Posted on 12/29/2004 6:47:34 AM PST by Melpomene
Just minutes after the earthquake in the Indian Ocean on Sunday morning, Thailand's foremost meteorological experts were sitting together in a crisis meeting. But they decided not to warn about the tsunami "out of courtesy to the tourist industry", writes the Thailand daily newspaper The Nation.
The experts got the news around 8:00 am on Sunday morning local time.
An hour later, the first massive wave struck. But the experts started to discuss the economic impacts when they were discussing if a tsunami warning should be made. The main argument against such a warning was that there have not been any floods in 300 years. Also, the experts believed the Indonesian island Sumatra would be a "cushion" for the southern coast of Thailand. The experts also had bad information; they thought the tremor was 8.1. A similar earthquake occurred in the same area in 2002 with no flooding at all.
...We finally decided not to do anything because the tourist season was in full swing. The hotels were 100% booked full. What if we issued a warning, which would have led to an evacuation, and nothing had happened. What would be the outcome? The tourist industry would be immediately hurt. Our department would not be able to endure a lawsuit...
******
Just THINK of all the tiny, little isolated islands of which we never heard out in that vast ocean, think how they have been effected by this. Just think how long it will be until (or IF) we find out about all the tiny islands' people. There are thousands of islands where people live(d) that probably haven't been contacted or seen yet. This is just so sad!
A few great movies could be made of some of the things that happened to some of these unfortunate and most likely terrified people!
It really is awful!
Try not to be an utter idiot. Predicting long-term climate trends is a cutting-edge business. Very, very tough to do.
Bump.
It certainly is very tough, given that people tend to place credence in data that supports their agenda, and disregard data that doesn't. Why, that practically makes it impossible to do correctly. Why don't satellite data show that the air is warming, only surface-based measurements located near urban areas? Here's another one, if Tuvalu is sinking because the ocean is rising (because of melting ice, global warming), why aren't the neighboring islands also sinking? Why only Tuvalu? Since I'm such an idiot, according to you, could you please explain that one to me?
I think this was probably the deciding factor. If there had been flooding before, they probably wouldn't have thought twice about issuing a warning.
This looks to me like someone has to be blamed.
I've found that movies about "victims" are not nearly as interesting to me as movies about people who struggle to overcome or even prevent disaster (Deep Impact vs Armageddon - the latter far surpassed, IMHO). Any heroism out there? Anybody stand up against the wave, in a metaphorical sense? Sorry if I seem too analytical about such a tragedy, but as a former newsperson and ongoing writer, it's what I do.
For the record, "The Day After Tomorrow" fell apart for me because it was about a guy trying to bond with his son and, oh, by the way, IMPOSSIBLE CATASTROPHE!
I doubt if it would have made any difference at all. One hour is an impossibly short time to convey the warning to everyone on every beach.
Thanks for the link.
If it's so tough to do, how come every liberal on earth agrees that it is real? Are they all cutting edge climatologists, or just speaking out of their a**es?
BUSH owns 90% of the tourist industry in SE Asia. He did, it's all his fault! BAD BAD BAD BAD....
Might not be too far off - they were thinking like capitalists and everyone knows that Bush is the epitome of a capitalist. If not for his influence, they would have definitley decided in favor of public safety instead of money. After all, these 3rd-world countries are famous for their humanitarian proclivities...<
The rest of your stuff is the same. Tuvalu is sinking but neighboring islands aren't. There's a conflict between surface based and satellite data, etc. Do you really think that scientists who specialize in this stuff are unaware of such arguments? That they're caught be surprise when they read about it on Free Republic or in the Daily Fish Wrap?
This stuff is being hashed out daily, even hourly, by first-rate professionals...and the consensus in their community is that global warming is real, species extinction is real.
A scientific consensus can be wrong but it's the best human beings can do at any given moment. The objections to it are strictly economic; the costs of moderating human influence are too great to bear...and the proposed interventions would be ineffective.
Answer me this: If sea levels are rising, how does one island sink and its neighbors not?
Probably!!!
But Government Tsunami Forecasters are not going to have enough assets to make it worthwhile for all the claimants and lawyers involved.
But if you could sue:
Now there's a lawsuit!!
Also add the following to the list of defendants:
It wasn't "Haliburton" making the decision.
It was the liberals/UN's/media/pundits/democrat's favorite party: The Thai politicians were making the decision NOT to issue a warning!
Why do liberals ignore the fact that the climate isn't constant and never has been?
Don't you guys have ANY imagination? Here's what really caused the tsunami:
Recognizing the fact that BUSH's War for Oil in Iraq is going badly, Halliburton decides that it must look elsewhere. Using its geophysical technology, Halliburton intentionally set off the tsunami. "Why?", you ask. It's simple: recognizing that its Iraq work was winding down, Halliburton wants reconstruction projects in SE and South Asia. The corporation-controlled media does not report accidents; everything happens for a reason. And the reason usually involves profits for Bush's cronies. Need proof:
- Halliburton executives and technical personnel have "vacationed" in Phuket and other resorts in S. Thailand almost continuously for the past several years. Obviously, these executives and other Halliburton operatives were engaged in the project, which was codenamed "SURFSUP"
- Halliburton companies have operations in Indonesia that would serve as cover for SURFSUP. Its presence in the region would enable it to get "emergency" sole-source contracts from the Bush Administration.
- Halliburton has extensive geophysical technology and expertise that they employ for SURFSUP. Halliburton subsidiaries have actually operated in this region and have extensive seismic data.
- The Bush Administration has, of course, another reason for SURFSUP. Bush wants to divert attention from its failures in Iraq and elsewhere.
- Everything else you can read about in Michael Crighton's "State of Fear", which was released in late December to shift the blame from the evil Halliburton to the righteous environmental movement. Is it a coincidence that this heavily promoted best-seller would be released just days before this massive tsunami? Just change the name from NERF to Halliburton, and you have all you need to know about how THIS IS ALL BUSH'S FAULT!!!!!!
Fill in some irrelevant details related to:
- Halliburton employees who actually did visit Phuket in the past years (I'm sure hundreds of visits have been made by Middle East project engineers and managers on R&R. Documentary evidence of their visits certainly exists.)
- Halliburton subsidiaries and joint-ventures in South and SE Asia.
- Halliburton's geophysical expertise.
- Halliburton's contracts in the region.
- Halliburtons's funding (no matter how insignificant or indirect) of one of the sponsors of one or more of the studies cited by Crighton. This will establish a conspiracy with media to condition the public in a manner that subtly shifts blame to environmental NGOs.
- Why we can expect more tsunamis caused by global warming. (This doesn't really support the conspiracy theory, but it never hurts to repeat the looming catastrophes from global warming.)
Ridiculous? OF COURSE, it's a CONSPIRACY THEORY. The more ridiculous, the better. Non sequitors actually make the theory more believable to gullible liberals since their worldview is already based on garbled logic.
Just in case it's not transparently obvious, this post is farce. Halliburton is, in fact, a fine company that has been unscrupulously slandered and libeled by Democrats and their minions in the mainstream media.
What did Rumsfeld know and when did he know it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.