Just wondering what OLOer's think about Italy jailing scientists for failing to provide an accurate assessment on the likelihood of a severe earthquake?

Should scientists be blamed for failing to accurately foresee the fury of natural phenomena?

There are possibly questions here dealing with all kinds of scientific assessment, even issues influenced by man and affecting natural phenomena.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-23/italian-scentists-jailed-over-earthquak-warning/4328046

Politicians should therefore be held responsible for the policy mistakes they make.
K Rudd please tell us taxpayers how you intend to repay the BILLIONS of dollars for the 20,000 plus welfare for lifers you allowed into Australia.
Scientists can't foresee what mother nature has in store in most circumstances.
But blundering politicians should be able to foresee trouble when you try to fix something that is not broken and has worked successfully for years..

shocking!

Tim Flannery would be doing a long stretch. Can't think of on prediction he has made right.

Just a quick correction, in that the men convicted are free until they have exhausted avenues of appeal.

Here's more opinion on the conviction:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-23/scientists-in-shock-at-outlandish-earthquake-ruling/4330438

Poirot seems a good question to me.
Shocking that the dills actually told the residents they would be safe.
Even more so they have been sentenced.
They SURELY, will not serve time.
Italy is now a laughing stock.
Contributors hieing for true views, may well be ROTFL at the contribution of Philip s, as I am.
Banjo just followed him after the fence was trampled.

Poirot,

This is symptomatic of modern society’s penchant for casting blame on everyone around them, for things that are, essentially, out of anyone’s control.

One point of amusement (amid the tragedy) though was this:

“Rick Sarre, a professor of law and criminal justice at the University of South Australia, says the sentence is likely to be overturned. ‘All I can say is it would never happen here in Australia …’”

Really? Give it time. I foresee a day when the BOM or similar will be taken to court over untimely or inadequate storm warnings. The only difference will be that they are unlikely to be incarcerated, merely sued for millions. Of course, it will cost tax payers millions to reap the millions, but such is the merry-go-round of life. And those subsequent safety measures put in place after the Black Saturday bush fires had better work next time, for the sake of all those highly paid commissioners and contractors.

Oh dear. Did I just make a prediction? Now I have to hope it comes true lest I be hit by a class action law suit, or thrown in jail.

The real question is, at what point do people shrug and say, ‘Crap happens’?

Poirot raises a good point.

The Judgement and sentence of the scientists is a vast overreach by the court, and is unlikely to stand. However, it does raise the question as to what responsibility do scientists take for their findings, and what level of censure should they face. As what the scientists told the community is not dealt with in much detail, this thread can only deal in generalities.

The questions should be:
What is the ability to form an accurate forecast,
What are the consequences of an error,
What information as to the accuracy and consequences were given to the people.

Given that the area has been levelled by earthquakes 3 times in 800 years, and that many buildings were not earthquake proofed, and likely to cause fatalities, the assumption would be that a catastrophe was unlikely but possible.

If this was close to the advice that was given, then no censure is warranted, however, if the advice gave the people an all clear, then some professional consequences should follow.

The risk is that if scientists give a clear and honest assessments, based on recognised evidence, any risk of prosecution will simply result in assessments in the future not being given or being couched in legal verbiage as to make them nearly worthless.

Is it working?? Can I upload??

Been having bloody hopeless problems with the whole sh!tbag.... er, I mean; system, this morning.

.

A terribly STUPID decision in Italy….. if it is as it is purported to be in the media.

We can never know the exact circumstances, but it is hard to see how this decision could ever be justified.

Some commentators think that it is a disingenuous decision by a low-level court, with the full knowledge that it will be overturned upon appeal.

It certainly seems like this could be true….. in which case that particular judge should end up behind bars for attempting to pervert the course of justice!

I totally agree Philip S.

Rudd should be brought to account for what would have to be the dumbest political move in the history of this country in opening up the onshore asylum seeker debacle again.

But there is one huge difference between this and the Italian decision – Rudd made what was OBVIOUSLY an absolutely STUPID decision to water down border protection laws, while the Italian scientists did NOTHING WRONG at all.

Totally absurd !
If I was a meteorologist in Italy's weather service I would resign immeadiatly.
The case against them would be stronger because their systems have
more certainty than seismology.

