Earthquakes & tsunamis - trusting in gods, mammon or science
The massive destruction we see in the news from Chile was caused by the biggest earthquake the world has seen for years. Yet news reports say hundreds of people have died. Tragic though their deaths are, terrifying though the circumstances are for the survivors, we inevitably compare the impact of this earthquake with the vast hellish devastation in Haiti with the hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed amid the rubble.
There are many reasons why there was such a difference between Concepcion and Port-au-Prince. Highest on the list is that policy decision-makers in Chile valued science, and gave it practical expression in such prosaic matters as building regulations and emergency services provision.
In bleak, unforgiving contrast, the Haitians trusted in God or Mammon.
Scientists' understanding of earthquakes isn't exact, but it's not shaky either. It tells of probabilities not certainties. And, as with climate change modelling, the maths is adjusted in the face of evidence.
It's science, too, that can explain tsunamis, and predict their impact with an impressive though not total precision. We now know that tsunamis are not expressions of anger from some mythical being, but the inevitable consequence of an earthquake on the seabed.
People on the Pacific rim have responded to the probability of tsunami after this Chilean earthquake; evidence that humanity has learned from the devastation and 250K deaths from the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami. Then mathematicians in California had calculated the height, direction and speed of the tsunamis, had no means to tell the threatened populations what was about to happen on their coastlines. Warning systems are now in place as a result, and have been used this weekend, as reported in the Post earlier today..
We feel impotent in the face of the vast human tragedy in Port-au-Prince and Concepcion, as we did for Aceh and Sri Lanka in 2004. But investment in science, in medicine, in engineering here, right here, right now, is perhaps the most useful response. It's through research that we learn about the world. Thereby sometimes we can, as in Concepcion, make the inevitable evitable.
Older/Newer
« Commons Inquiry to Get to the Truth Behind Rover and Cadbury | Happy cities -- stitching the disconnections? »
8 Comments
Leave a comment
News authors
Jonathan Walker - The Birmingham Post's political editor
My postings |
My feed
David Kuczora - A PR consultant working in Birmingham and living in the 'burbs
My postings
Alister Scott - Professor of Spatial Planning and Governance, Birmingham City University
My postings
Latest Birmingham Post Business blog
Birmingham Post staff and guest bloggers from Birmingham and the midlands inform and entertain on all business matters.
Latest Birmingham Post Lifestyle blog
Birmingham Post staff and guest bloggers from the midlands give you the lowdown on what's happening in your region and some musings on culture in the UK and beyond.
Latest Birmingham Post Science blog
Birmingham Post staff and guest bloggers from Birmingham and the midlands inform and entertain on all science matters.
Latest Birmingham Post Sport blog
Birmingham Post staff and guest bloggers from Birmingham and the midlands inform and entertain on all sporting matters.
I believe both - God & Science! That was when I found out God is not against science but in support and even inspiration to it. Jesus had a disciple who was a Doctor - Luke. As for earthquakes, the Bible mentions too many examples to describe them all in here. Nobody in the Bible spoke more about earthquakes than Jesus Christ. Does anyone bother to know what he said about earthquakes, why they happen and what to expect in future regarding them?
Thanks for your comment, Marcel.
I didn't, however, use the word 'believe' for science is not a belief system.
would the word 'trust' do it for you instead?
Trust? No â scientists get it wrong. I used the verb 'value'.
If I have the choice of getting into an airplane built by imagination or belief, or one designed and built by scientists and engineers who've changed their minds in the face of evidence, I go with the latter.
It's why, too, I consult a licensed medic when I'll ill or in need of health advice, and not a quack or, indeed, a priest.
An Airplane was first conceived in someone's imagination - the mind upon a belief that it was possible to fly even though most people 'valued it' such idea as ridiculous. Only then it's possible to be engineered. As for your conception of the job of a priest, it's a bit disappointing and discriminating in your comparison. Needless to go any further, since your mind and 'values' are already revealed.
But's it's never too late to learn better whether in life or in death. I guess your standards of living will speak louder than your words. "The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, and their ways are vile." Psalm 53:1
Hm. So discussion is dead because I'm a fool, corrupt and vile. What next for my vile corrupt being? The Inquisition or, given that I'm a woman, the ducking stool?
While you ponder my fate were it in your hands, here's a question: Were you living in a earthquake zone, would you prefer to live in a house built to regulations or one built on prayer and/or official corruption of the monetary kind?
I actually live in an earthquake country... I probably have felt more earthquakes in my life than the amount of prayers you ever made in your entire life. Perhaps that's the reason why I studied about them and discovered what God says about them too.
You are deviating the talk as if I refute science because of faith. Why are you doing that? Does it make you feel better? Would Mr William Lench, a man who founded the Institution you are part of, a faithful man to his beliefs and causes of faith agree with you? Would all his money and charity be used as it was, (and is) by being away from his faith or by what he learned from it? Or it just make you leave by the tangent as by discarding other aspects that might 'disqualify' you in life? Just check again my first post and you will see that I said I believe in science but I have grown enough to understand the benefits, knowledge and life standards of an intelligent faith. An intelligent faith is emptied of religion and fanaticism in order to focus on obvious precepts of life and God's Word. Lots of famous Scientists & Philosophers agreed and agree with that. Mr William Thomson Kelvin, Albert Eistein, who said: âÂÂScience without faith is lame, faith without science is blind.â Isaac Newton, etc... Today there are over 700 prominent Scientists in US alone who are devoted to their faith and yet contribute greatly to science and Engineering Check a recent post on: http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/08/we-believe-in-evolution-and-god-.html
As for the corruption aspects... Do you blame the whole Police Force for one or two corrupted officers? Do you blame the whole Medical Authority or a Hospital because of one negligent doctor? So why would you do it with the faith? Does your career of good deeds should be tainted by some of poor mistakes in life, even when it turned out wrong when you are actually were trying to do it right? Realise you need space to grow, mature and after all, never disqualify what you have never understood deeply. This is my last post here. Good Luck with your life.
I believe both - God & Science to.many chinese believe to.very happy to see you article