Italian scientists guilty of manslaughter after failing to warn about earthquake

[JtheJackal]

Every quote of the scientists has shown that everything they said is factually accurate. It is beyond outrageous anyone thinks the scientists actually did something wrong.

 

[Borachio]

To be precise: every report that you have read shows that what they said was factually accurate.

Other reports, which I've not seen either but the judge of the case presumably has, indicate they were simply part of a corrupt government system, more interested in making a profit from substandard construction than saving people's lives.

But, maybe I misunderstand the situation.

 

[LightSpectra]

You can also thank the Catholic Church for the persecution of scientists but who is counting?

Zero scientists persecuted by the Catholic Church, as counted by a self-described atheist professor of history:

In the academic sphere at least the "Conflict Thesis" of a historical war between science and theology has been long since overturned. It is very odd that so many of my fellow atheists are clinging so desperately to a long-dead position that was only ever upheld by amateur Nineteenth Century polemicists and not the careful research of recent objective peer reviewed historians. This is strange behaviour for people who like to label themselves "rationalists". I'll leave others to ponder how "rational" it is.

...

As mentioned above, no manifestation of "the Myth" is complete without the Galileo Affair being raised. The proponents of the idea that the Church stifled science and reason in the Middle Ages have to wheel him out, because without him they actually have absolutely zero examples of the Church persecuting anyone for anything to do with inquiries into the natural world.

Source

 

[Crezth]

One is decidedly not zero.

e: Also, don't pretend the Catholic Church doesn't have a storied history of burning heretics, scientists or no. Sometimes that included students of natural philosophy who looked up at the sky and said "hold on a minute;" sometimes it included people who said "maybe the trinity doesn't exist." This is not something that should be whitewashed.

If you want to dismiss it as necessary because those heretics were endangering the immortal souls of others, so be it, but at least just come out with it and say you advocate slaying the unfaithful. I admit I'm just guessing here, but you either have to support the Catholics Church on this or pretend it didn't happen. Either is lunacy.

 

[del62]

If these scientists had been corrrupt and mafiosi types they would probably wouldnt have gone to jail

 

[LightSpectra]

One is decidedly not zero.

Glad you asked, because he went on to dispel that myth as well, since Galileo wasn't being tried for religious reasons, but because he was proclaiming heliocentrism to be absolute truth based off of incorrect reasoning (his model was incapable of explaining the phenomenon of parallax shifts).

Maybe you should really give that article a read.

e: Also, don't pretend the Catholic Church doesn't have a storied history of burning heretics, scientists or no. Sometimes that included students of natural philosophy who looked up at the sky and said "hold on a minute;" sometimes it included people who said "maybe the trinity doesn't exist." This is not something that should be whitewashed.

If you want to dismiss it as necessary because those heretics were endangering the immortal souls of others, so be it, but at least just come out with it and say you advocate slaying the unfaithful. I admit I'm just guessing here, but you either have to support the Catholics Church on this or pretend it didn't happen. Either is lunacy.

I'm really glad you keep repeating these tropes; that's all the more misinformation that I can refute. In addition to being the sponsor of basically all scientific inquiry for thousands of years by funding universities, hospitals and libraries, the Catholic Church also has never burned somebody that, as you describe, "looked up at the sky and said 'hold on a minute'". The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate otherwise.

Heresy didn't really progress the way you think it did. There were no cases of guys in universities saying "I know this to be fact", contrary to Catholic doctrine, and the Catholic Church executing them for it. When people taught "heresy" in public, in most cases they would get a strongly-worded letter from a bishop about it, and then if they refuse to retract their opinions, they would be excommunicated. Now, in some kingdoms, that's a capital offense. Because heretics were infrequently guys at universities teaching weird things, they were usually guys that would become fringe extremists and political rebels, that could gain military power and revolt against the regime. Such examples of this are the Cathars.

But the Catholic Church wasn't just wantonly executing heretics. Movements like the Dominican Order were founded specifically to peacefully preach and disarm heretics, who were, again, political rebels.

 

[illram]

The Italian justice system strikes again!

This sets a terrible precedent. The US should offer amnesty to Italian scientists who fear this sort of absurd persecution.

 

[Ondskan]

Nah, it's fair. We send bankers to jail when they cause financial meltdowns, after al-

oh, wait.

But we should, you n00b.
Although frankly they aren't truly responsible as we have made their responsibility null and void by creating a legal person out of the corporation like the morons we are.

 

[Lillefix]

But the Catholic Church wasn't just wantonly executing heretics. Movements like the Dominican Order were founded specifically to peacefully preach and disarm heretics, who were, again, political rebels.

Reminds me of a joke.

Why did the chicken cross the road?

Thomas de Torquemada:
Give me ten minutes with the chicken and I'll find out.