I notice that the boss of those convicted has resigned in protest.
How about a judge who releases someone on bail and they go out and kill someone ?
Thousands of similar liabilities exist, a lawyers' paradise.
My goodness, if I was a contributing author to the IPCC I would be in a total funk !

The whole thing goes from insanity to the madhouse.

Funny you should say that Bazz.

Only this year NZ meteorologists have been subject to legal action on these issues - and even talk by some of the possibility of extending the process to Australia's BOM.

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/o7/news-legal-action-against-agw/

How to shut up scientists 101?

How about Dubya, Blair and Howard who lied their countries into a destructive, bloody and unnecessary war? War criminals?

How about people who could live elsewhere but decide to build on a flood plain, in an earthquake zone or ln a fire prone area? Guilty of putting their families in danger?

I always reckon the weather forecast should be followed by the Lotto forecast.

Someone is always to blame Poirot. There's no such thing as an accident or bad luck any more.

'Guilty of putting their families in danger?'

Yes. So are those who go bush walking, and women who walk home alone putting themselves in unnecessary danger. People who travel to countries with DFAT warnings (ie any other country but AUS), people who decide to sail around the world, and people who insist on cooking inside their houses. All carry a risk, and the user should pay for any services that are needed to get them out of trouble.

People who use drugs, people who get fat, people who dont clean out their gutters every 6 weeks. They all should have to pay!

Or we could just shoot all the lawyers of course.

It's only online anonymity that allows me to publicly admit that I'm usually in agreement with Houellebecq… but not this time.

"Someone is always to blame Poirot."

This is not true.

Someone ELSE is always to blame – without exception!

Usually it's easy to work out who: celebrities, but never us fans; politicians, but never our voting; banks, but never our borrowing; religions, but never our god; youth, but never our parenting; other people, but never my people; et cetera.

But I do agree we should shoot all the lawyers. Couldn't hurt… and at the very least we'd feel better.

Poirot, that article about the NZ BOM is not about predictions but the
alleged faking of temperature records.
That problem has been around for some time.
It is said that the records were "adjusted" to present what they wanted.
Just like the Darwin airport record.

So it is not like predicting a forecast with all the uncertainties that there are with the wx.

It looks like all wx, siesmic, building inspections etc etc are about
to stop in Italy.

http://tinyurl.com/9h7j6p2

This could blow through to aircraft service & inspection.
Emergency planning could come to a halt and those that have written
disaster plans could withdraw them.

Talking of precedents, I like this new precedent in changing the meaning of words.

Currently the Macquarie Dictionary links the term “Nazi” with Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party of recent memory. But some people use the word “Nazi” with respect to such contemporary conservative political leaders as John Howard and Angela Merkel. Perhaps, after a Q&A program, Ms Butler of the Macquarie Dictionary might call an emergency meeting of her anonymous colleagues and extend the definition of Nazi to read as follows: “Nazi: one who believes in or sympathises with the policies characteristic of Hitler or John Howard or Angela Merkel”. Just a thought. – Ed].

From Gerard

http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/issue-159/

Anyone else got a word they need altered by the ministry of truth?

How can you make scientists responsible for their predictions ? No-one can foretell with certainty when Nature decides to play serious. At the same time they shouldn't be paid so much simply for guessing.

Here's a more in-depth analysis of the issue from the Skeptic Lawyer blog:
http://skepticlawyer.com.au/2012/10/24/scientists-found-guilty-for-causing-earthquake-deaths/

Bazz,

Anthony Cox's headline for his article was "Legal Action Against AGW"

It's all connected. If you can cast doubt on one aspect of climate science, you're likely to successfully throw a spanner in the works in relation to many other aspects.

IMO

Not before time in my opinion.

If people want to be funded as experts, they should have to take the blame.

A common argument from the global warming mob is that someone is not a climatologist, when they refute the "expert" predictions. If they want to claim authority, that authority should be backed up with the responsibility of any & all damage their claimed authority has caused to millions.

If a volcanologist doesn't know, they should say so, not bask in the glory of their expertise.

I am so sick of our ABC, & it's procession of experts, who often know very little & are simply making a grant application over the airways.

How many more times can the Great Barrier Reef be destroyed, & still be standing for the next "expert" scare next year?

