|
|
Question: what happens when you find someone who
has far more knowledge than you?
Answer: Give them the podium!
The Passion of the Amateur
by Joseph
Summerour
published: October
7, 2005
As a brief intro, I blog politics & science issues at “geosciblog” and beer at beercanblog” . I currently teach Geology and
Environmental Science at an Atlanta-area junior college. My viewpoints come from the
perspective of a “field scientist”, i.e., one that has worked outdoors,
not within the laboratory, except of limited occasions. Of course the laboratory is a
place where some aspects of nature can be studied in a controlled manner,
but outdoors is the place to read Earth history as it is recorded in (and
below) the hills and valleys of the land.
In order to gain a
Bachelor’s Degree in Geology and then a Master’s Degree, it is necessary
to be exposed to other science or quasi-science arenas, e.g., Physics,
Chemistry, Biology, Geography, Climatology, etc., and some “hybrid”
courses, e.g., Geochemistry and Geophysics. Coursework in Geography and
History help provide a sense of perspective as to where science issues
“fit” into the culture. So
when I blog about issues beyond Geology, e.g., Climatology, Oceanography,
Meteorology, Geography, History, Environmental Science, etc., it could be
considered as a passionate amateur, with a modicum of
training.
A significant portion of the duties of a scientist is to inform
others of ongoing research and results, whether by published reports or by
conversations at parties and other social functions. Thus we need some sort of
communication skills or at least the passion to make the subject
interesting. And sometimes in
our passion, we may have a tendency to “overwrite” in order to fulfill our
need to explain things.
I do not fancy myself to be a professional writer, rather I pursue
blogging because of passion.
As a geologist, I become frustrated with media misrepresentation of
science or the political misuse of science for agendas. Myself and other scientists want
to see “good science”, e.g., “the best of our current understanding”
presented to the public without political baggage. Both parties are guilty of
mangling science to fit their concepts and biases, though one party, with
its connections with the Main Stream Media, appears to be worse than the
other. Some of this misuse is
willful and some of it may simply be because of obsolete information. I blog politics because of my
personal transition from a “Classical Liberal” to a
Conservative/Libertarian, i.e., I have seen both sides of the political
spectrum. I made the
transition largely because of conservative talk radio. As a Classical Liberal, I
considered it my duty to be open-minded and to listen to the opposition
and judge them on the merits of their arguments. Over time, the opinions and
analysis of Rush Limbaugh, et
al, progressively made more sense and when the Berlin Wall and the
Eastern Bloc/Soviet Union rapidly “fell” in the late 1980s/early 1990s, I
said to myself “maybe Reagan was right”. I blog politics to help bring
“both sides” of the argument to the table for consideration by other
open-minded people. Not that
I have any special insights, but sometimes just the different articulation
of an issue or perhaps using scientific principles may help someone
understand an issue for the first time.
For those not in the realm of science, the study of nature is an
ongoing endeavor, i.e., there is a “Never-ending Learning Curve”. Most scientists, especially those
that work outdoors, understand this.
We understand that some of what “we know” will be obsolete in five,
ten, twenty years.
Politicians and lawyers like things “tied up and finished”, while
scientists understand that, in some respects, we are on a “roller coaster”
of nature. That is what makes
science interesting, that there is almost always something new to learn,
though it may be bewildering to some.
A better understanding of past climatic history may help us
understand some of the “hows and whys” of past human cultural events. In other words, there is a growing
body of evidence as to how climatic events play a role in human
migrations, the rise and fall of cultures, the spread of diseases, and
other aspects of human history.
So dedicate yourself to turning off the TV sitcoms and “reality
shows” and tune yourself into the enjoyment of learning something
new. You could start with the
History Channel, the Discovery Channel, PBS, and internet resources, with
the understanding that at times, there may be the interjection of
political viewpoints into scientific discussions. Hopefully, by availing yourself to
a number of different information sources, you will be able to glean the
useful information from the political chaff & entertainment
fluff. You never know how a
little bit of pertinent information may pay off. Your ability to answer a child’s
question may spark an interest in science. It may trigger a change in
political views if you can present rational answers to agenda-driven
“talking points”.
The
content of this article is copyrighted 2005© by Joseph Summerour, and is
published on The Anthropogene with the express permission and consent of
Joseph Summerour. No part of these contents may be reproduced or
redistributed by any mean without the written consent of the author. The
article and views presented are his alone.
2.
Examining the Random Conceit
by John Sweat
published: October 7,
2005
If history is reprocessed because our selection of those
causes that we are interested in are deliberately selected or discarded
due to relevance - then don't be surprised when the ground shifts and
Clausewitz's proverbial fog settles down upon one's thoughts and casts
unnatural appearance upon the landscape.
The fungus ridden corpse of Lenin,
still lying in state in his mausoleum in Red Square merits little
attention these days.
"Lenin," mused Natasha Zakharova, 23, as she walked off
Red Square on Tuesday, admitting that she was not quite sure whose body
she had just seen. "Was he a Communist?"
Perhaps this more than anything shows history being lost,
the the onset of collective amnesia taking place.
And our perceptions change. An interesting thought
experiment shows that in our "post-modern" world these two atavistic
figures represent the Matter of Britain. The antiquarian can only feebly
protest the exclusion of Arthur.
Rule Britannia vs. Cool
Britannia?
Regarding the Anthropogene and it's subject matter, we have
Paul Crutzen, the Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric chemist who proposed
four years ago that the Anthropocene had begun - a new geological era
whose prime determinant is the impact of humans on the global
environment.
This concept has been stretched of late in a most sinister
and paranoid fashion. The most virulent of the Muslim propograndists
accuse the United States of triggering the Indian Ocean Tsunami with
advanced weaponry. Enviro-cultists, such as Robert F. Kennedy, accuse
American energy policies for the twin onslaughts of Hurricane Katrina and
Hurricane Rita. One would almost expect a return to the concept of the
Harvest King to placate such false prophets.
If there is one single concept I would like to point out on
this site, humans, while a most active niche player in the terrestrial
ecology, are still merely part of that system - not above and beyond
it.
 Back |
|
