Catastrophes occur because people believe half baked crap

Some examples 














Background . There are always things we don't know in the precipitation of a man made disaster,  but the evidence is that ,what was obvious to a few, or very few ,wasn't effectively communicated to those who could have done something to prevent it. 

The occasions when no one saw the risk are  rare and not the focus here.
The terrible truth is that  there are often many ways on the road to catastrophe to prevent it,  which makes the noise from constant general talk of catastrophe just another example of careless crap .


The other terrible truth is that not many of us are good listeners - especially when it comes our objectivity about a bigger picture. about the truth others may have ( Peterson's rule 9)

Take this claim from the  climate catastrophians that "the end of the world is nigh " ,Why aren't many of  us NOT listening to them? 
I heard someone say on the sacred ABC  that 100% of scientists agree with him  , but  that's a lie.  Noone should follow a liar or treat the ABC staff as knowing what we need to know-- most are not anywhere near practicing scientists .A deep trust in what ALL scientists think is not very deep because scientists dont always agree - esp on implications of their knowledge.
I hate it that my profession is implicated but not properly involved (say debate), but you should know we scientists get ignored too- whatever we truly know!--

We are not listening to the  catastrophians too because we don't really know where the climate catastrophe persons want us to run to? If such people want to be listened (and not further condemned ) they must  succinctly save time and spell out the road to avoidance. No more burning of any kind ?, Sequestration of a truly substantive kind? 
With volcanoes and landslides,it helps if a local scientist is on the ground , You the reader need to know there are none-NOW - there used to be before , TODAY you NOW get a noise on your phone or on radio . ring 000 what a huge waste of money is spent by state governments  trying to act like parents to us !  "I will tell you when your life is at risk " --they say .You would be mad to trust them  

It is the very crime of the catastrophians that they misuse hearing time  by not being specific .
Is it the crime of our very own broadcaster that they are quite subtle and sly  in refusing to let a variety of voices ( close to action ) be heard on the subject /their subject choice .( thankfully One 2 One and other programs like Arndo is changing things)
 Real risk reduction always requires  specific recognition of cocontentating forces. This is of course is the annoying truth -you have to listen to the long winded way of all scientists and observers in practice-to see when the planets collide --- too bad there are no short cuts,, and crying wolf kills  )
The crime of the catastrophians is that they waste time talking about risk in ways which do not really address it . 
The important  but differing roles of the student , the participant and the observer ( very important subject noted here with S , O ' and P's below ) is not the main focus here.

The very human reasons why proper communication did not occur,  as with the fable, is the focus here.,  I have had the privilege of being both S, P and O as a geoscientist working in rural areas.

These deep historic and ongoing realities in men's failure to really listen to each other MUST be taken as critical if we are to avoid both small and large disasters. Excuse making we can't stop, but by being alert and not alarmed ,we can avoid more disasters.  

The Aberfan tragedy 1966  
The risk of a pile of excavated fill going thixotrophic when saturated would have been observed by many people in most moist towns across the country. You don't have to be an expert to notice ( S+O) important things-- to be a good observer (O)  ,

Geoscientists know the risk of landslide to be very high  and the risk of slurry slide to come with momentum energy that would be developed by its height in the landscape ( the situation at Aberfan) . Sitting high above a city,  its hard not to think slurry and landslide at some point. Why the blindness? (B)
 While one might have expected the local geotechnical engineers (S) to have at one moment noticed the probable structural  failure of fill outside,  their daily focus  was quite normally  on structural failure inside the mine ( where lives were also at risk of being lost ) ,

A key risk  for any of us is that we can be so close to something  ( a good thing and the best thing )  (P) is we can't see it (S)   We need to listen to each other to live well .
 Prosecution of sound risk management usually requires at least TWO parties( eg P+O) to talk to each other. 
We don't know who didn't talk to who,  but we do know that as usually happens with HBC-- the obvious is touted as  cause  when in reality risk will usually run deeper. The creek was a focus for some but the low factor of safety was all that mattered . We know the very high rainfall of the time was blamed by management but those of who study the substance know that all sort of  secondary is normally highly distractionary.
Yes  for eg rainfall is a cause but,,,,,,,,,

If you cut no deeper  that the risk of bush fire being increased by higher than normal temperatures (TODAY- drafted in November)  you will probably be not advancing the cause of prevention protection and real wisdom about risk.

If you talk when someone else should be talking , you risk being the problem. 

GPS on our phones should be used as a way of alerting people to risks. 

You heard it first from Emperors Academy
Don' t forget to never leave technology in the hands of wannabes , Give it over to professional scientists ( and geoscientists in particular )