"If the risk of being hit by a rockfall is way down the scale compared to walking across the road or driving your car, then we need to know that". This logic is being overridden by a panic-led search for absolute safety. CLEARLY by the number of injuries and fatalities sustained even in the 4 major events, the life-risk from rockfall is MUCH LESS than the public is being led to believe. Yet all manner of restrictions are being imposed on occupation of dwellings and movement. This has to change.
Context is everything . Cycle helmets a case in point . You would think you would have a certainty of brain injury without one , statistically there insignificant , with some studies a helmet makes you think your safer so ride more dangerously . I always thought a spike in the steering wheel would make people drive safely !
The kinetic energy of these rocks are extremely high. The whole area needs to be completely off limits for all people and any development as well. This is a killing field just waiting to happen.
Except that in the earthquake which caused all these rock falls, the deaths (if any) where minor compared to building collapse. So you comment about banning development is like suggesting we ban cars as they kill hundreds a year.
@@zestoslife we all know the earthquakes are caused by climate change. It’s a proven scientific fact. When we get the global climate under control then we may lift any ban on development are a stabilization study is complete which may be upwards of 100 years.