 

[Crezth]

Glad you asked, because he went on to dispel that myth as well, since Galileo wasn't being tried for religious reasons, but because he was proclaiming heliocentrism to be absolute truth based off of incorrect reasoning (his model was incapable of explaining the phenomenon of parallax shifts).

Maybe you should really give that article a read.

The idea that the Catholic Church rejected Galileo's claims due to insufficient maths is hysterical: geocentrism is quite apparently far less substantiated than heliocentrism on a good morning for geocentrism. That historian is a crock.

But let's suppose that it was the case. What gives the Catholic Church any proper authority to imprison Galileo for simply being bad at astronomy?

I'm really glad you keep repeating these tropes; that's all the more misinformation that I can refute. In addition to being the sponsor of basically all scientific inquiry for thousands of years by funding universities, hospitals and libraries, the Catholic Church also has never burned somebody that, as you describe, "looked up at the sky and said 'hold on a minute'". The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate otherwise.

The Catholic Church sponsored all scientific inquiry for thousands of years? What about the Muslim world? The Orthodox world? The Protestant world? The Orient?

The notion that the Catholic Church was the sole font of all wisdom for thousands of years is not only deludedly west-centric, but something of a suspect claim. It certainly begs the question of why the the rise of protestantism and the loosening of the Catholic Church's grip seemed to correlate with the rise of rationalism and scientific inquiry.

Heresy didn't really progress the way you think it did. There were no cases of guys in universities saying "I know this to be fact", contrary to Catholic doctrine, and the Catholic Church executing them for it. When people taught "heresy" in public, in most cases they would get a strongly-worded letter from a bishop about it, and then if they refuse to retract their opinions, they would be excommunicated. Now, in some kingdoms, that's a capital offense. Because heretics were infrequently guys at universities teaching weird things, they were usually guys that would become fringe extremists and political rebels, that could gain military power and revolt against the regime. Such examples of this are the Cathars.

But the Catholic Church wasn't just wantonly executing heretics. Movements like the Dominican Order were founded specifically to peacefully preach and disarm heretics, who were, again, political rebels.

Were heretics executed by the Catholic Church or were they not? What of Giordano Bruno, who was supposed to be burnt for his heresy?

The Church was infamous for brooking no dissent, or at the very least being tolerant of regimes acting in its name that were no less brutal for it. If it allowed ostensibly Catholic kingdoms to carry on disembowling heretics in the name of Catholicism, that amounts to more than simple passing approval.

 

[Ondskan]

Why don't you kiss my ass and tell me how awesome I am crezth. You know you loved my post. Just admit it. Go ahead.

 

[classical_hero]

The problem with the scientists is that they did not give out all the information. The fact that they did predict that there would be no major earthquake is negligent, since if you can't predict when one will happen, you then can't rule out when so the best advice would have been that the chance is low, but as always there is a chance. You should always be prepared for the worst, which what these scientists did not do and thus they put people in danger. It also shows the serious lack of proper building code in the region if a 6.3 earthquake can do that much damage.

 

[Crezth]

Why don't you kiss my ass and tell me how awesome I am crezth. You know you loved my post. Just admit it. Go ahead.

u rokk

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I don't really see where your bigotry came into play, but you can thank the Catholic Church for the fact that seismology even exists at all.

Please elaborate. Right now this sounds about as sensible as saying that genetic engineering wouldn't be possible if the United States of America didn't exist. Why is Roman Catholicism a necessary prerequisite to monitoring and analyzing ground waves?

 

[FriendlyFire]

Climate scientist should be executed for failing to predict global warming.

 

[onedreamer]

As I've read it, they said there was no higher risk in the coming days, not that there was no risk. Geologists think in terms of confidence intervals, not in binary yes / no questions. I find it very hard to imagine a competent geologist ruling out the possibility of an earthquake.

What it seems to me then, is that there was a breakdown in communication. A group of geologists reported that the small swarm of earthquakes prior to the large quake was not evidence of a large coming quake. This was reported as a large quake was not forthcoming.

Every quote of the scientists has shown that everything they said is factually accurate. It is beyond outrageous anyone thinks the scientists actually did something wrong.

Ok you do not read what I write. Can you please READ before answering? Those quotes you have read have been written AFTER the earthquake. There has been no breakdown in communication, it all went as planned as their intent was to calm down the population, as it is CLEAR by reading the wire tappings. Also, another detail I have been omitting but that gives you a better idea of the people involved, the same night of the earthquake, at late hours the head of the Civil Protection who has his phone controlled by Police for other shameful reasons, calls a house contractor his friend to inform him of the disaster and this guy REJOICES at the terrible news: he knows in advance and without even mentioning it he will win the appalt to rebuild crumbled houses.

