Survival in Tough Times: Science is never settled. One can assert "facts," but the assertion still has to be proved every time. Science never trusts. It verifies.
I nearly became a geology major, but decided my abominable math skills would prevent any possible success. So to fulfill science and math requirements as an undergrad, I took geology, but not the notorious "Rocks for Jocks" classes. I took the intro sequence for geology majors. I wanted the real stuff.
It was a wonderful time to study geology in the middle 1970s. As in all my other classes, a full professor taught the classes and brought us many learned lectures three days of every week for an entire year. In that class I was able to expand my knowledge of glacial geology. The essay question on my last geology final was about glacial succession in New York state and out to Long Island. I predicted the question, prepared for it, and nailed it. Aced the class. Awesome!
Everything takes time. Lots of time
Plate tectonics had just come into its own and was part of the curriculum. It explained so much and provided so many great questions to ponder. The tectonic subduction zones, the Ring of Fire, the volcanoes in Sicily and Alaska and Washington and Indonesia, Krakatoa, Vesuvius, the earthquakes and new islands formed in the middle of the Atlantic all began to fit a rational pattern and make sense.
Each of these events was spectacular to us, but none of it happened in a hurry.
One of the first things we learned in geology back in those days when there was little pseudo-science in the curriculum was a fundamental concept called uniformitarianism. You don't hear much about it now, for some reason.
From Britannica:
uniformitarianism, in geology, the doctrine suggesting that Earth's geologic processes acted in the same manner and with essentially the same intensity in the past as they do in the present and that such uniformity is sufficient to account for all geologic change. This principle is fundamental to geologic thinking and underlies the whole development of the science of geology.
Nota bene: Long running geological mechanisms of the past still operate today and will operate in the future. These processes function uniformly and slowly. Sudden changes are exceedingly rare, even in geological terms. A grain of sand moving an inch on a beach and a pebble moving an inch down a mountain valley in a creek can both be considered geological events. In other words, everything takes time. Lots of time.
Uniformitarianism was the scientific answer to catastrophis
m
Uniformitarianism was the scientific answer to catastrophism, the idea that a series of catastrophic events such as the Biblical flood, had shaped the world as we know it. These events had occurred over a relatively short period of time, bringing sudden and unexpected changes to the earth.
The uniformitarians won that one.
What may be seen as a major event to humans is almost certainly not a major event on the geological time scale. If a major event like the one that led to the extinction of dinosaurs hits, we won't be able to predict its coming. That event had a major impact on plant and animal life, but there's an argument that it wasn't a major event in the geological history of the earth. Geological events continued afterward as they had before. That is to say, very slowly.
The doctrine of uniformitarianism has always been a powerful check on the Chicken Littles of the world. Here's how to apply it.
Someone runs on stage shouting: "The sky is falling!"
Ask the following questions:
What, right now? How do we know this? Who says? Show me the photos.
Where is it falling? What caused it to start falling? Show me.
Has the sky always been falling? Is this something new or part of a longer trend?
Has this happened before? When? What caused it then?
Why is the sky falling now when it wasn't falling before?
How long will the sky fall?
When will the sky stop falling?
Support Canada Free Press
Dismissed as a fear monger, quack, or CNN science advisor, but I repeat myself
If after an assertion or a prediction we can go through these questions and demand answers, then we can rather easily determine its value. Assertions and predictions must follow the doctrine of uniformitarianism.
The easiest assertions to shoot down are the scary predictions. "Sea levels are rising and will inundate coastal areas of the world where most of the population lives!" Really? Where is this happening now? "Why, there's an island in the Pacific that's practically underwater now!" Really? Which one? Do I assume correctly that all the other islands in the Pacific have similar rising water levels? No? JUST ONE ISLAND IN THE PACIFIC HAS RISING SEA LEVELS? Interesting! Gee. Do you think there could be any other explanation? Are really smart and really cool people who live near sea level quietly selling their properties and moving to locations with higher elevations? No? Why not? How long has this rising water level thing been going on? Who says? How soon will this rising water level happen? In 50 years? In 100 years? How do we know that? What is driving this unprecedented geological event? Has it ever happened before? Has it ever happened before in the time frame predicted? Are you out of your mind?
Anyone who makes an anti-uniformitarian assertion but resists answering the above questions may safely be dismissed as a fear monger, quack, or CNN science advisor, but I repeat myself.
And if the assertion can be proven, then it's still not time to panic. It's time to move. Don't tell anybody, or the freeway is going to get really crowded before you pack all the boxes.
Science is never settled. One can assert "facts," but the assertion still has to be proved every time. Science never trusts. It verifies.
Dr. Bruce Smith (Inkwell, Hearth and Plow) is a retired professor of history and a lifelong observer of politics and world events. He holds degrees from Indiana University and the University of Notre Dame. In addition to writing, he works as a caretaker and handyman. His non-fiction book The War Comes to Plum Street, about daily life in the 1930s and during World War II, may be ordered from Indiana University Press.
I nearly became a geology major, but decided my abominable math skills would prevent any possible success. So to fulfill science and math requirements as an undergrad, I took geology, but not the notorious "Rocks for Jocks" classes. I took the intro sequence for geology majors. I wanted the real stuff.
It was a wonderful time to study geology in the middle 1970s. As in all my other classes, a full professor taught the classes and brought us many learned lectures three days of every week for an entire year. In that class I was able to expand my knowledge of glacial geology. The essay question on my last geology final was about glacial succession in New York state and out to Long Island. I predicted the question, prepared for it, and nailed it. Aced the class. Awesome!
