Discussion Questions for PT, Chapter
14
1. "We did not go into the field to test hypotheses; we
went to map the planet" (228). Did he mean so literally?
If so, are all aspects of geology this type of research?
Are other sciences?
2. Does the style of this chapter seem to be more
narrative and forgetting the science?
3. "This kind of thing gets geology a bad name" (229).
This was being said to him as someone reviewed his
dissertation. What was wrong with his dissertation?
4. How does geology and geophysics differ especially on
the topic of plate tectonics?
5. In page 234 the authors claims that the statement "only
physics is really science" is an extreme one, and that
"[scientists] all need each other in the earth sciences if
progress is to be made? Is this unconditionally true and
"absurd"?
6. On page 242, Oreskes makes a point that have briefly
discussed in class before: "general knowledge and
understanding of the earth sciences is becoming increasingly
rare." This is an indirect reference to question number 5, and
refers to this idea that scientists need to more knowledgeable
in other sciences to be successful? Why do scientists still
press on such an "archaic" idea that has been proven to be
ineffective/unnecessary time after time?
7. Pg 237 "There is clearly a global tectonic cycle that
assembles continental blocks and then disrupts them..." Is
there or will there be any way to calculate these cycles, and
what does this information do for us today?
8. As we know that geology is "a difficult, field based
science that takes immense amounts of time, patience, and
care..." (Pg 241), will there be some geological events that
we will never be able to learn about or discover?
9. Pg 242 "If we fail to train the new generations in
geology, the earth sciences will decay to a speculative,
shallow, model building." Do you agree with this? Why?