 

[onedreamer]

This is the transcription of the phone call of Guido Bertolaso head of Civil Protection to the regional head of Civil Protection Daniela Stati, to set up the infamous meeting to discuss of the continuous earthquakes in the region the last of which 4.1 Richter caused evacuation of public offices and universities. In the previous days there had been voices by independent scientists that would "predict" a stronger earthquake soon (but centered 50km away from where it happened and with several days of difference), so the goal of this people is to put these voices at rest, the problem is that they overdone it since if it is true that earthquakes can't be predicted, it is also true that they can't be excluded. Use a translator for now, I know it sucks but maybe later I or someone else will have the time to provide a better translation. This phone call gives you the idea of the corruption of the men (and women) holding offices in these institutions:

Stati: Pronto?

Bertolaso: Sono Guido Bertolaso.

S: Oh! Buonasera, caspita che onore.

B: Come stai?

S: Bene, tu come stai Guido?

B: Bene. Senti, ti chiamerà De Bernardinis, adesso, il mio vice, al quale ho detto di fare una riunione lì all'Aquila domani su questa vicenda di questo sciame sismico che continua, in modo da zittire subito qualsiasi imbecille, placare illazioni, preoccupazioni, eccetera.

S: Ti ringrazio, Guido. Grazie mille.

B: Però devi dire ai tuoi di non fare comunicato dove non sono previste altre scosse di terremoto, perché quelle sono cazzate, non si dicono mai queste cose quando si parla di terremoti.

S: Va benissimo.

B: È uscita un’agenzia che dice ‘non ci saranno altre scosse’, ma questa è una cosa che non si dice mai, Daniela, neanche sotto tortura.

S: Io guarda, Guido, non lo sapevo e mi scuso per loro perché esco in questo momento dalla Giunta.

B: Figurati, non c’è problema, però digli che quando devono fare comunicati parlassero con il mio ufficio stampa, che ormai ha la laurea honoris causa in informazione in emergenza e quindi sanno come ci si comporta in modo da evitare boomerang perché se tra due ore c’è una scossa di terremoto, che cosa dicono i tuoi?

S: Li chiamo subito.

B: Il terremoto è un terreno minato, bisogna essere prudentissimi. Comunque questa cosa la sistemiamo. La cosa importante è che adesso De Bernardinis ti chiama per dirti dove volete fare la riunione. Io non vengo, ma vengono Zamberletti, Barberi, Boschi, quindi i luminari del terremoto d’Italia. Li faccio venire all’Aquila o da te o in prefettura, decidete voi, a me non frega niente, di modo che è più un’operazione mediatica, hai capito?

S: Sì, sì.

B: Così loro, che sono i massimi esperti di terremoti diranno: è una situazione normale, sono fenomeni che si verificano, meglio che ci siano 100 scosse di 4 scala Richter piuttosto che il silenzio perché 100 scosse servono a liberare energia e non ci sarà mai la scossa, quella che fa male. Hai capito?

S: Va bene allora io intanto adesso li chiamo cerco di bloccare il comunicato...

B: No, no, no, l’hanno già fatto, ci stanno mettendo una pezza i miei. Tu adesso parla con De Bernardinis e decidete dove fare questa riunione domani, poi fatelo sapere che ci sarà questa riunione, che non è perché siamo spaventati e preoccupati, ma è perché vogliamo tranquillizzare la gente. E invece di parlare io e te, facciamo parlare i massimi scienziati nel campo della sismologia.

S: Va benissimo. E poi ci vediamo domani pomeriggio a Roma perché il presidente Chiodi mi diceva che ci sarà un incontro sui Giochi del Mediterraneo

B: Non ci sarò io ci sarà Aiello, domani pomeriggio sarò a Napoli.

S: Va bene allora poi ti mando una relazione su quello che è successo.

B: Va bene.

S: Grazie Guido. Ciao, buona serata.

B: Ciao

 

[onedreamer]

A translation of the key sentences:

B: Così loro, che sono i massimi esperti di terremoti diranno: è una situazione normale, sono fenomeni che si verificano, meglio che ci siano 100 scosse di 4 scala Richter piuttosto che il silenzio perché 100 scosse servono a liberare energia e non ci sarà mai la scossa, quella che fa male. Hai capito?

This way they who are the recognized experts about earthquakes will say: it is a normal situation, these phenomena happen frequently and it is better to have 100 tremors of 4 magnitudo than to have silence because 100 tremors liberate energy and hence there will never be THE earthquake, the one that hurts. Got it?

S: Va bene allora io intanto adesso li chiamo cerco di bloccare il comunicato...

All right, meanwhile I call them to stop the other communicate...

