The trial of seven Italian earthquake experts facing manslaughter charges for not correctly predicting an earthquake continued this week.

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

The trial of seven Italian earthquake experts facing manslaughter charges for not correctly predicting a deadly earthquake continued this week.

The prosecution’s argument that the experts had underplayed the possible occurrence of a major quake was bolstered by testimony from Daniela Stati, the former civil protection officer for Abruzzo, who took an active role in the March 31 meeting. Stati confirmed what she had previously told prosecutors in 2010, that one of the indicted said during the meeting that the continuing tremors represented a “favorable signal” because there was a continuous discharge of energy that made stronger tremors less likely. In fact, scientific evidence suggests that groups of small earthquakes tend instead to increase the chances of a major earthquake nearby, even though the absolute probability of such a quake remains low. Stati said that nobody within the commission objected to this statement. She also underlined that the “reassuring message” given to the press by her, L’Aquila Mayor Massimo Cialente, and two of the indicted, Franco Barberi and Bernardo De Bernardinis, was based on comments made at the meeting.


One comment

  • Chris Kirkendall

    Insanity ! ! I guess people now think Science is some form of Wizardry – we can see the future & predict it with 100% accuracy! Maybe in a way this is fallout from the Global Warming folks, who tell us they CAN predict what the climate will be like 10, 20 or 100 years from now – even though no one is able to predict the formation of a tornado even an hour ahead of time. We can say conditions are right, but not that one will actually form or where it will go. I think we need to do a better job of teaching not just Science FACTS, but how the scientific method operates…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *