1. Page 211 states, "When I was an undergraduate at
Harvard in the late 1940s, my professors ignored or
dismissed (with ridicule) speculation that continents move
relative to each other, the poles tip, and convection
currents constantly stir the interior of the earth." Is this
questioning a normal response to such a theory? Do you think
the opinions of these professors influenced those of their
students?
2. Page 126 states, "Are plate tectonics for geologists
the equivalent of Bohr's theory of the atom for physicists,
as has been claimed?" What are your opinions on this?
3. Page 125 speaks of a natural "herd instinct" that
scientists tend to have. Can you think of examples of
scientists who were ostracized due to their refusal to
follow the "herd"? Did any of them end up being right in the
end?
5. In certain classes, we are supposed to present a speech,
PowerPoint, or even our thoughts with ease and as smoothly
as possible. Sir Harold did not have that skill of
communication when it came to lectures, this strikes me as
very odd for communication is a vital part of science. Do
you agree with this statement?
8. In the "Afterthoughts" section, the topic of 'herds'
vs strays was brought up. It was evident that herds had
all the power, money, and backup that the strays needed.
What if somehow there were no herds and if everyone did
their own thing/stopped following other scientists? How
different would science be?
13. Would there be even more people discounted and ridiculed
for their work if there were no herds?
21. On page 125 the author refers to the "herd instinct."
We've discussed this kind of behavior from scientists before
and we've witnessed it in almost all the fields. However,
what is unique about plate tectonics and their "herd?"
34. Related to the first question, on page 111 the
author uses the word "ridicule" to describe the treatment
that Plate Tectonics proponents faced. Imagine being part
of this debate and receiving this kind of treatment while
discussing an upcoming idea. Would this treatment make you
distance yourself from the field like Wegener or "fight"
back like Mendeleev?
55. How different do you think the field and the theory
of plate tectonics would be if sonar mapping wasn't
available during WWII? How much longer would it take to
develop a withstanding theory considering the fact that it
took almost an extra 20 years to accept it?
89. If continental drift was accelerated, how would the
world react to these new borders? (Think about
international relations, economy, trade deals, politics
etc.)
144. In science we've constantly detected and
recognized more intricate details about certain
"catch-all" theories like atoms and gravity to name two of
them. Do you think plate tectonics is "the theory" that
explains all we need to know about how the Earth
changed/change/ and will change