So to all experts, if you don't want the pain, don't sit in the flame. Go do something less lucrative. Be careful though, a carpenter will be held responsible for poor work, so you just may have to learn to accept responsibility too.

Ludwig Gday, it has to be a mate, you know, that tells you your fly is undone?
Rudd, you single minedly hate him.
And for one reason.
He spoke of a big Australia.
Your own post history has you saying some good things about him, before he said that.
You are currently in a verbal wrestling match, in another thread, because my mate, you are blind to some points in this issue.
I am posting a thread, if it gets a start, lets talk, and may it be over interest to others.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-24/forecasters-surprised-by-el-nino-turnaround/4332260

It appears our climate forecasters have got it wrong.

Now, while there is no doubt this is good news – after all who really wants another 13 years of drought? – I have to say I am slightly miffed.

Based on the previous forecast heralding the coming of El-Nino, I sank two bores in my backyard, installed 3 rain water tanks, set all my taps to ‘trickle only’ and forbade my two teenage sons from bathing more than once a week, which has resulted in a most unpleasant and pervading odour throughout the house. Indeed, in my efforts to forestall any suffering from the water shortage predicted and reduce my water bill to something slightly less than our national debt, I removed every living thing from the garden (including the snails who, let’s face it suck up more water than a bilge pump) and concreted the lot, painting over it a fresco (in water soluble paint) depicting a lush forest floor.

Now I just feel silly. Much like the Victorian government must do about the desalination plant.

I wonder, based on the events in Italy, whether I, or the Bailleiu government, have any recourse in taking the BOM to court?

It's ludicrous but I don't think this decision will set a precedent.

What society calls expert is really just a person who has been educated on a particular topic, written a few peer reviewed papers and knows a bit more about a subject than many others. But they are by no means perfect. One only need look to the climate change to see that even many of the experts disagree on aspects of that debate.

I'm not so sure that the climate forecasters have "got it wrong."

The article states:

"Warming in the Pacific Ocean as recently as August pointed to another El Nino weather event, but the forecasters witnessed a huge turnaround."

"Come September, all of a sudden the temperature started to cool down, the trade winds started to become a little bit enhanced, and the cloud patterns and other indicators like that headed away from El Nino....It actually is quite a unique situation that we end up not going into an El Nino event.....It's sort of the biggest turnaround that we've actually seen in our records going back to about 1950, so quite unprecedented."

All of which may conform to a warming scenario whereby the planet is predicted to experience an increased frequency of unusual and/or extreme weather events.

Well scribbler, I don't think that Italian courts can set precedents
for our courts, but I will bet quids that some lawyer is sitting there
clicking his tongue thinking about it "$$$".

but the forecasters witnessed a huge turnaround."
Poirot,
Big deal ! We witnessed that too & long before the experts realised it. (can we get obscenely excessive funding now ?)

Philip S asked "... Should scientists be blamed for failing to accurately foresee the fury of natural phenomena? ...".

Yes, when scientists go from researching a topic to providing advice to the public, they must accept responsibility for their actions.

Computer and engineering students have ethics and professionalism as a compulsory part of their university program. I teach this at ANU: http://tomw.net.au/technology/it/professional_ethics/

After problems with communications during the Canberra bush-fires, myself and one of my students wrote some reports on what we thought should be done and gave talks about this. I made sure that this material was online and easy to find, so that no professional could use ignorance as a defence, if called before a royal commission after another bushfire. Regrettably, there were then bushfires in Victoria with loss of life. The royal commission staff found my material online and called to ask if it was okay to use it: http://blog.tomw.net.au/2009/03/national-bushfire-warning-system.html

Professionals have a level of protection from legal action, if they act honestly and competently. As an example, I am an ACS Certified Computer Professional and there is a cap on my legal liability in civil cases. But I have to make sure I keep my skills up to date, so I know what I am doing: http://blog.tomw.net.au/2011/05/certified-computer-professional.html

Tomw thank you, brigades I have been part of went down to the ACT and sat around unused till it was too late.
You may be well aware we are in big trouble due to not burning off in winter.
Headed far worse than black Friday and the ACT.
Red tape wrong people are going to kill.
outcome from Italy?
Well in my view no prison terms but no more warnings may bean out come not wanted.