we can least afford them!
Rhrosty.