White Island eruption

Forums › Off topic › White Island eruption

1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 25

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2373062 12-Dec-2019 10:01

Fred99:

tdgeek:

IMHO nothing has changed at all. 30 years of visits, nothing has changed.

Did they used to take such large tours with ~50 people on the island at one time?

How does that matter? Alert 1 is acceptable, Alert 2 is acceptable, or its not. That applies to 47 people or 4 people, or 1 person.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15469

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2373063 12-Dec-2019 10:02

tdgeek:

networkn:

I am torn on this. It's normal for people to want accountability when people die tragically like this, however, how much accountability does the person signing the waiver need to accept? The Tour operators will become the target/scapegoats here certainly. Bottom line it's an active volcano and tour operators have operated under the same set of conditions for many years (17,000 people last year were there apparently).

Given it can explode on a moment's notice with apparently no warning, then surely you either ban tours full stop or you don't hold people to account if things go wrong.

From what Ive seen, they all get told its a volcano, there is a risk. Thats it. Alert 2, more activity, heightened risk of an eruption, they didn't get told that. As the operators take alert 2 as fine. IMHO, that's the problem, extra activity, heightened risk of an eruption. Those at risk on ski fields have a FAR greater chance of avoidance if one erupted, if you are 3 metres from the crater, you have no hope. I can see that Alert 2 can keep ski fields open, but banned from the summit (as occurs) but WI is so much different, you are literally IN the volcano when you are 3 metres from crater lake

If I put myself in that position, well obviously there are safety concerns but obviously its been deemed as ok. Factor that by 3 in todays PC/OSH society.

IF indeed they weren't told of increased activity or risk, then I believe accountability is reasonable and fair.

I wasn't aware until a couple of days that a Volcano could pop on a moments notice with no real warning signs. It pretty much ensures I'd not ever consider going to it or near one recreationally.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2373076 12-Dec-2019 10:06

Batman: Anyway, the legal mess that this leaves might be crazy. Suddenly they are investigating the tour company, the cruise company might be asked , and even the island owners have liability.

But the govt agency monitoring, well they have done nothing wrong it seems.

What do people think? Going on an active volcano is risk free cos it won't erupt/nobody told us it would erupt? Or maybe there needed to be a fire exit to be pointed out to tourists when it erupts?

Decide is Alert 1 is acceptable. That simmering with normal ranges. Alert 2 is extra activity from gas and or water, and/or deformation, and/or seismic. heightened risk of eruption. IMHO thats when its shut down for the duration. Its not that common. You close a ski field when not enough snow, too much weather, whats the diff?

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2373080 12-Dec-2019 10:10

networkn:

tdgeek:

networkn:

I am torn on this. It's normal for people to want accountability when people die tragically like this, however, how much accountability does the person signing the waiver need to accept? The Tour operators will become the target/scapegoats here certainly. Bottom line it's an active volcano and tour operators have operated under the same set of conditions for many years (17,000 people last year were there apparently).

Given it can explode on a moment's notice with apparently no warning, then surely you either ban tours full stop or you don't hold people to account if things go wrong.

From what Ive seen, they all get told its a volcano, there is a risk. Thats it. Alert 2, more activity, heightened risk of an eruption, they didn't get told that. As the operators take alert 2 as fine. IMHO, that's the problem, extra activity, heightened risk of an eruption. Those at risk on ski fields have a FAR greater chance of avoidance if one erupted, if you are 3 metres from the crater, you have no hope. I can see that Alert 2 can keep ski fields open, but banned from the summit (as occurs) but WI is so much different, you are literally IN the volcano when you are 3 metres from crater lake

If I put myself in that position, well obviously there are safety concerns but obviously its been deemed as ok. Factor that by 3 in todays PC/OSH society.

IF indeed they weren't told of increased activity or risk, then I believe accountability is reasonable and fair.

I wasn't aware until a couple of days that a Volcano could pop on a moments notice with no real warning signs. It pretty much ensures I'd not ever consider going to it or near one recreationally.

Yes, they can all blow at any time. But so can a bungy rope, etc. If scientists are keeping an eye on it, thats good enough for me, but if they are, but the call to go is ignoring that (which I did not now) then I see that as a concern. Of all the adventure activities this surely was high risk, but scientist alerts meant nothing. The next alert is 3, that means a small eruption. So, there is NO alert level in reality.

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3317

Trusted

#2373081 12-Dec-2019 10:10

Batman: Survival with 50 percent burns is pretty low. Most of these in hospital have over 80 percent.

Yes, so we can expect more of that 23 to die in the coming days.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2373082 12-Dec-2019 10:10

networkn:
I am torn on this. It's normal for people to want accountability when people die tragically like this, however, how much accountability does the person signing the waiver need to accept? The Tour operators will become the target/scapegoats here certainly. Bottom line it's an active volcano and tour operators have operated under the same set of conditions for many years (17,000 people last year were there apparently).

Given it can explode on a moment's notice with apparently no warning, then surely you either ban tours full stop or you don't hold people to account if things go wrong.

I'm not even slightly torn.

