Image: USGS/Earthquake Science Center
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Six Italian scientists and one government official are set to go to trial today in Italy (Sept. 20) on charges of manslaughter for not warning the public aggressively enough of an impending earthquake that killed more than 300 people in 2009.
While such a trial is unlikely on U.S. soil, experts say, American geologists and seismologists are watching closely, surprised at a legal system that would attempt to criminalize something as uncertain as earthquake prediction.
"Our ability to predict earthquake hazards is, frankly, lousy," said Seth Stein, a professor of Earth sciences at Northwestern University in Illinois. "Criminalizing something would only make sense if we really knew how to do this and someone did it wrong."
Henry Pollack, a professor of geology at the University of Michigan, echoed Stein's concerns.
"The whole thing seems bizarre to me," Pollack told LiveScience.
A deadly quake
The case has its roots in 2009, when a swarm of small earthquakes shook the central Italian region of Abruzzo in Italy. The region is seismically active, but knowing whether little shakes are leading up to a big temblor is impossible, seismologists say. A 1988 study of other quake-prone Italian regions found, for example, that about half of large quakes were preceded by weaker foreshocks. But only 2 percent of small quake swarms heralded a larger rupture. [See Photos of L'Aquila Earthquake Destruction]
Enzo Boschi, the then-president of Italy's National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology and now a defendant in the case, seemed to allude to this uncertainty in a March 31, 2009, meeting in L'Aquila, a medieval city in Abruzzo. Comparing the situation to a large quake that struck L'Aquila in 1703, Boschi said, "It is unlikely that an earthquake like the one in 1703 could occur in the short term, but the possibility cannot be totally excluded."
In a press conference after the meeting, however, Department of Civil Protection official Bernardo De Bernardinis, also a defendant in the case, struck a more soothing tone, saying that the situation posed "no danger" and urging residents to relax.
Less than a week later, on April 6, a 6.3-magnitude quake struck in Abruzzo. L'Aquila's medieval buildings crumbled, killing 309 people and injuring more than 1,500.
Seismic uncertainty
The case against the scientists and De Bernardinis states that they did not do their duty in communicating risk to the citizens of L'Aquila and holds them responsible for manslaughter. A guilty verdict could carry up to 15 years in jail. The families of the dead are also seeking millions of dollars in civil damages.
But geoscientists say that asking the Italian scientists to predict when and where a quake might strike is like asking them to look into a cloudy crystal ball for an answer. [Natural Disasters: Top 10 U.S. Threats]
"I think that what people don't understand is just how low the risk was. These swarms of earthquakes do happen all the time," said John Vidale, a seismologist at the University of Washington. "We have swarms in my state, Washington, all the time, and I'm not sure of a single one that's ended with a large earthquake."
Although scientists — and cranks — have tried, there's no way to predict an earthquake days or weeks in advance. You'd have to fully understand the stresses deep in the Earth, Vidale told LiveScience, and you'd have to know exactly which parts of the crust are so weak that those stresses are going to cause ruptures.
See what we're tweeting about
29 Comments
Add CommentLooks like the Italians are now like Americans, wanting money for everything .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the building standards were of a proper standard for a region of high seismic risk it would have been better.
The Government seem to be dogging their responsibility for not having such a building code and looking for a scapegoat .
Even if they could predict earthquakes 100% accurately I don't think anyone should be put on trial for this sort of thing. You can't expect people to take the blame for natural disasters or else nobody would want to take the responsibility...basically it would be saying "Do your job perfectly or else you're going to jail." You can't do that to people.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDo you have a cite for you claim that either one ever said that "catastrophic global warming would be here by now," or are you just making things up? As a matter of fact, I'm quite sure neither has ever made that claim.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy don't they just sue God?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOr the news media for publishing, or failure to publish, warnings.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat do you expect from another Banana republic?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe actions taken by the US government after massive bank fraud that led to the GFC proves the USA is the biggest in this class of republics.
I am talking about the way big banks and ratings agencies demanded and received indemnification from the people they had stolen from. No indemnification no they will not accept being bailed out. Destroy the entire system, if you make us liable for our fraud. This US Taliban succeeded, as it would in a banana republic.
I would not blame anyone in Italy for never giving another prediction - earthquakes, floods or anything else
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI don't think this is bizarre at all. SciAm's sister publication Nature covers the trial much more neutrally (http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110914/full/477264a.html). If you read it there, you'll see that the scientists are sued not because they failed to predict the quake, but because they downplayed the risk. After the first tremors, a panel of scientists told the townspeople that there is no big danger and they should to go home and relax. They would possibly spend the night outside, as is customary in the region, but they followed scientists' advice.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMy impression is that the scientists sought to "avoid panic", possibly by government's suggestion. They failed to prepare people for the worst, so they failed to do their duty as scientists. If you don't know what'll happen, say so. Do not say "It'll be OK".