B: No, no, no, l’hanno già fatto, ci stanno mettendo una pezza i miei. Tu adesso parla con De Bernardinis e decidete dove fare questa riunione domani, poi fatelo sapere che ci sarà questa riunione, che non è perché siamo spaventati e preoccupati, ma è perché vogliamo tranquillizzare la gente. E invece di parlare io e te, facciamo parlare i massimi scienziati nel campo della sismologia.

No no it's already done, my men are fixing it. Now you will speak with De Bernardinis and you decide where to hold this meeting tomorrow, then make it known why there will be this meeting, not because we are scared and worried, but because we want to calm down people. And instead of speaking in first person, we let speak the best experts in the field of seismology.

---

Which then said what Bertolaso suggested, "fixing" the bit about the earthquake swarm it in the post-earthquake report by adding that "although a mainshock can never be excluded".

 

[LightSpectra]

Please elaborate. Right now this sounds about as sensible as saying that genetic engineering wouldn't be possible if the United States of America didn't exist. Why is Roman Catholicism a necessary prerequisite to monitoring and analyzing ground waves?

First European seismoscope was theorized by Jean de la Hautefeuille, a 16th century French Catholic priest.

The idea that the Catholic Church rejected Galileo's claims due to insufficient maths is hysterical: geocentrism is quite apparently far less substantiated than heliocentrism on a good morning for geocentrism. That historian is a crock.

We're not talking about flat eathers in the 21st century, Crezth. We're talking about 16th century astronomy, which wasn't very advanced. Later in the century Jesuit astronomers proved heliocentrism to be a fact, and they weren't burned at the stake; rather, Catholics accepted the provided evidence and heliocentrism became the norm.

The problem with Galileo is that he didn't have the technology nor the reasoning to prove his claims. Again, he was unable to explain the phenomenon of parallax shifts, and openly admitted so. I'm sorry you think old narratives about EVIL CATHOLICS THAT HATE SCIENCE are more reliable than every good historian's recognition of the fact that Galileo wasn't persecuted for being a scientist but for tangential matters that ran with that affair. I guess every history department since the 1960s is just full of hysteria.

Plotinus made a really good post about it in World History here.

"Galileo's views were rejected by the majority of scientists of his day - not for religious reasons but because the evidence simply didn't support them. From the point of view of contemporary scientific consensus, the church leaders were going with the majority."

Plotinus, and the Ph.D atheist historian I linked you to, both agree that "science versus religion" narratives were invented by 19th century polemicists and have little to do with actual history.

The Catholic Church sponsored all scientific inquiry for thousands of years? What about the Muslim world? The Orthodox world? The Protestant world? The Orient?

They did too? I wasn't talking about globally. I was talking about in Europe. In ye olden days, there weren't scientific laboratories waiting for research grants. There were only universities and monasteries, and almost all of those were funded by the Church.

Were heretics executed by the Catholic Church or were they not? What of Giordano Bruno, who was supposed to be burnt for his heresy?

Would you like me to talk about that in depth, or are you just going to twist that around and call historians who know what they're talking about "hysterical"?

The Church was infamous for brooking no dissent, or at the very least being tolerant of regimes acting in its name that were no less brutal for it. If it allowed ostensibly Catholic kingdoms to carry on disembowling heretics in the name of Catholicism, that amounts to more than simple passing approval.

I'm sorry, you're just wrong. Heretics "gutted en masse" like the Arians and Albigensians were also political rebels that challenged the authority of the king; in spite of that, Dominicans were dispatched to preach to them to convert them peacefully. There were other heretical movements that were condemned but never violently attacked, since they posed no threat to the monarchs of territories with those heretics; such examples of this are the Waldensians and the Jansenists.

I encourage you to keep posting. The only actually important thing I do on these boards is dispel anti-Catholic misinformation.

 

[Crezth]

The problem with Galileo is that he didn't have the technology nor the reasoning to prove his claims. <snip>

Alright, I concede the point.

They did too? I wasn't talking about globally. I was talking about in Europe. In ye olden days, there weren't scientific laboratories waiting for research grants. There were only universities and monasteries, and almost all of those were funded by the Church.

You notably said "all" scientific inquiry. It's possibly the case in Europe until the enlightenment, but after that point I think you'd be hard-pressed to argue that scientific progress only comes about as a fact of the Church.

Would you like me to talk about that in depth, or are you just going to twist that around and call historians who know what they're talking about "hysterical"?

Go ahead.

I encourage you to keep posting. The only actually important thing I do on these boards is dispel anti-Catholic misinformation.

I have plenty against Catholics without having to resort to apocryphal tales of Catholic anti-scienceism, but that'd be off topic.

My sister goes to a Catholic school, some of my good friends are Catholic, etc. I'm not just some internet atheist foaming at the mouth here.