It's a volcano. There's a risk. Anyone freely paying to go there is willingly accepting that risk.

Same as accepting the risk of a crash when you fly or drive, or of death during surgery procedure etc etc.

Life is full of risks. The very idea that someone could undertake an inherently risky activity free of risk is nonsense.

The only question is whether the alert level was such as it ought to have stopped the trips.

If it wasn't, then it's unfortunate but sometimes life notes back. If it was, then someone erred and will no doubt see the inside of a courtroom.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2373083 12-Dec-2019 10:10

networkn:
I am torn on this. It's normal for people to want accountability when people die tragically like this, however, how much accountability does the person signing the waiver need to accept? The Tour operators will become the target/scapegoats here certainly. Bottom line it's an active volcano and tour operators have operated under the same set of conditions for many years (17,000 people last year were there apparently).

Given it can explode on a moment's notice with apparently no warning, then surely you either ban tours full stop or you don't hold people to account if things go wrong.

I'm not even slightly torn.

It's a volcano. There's a risk. Anyone freely paying to go there is willingly accepting that risk.

Same as accepting the risk of a crash when you fly or drive, or of death during surgery procedure etc etc.

Life is full of risks. The very idea that someone could undertake an inherently risky activity free of risk is nonsense.

The only question is whether the alert level was such as it ought to have stopped the trips.

If it wasn't, then it's unfortunate but sometimes life bites back. If it was, then someone erred and will no doubt see the inside of a courtroom.

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3317

Trusted

#2373088 12-Dec-2019 10:15

We have the technical ability to make cars and planes safer. We can't make volcanoes safer.

GV27

5977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2373089 12-Dec-2019 10:17

tdgeek:

IMHO nothing has changed at all. 30 years of visits, nothing has changed.

Sorry for the ambiguity here, I meant physical changes in the volcano itself i.e. obstructed pathways, new vents, changes in the lake stability, etc as result of the eruption and further eruptions may mean previous understandings of risk at White Island are no longer that relevant.

jonathan18

7415 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#2373108 12-Dec-2019 10:54

Batman: Suicide is illegal.

Apologies for going OT, but I think it's important that fallacies like this are corrected...

Umm, not in New Zealand. Assisting someone to kill themselves is a crime, but not killing oneself.

According to Te Ara:

From 1893 suicide was not a crime, but attempted suicide remained a crime until 1961. However, after 1900 it was not regarded as a serious crime – about 50 people a year were brought before the magistrate’s court charged with attempted suicide, but most were either discharged or convicted with sureties for good behaviour.

Source: https://teara.govt.nz/en/suicide/page-6

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2373110 12-Dec-2019 10:56

tdgeek:

Fred99:

tdgeek:

IMHO nothing has changed at all. 30 years of visits, nothing has changed.

Did they used to take such large tours with ~50 people on the island at one time?

How does that matter? Alert 1 is acceptable, Alert 2 is acceptable, or its not. That applies to 47 people or 4 people, or 1 person.

You're exposing many more people to risk - and stretching the resources of any possible rescue operation.

You seem to have missed the part where with White Island, it can erupt at any time from any alert level. FWIW, they've dropped the level now from 3 to 2, but the risk of an eruption hasn't diminished, it's just not currently erupting (level 3).

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

itxtme

2102 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557

#2373111 12-Dec-2019 10:56

Batman: Suicide is illegal. On the other hand Euthanasia bill is passed. What's wrong with wanting to retrieve one's brother? Or cave diving? Free diving... Etc

Suicide is not illegal

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2374107 12-Dec-2019 11:05

itxtme:

Batman: Suicide is illegal. On the other hand Euthanasia bill is passed. What's wrong with wanting to retrieve one's brother? Or cave diving? Free diving... Etc

Suicide is not illegal

Also, what would the point be of making it illegal? Who would ever be convicted?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2374109 12-Dec-2019 11:07

Geektastic:

Same as accepting the risk of a crash when you fly or drive, or of death during surgery procedure etc etc.

People seem to be incapable of assessing risk / understanding relative risk. They'll ride a motorbike to the airport but worry about flight safety, feed their kids junk food 7 days a week - but put them in sun-proof clothing all day, worry themselves to death about being eaten by sharks, when you're millions of times more likely to be eaten by microbes, then if you do realise that, become a "dettol freak" or compulsive hand-washer despite pretty poor evidence that might save you, and some reasonably compelling evidence that it's doing harm.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2374120 12-Dec-2019 11:18

Fred99:

Geektastic:

Same as accepting the risk of a crash when you fly or drive, or of death during surgery procedure etc etc.

People seem to be incapable of assessing risk / understanding relative risk. They'll ride a motorbike to the airport but worry about flight safety, feed their kids junk food 7 days a week - but put them in sun-proof clothing all day, worry themselves to death about being eaten by sharks, when you're millions of times more likely to be eaten by microbes, then if you do realise that, become a "dettol freak" or compulsive hand-washer despite pretty poor evidence that might save you, and some reasonably compelling evidence that it's doing harm.

Indeed.

1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 25