No need to worry as long as you give an honest professional opinion that is supported by the facts and hard science.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt may indeed be the case that the scientists overstepped their ken and issued reassurances a little too cavalierly, however, that is nowhere near the same thing as manslaughter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNot interesting, idiotic. Too bad Italy suffers from democracy disease...if people can vote they quickly vote themselves a paycheck and a license to sue. The solution is obvious if not politically correct (which I guess makes it even better): a Republican foerm of government. Involve the people in choice of representatives and make the specific representatives accountable for tyhe performance of yhe entire body of reprsentatives.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBefore the earthquake, a technician of Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Giacchino Giuliani, measuring the gas Radon said that a big earthquake was coming. The italian scientists which now are on trial, a week before the earthquake said that his measurements had not a scientific base. So now this Trial is to find out the truth about that.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis beats the cake. Has the Italian government lost its mind? The logical response would be for scientists there to routinely issue warnings -- perhaps weekly -- as a legal counter-measure. But wait, then Italy will charge them with "fraud" for issuing "false warnings."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGuess it doesn't make economic sense to be a scientist in Italy; perhaps their scientific community should look for jobs in other more, shall we say, "developed" nations? :-(
What is the charge, "mass murder"? That makes these scientists worse than any genocidal dictator in human history. Wow, what kind of kangaroo legal system does Italy have these days? Who would have thunk...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGW IS here already. The climate noticeably changed over my lifetime exactly as Jim Hansen said it would. You may be too young to have noticed. Olean, Little Valley [Cattaraugus County seat], Salamanca N.Y. got 450 inches of snow per year in the 1950s and 1960s. Now get only 96 inches of snow per year. There have been many GW related floods, droughts, heat related deaths, and 160,000 GW caused deaths per year recently.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisChange from: "The case does highlight the need to be upfront with the public about the limits of scientific predictions"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisChange to: "The case does highlight the need for journalists to repeat word-for-word what the scientists actually said"
Do they have actual recordings of everything that was said? Even if they did, the trial is nonsense. Geologists have always said that earthquakes are unpredictable. The journalists "should" be the ones on trial for failure to understand and report enough geology.
Or the people who were killed "should" be on trial for failure to understand enough geology.
Or the city "should" be on trial for failure to demolish buildings that could not withstand an earthquake.
Or the Italian school system "should" be on trial for failure to put enough science and math into its K-12 curriculum.
How does one downplay or exaggerate unknown risk? The reality is they did not know the risk, no one knew, and any response in such a circumstance is equally valid. Apparently what they did know was the correlation between swarms and big earthquakes is essentially zero. "Preparing for the worst" means what? There is no preparing for the worst, only leaving. I live in a major earthquake zone where 9 earthquakes have happened. For the millions of us living here the only "preparation for the worst" is for all of us to move to the mid-west (oh, wait, New Madrid), ok, New Orleans, no, Mexico, no, Virginia, damn....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne thing which stood out in the article is that the defendants are all government paid, making them employees of the people and who therefore must answer to the people. If they were brought in, in an official capacity and told to evaluate the situation, then their results should become official policy. But when they go beyond the known facts, advising inaction, then they become personally responsible for those results. Scientists on the dole are pressured to produce the benefactor specified line. The answer I think, is privately financed research and University research. Government then can't demand the scientist put their neck on the line with a personal opinion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe facts, man, just the facts. Cut all government funding of scientific research.
In Europe, particularly southern Europe, those who live on the government dole outnumber those who work for a living. This is totally unsustainable and is reaching a tipping point. When it does tip, it will be violent and sudden, and those, including scientists, who are perceived as part of the problem (government) will go down with the government. Think the end days of the USSR. This time it may be far more widespread and deadly, making the Arab Spring inconsequential. The U S needs to be working toward preventing the same things from occurring on our soil. A strong private economy, and putting the masses to work and off the government teate is the answer. It will come about, the question is whether through armed rebellion or robust economy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Thomas Jefferson (1743 - 1826
Actually, these "official" state seismologists SHOULD be prosecuted, as geologic research technician Giampaolo Giuliani developed a special radon detector for quake prediction. He had been warning local towns, but the men now on trial convinced the government to silence him with a court injunction. The government realizes that it listened to the wrong scientists....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat you suggest is a logical impossibility. Assuming that BEFORE the accident happens, a respected figure says, "It's a 1 in a million, not something that we should worry about". If the event occurs, it doesn't change that fact that the risk was 1 in a million, just that it happend to be that 1 in a million. That's not irresponsible, people have to accept that you cannot go around blaming others for their poor fortune.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy don't you ask the people in Pakistan about the two disastrous and catastrophic floods two years in a row?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisShould they sue the climate scientists for not warning them???
Oh yeah, privately financed research.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLet's put lead in gasoline to prevent engine knock. Never mind that a generation of kids cannot think.
Let's put CFCs in the atmosphere so the ozone layer disappears. Consequences? Who cares the research was privately financed and therefor must be good.
Too much sulfur in the atmosphere causing acid rain etc. ? Not to worry it was private enterprise that put it there.
Any questions? OK, we have lots of stupid answers.
Stay tuned for more.
Does this verbal spray of inanities have anything at all to do with the tragic events in Italy ???
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is not about scientists, it's about a team that were delegated to provide information about the chance of an earthquake.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere has also been a gelogyst who said that there would have been an earthquake in few day, just 7 days before the earthquake striked.
I know that there are no 100% sure ways to predict an earthquake, but there are also no ways to tell people that they are 100% sure. In fact, the story of that region says that every big strike starts with many small strikes, and saying that there are no risk at all is just something you do not have to do.
By the way, the trial will take nowhere, it's not likely to come to a sentence.
From Italy,
Alessio.
Thats dumb. Number one, you cant know for sure a large earthquake in the area will be proceeded by smaller ones until after its occurred. Second, the guy that ran around screaming to everyone to leave had his reasons to believe the earthquake was about to occur based on radon gas emissions which is highly inconclusive. Third,you dont predict earthquakes. You forecast them. Why dont we jail all of the meterologists then for property damage because they can't ever get a storm's direction right? And fourth, you cannot just up and move an entire population without proof because of economic collapse. The place would have been destroyed either way. Either by the job loss etc or the earthquake. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFrom America,
Joseph
If you dont say "itll be ok" you'll have panic. No doubt.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisReally? Listened to the wrong scientists? Did you happen to read all of MR. "I can tell when an eathquake is coming by inconclusive radon gas tests" false predictions? I think not.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI like your logic sir.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this