prudence is always a wise choise.


Il 23/10/2012 18:02, Steinar Midtskogen ha scritto:
> Mauro Mariotti  writes:
>
>> The word of the defence point the guilt of the accused.
>> "...there is no way to predict major quakes..."
>> so this imply there is also
>> "...no way to predict there will be NO major quake..."
> ...
>> But believe me, I am also partially eye-witnesses of some facts of the
>> l'Aquila quake, these people are guilty.
>
> That equally implies that there IS a way to predict major quakes.  I
> suggest that the public from now on ask the jury whether a quake is
> imminent.  And the jury would know that if they give the wrong answer,
> they'll go to jail.
>
> If the best advice is "go home, don't worry" based on the science
> available, which may have been the case here other than the advice
> "abandon your homes, you live in an earthquake prone area and will
> most likely during your lifetime experience a major quake", scientists
> should be allowed to speak.
>
> In this case it's probably worth considering what the press has
> filtered.  Nuances and reservations are always lost when journalists
> relay science.
>

-- 
Mauro Mariotti
http://www.infoeq.it
http://www.sara.pg.it

__________________________________________________________

Public Seismic Network Mailing List (PSNLIST)

To leave this list email PSNLIST-REQUEST@.............. with 
the body of the message (first line only): unsubscribe
See http://www.seismicnet.com/maillist.html for more information.