≡ Menu

A sculptor once said to me, “Science is a discipline followed with passion. Art is a passion followed with discipline.” In The Planet In A Pebble: A Journey Into Earth’s Deep History, Jan Zalasiewicz describes well how geology and its pursuit is simultaneously both discipline and passion. From the origin of its parts in the Big Bang and earth’s own cataclysmic birth to its subterranean assembly, from its exhumation in a plate tectonic act to ultimate disintegration many millions of years from now, the book follows the life of a pebble of Welsh slate. Along this arduous journey with the pebble, the reader is introduced to the fundamentals of geology as well as the tools and practices of the trade.

A pebble of Welsh slate. One will never consider such a rock sample drab, lowly or boring again on learning its contents and history, which is the makeup and story of the earth itself. The book begins with the creation of our solar system and immediately relates geology to the first principles of science – that an implicit understanding of these is required, that geology is not an “ism” in isolation but a synthesis of fundamental sciences in the study of this ball of physics, chemistry and biology on which we live. Pebble also directly imparts an understanding of and respect for time, that key geological ingredient.

Landscapes are transient. This is a concept that does not come easily to us. In our brief lifetimes we see the Earth’s landmasses as things of massive permanence, the bedrock of passing civilizations. And yet even in these human lifetimes we can see masses of rock debris piled up beneath mountain crags – and, as we walk nearby, hear the fall of new scree fragments, dislodged from rock faces by wind and water … Multiply such changes by the vastness of geological time, and there is plenty of time to change the face of a continent.

Zalasiewicz appears to be a paleontologist and geochronologist primarily, obvious from the tender explanations of the biochemistry of deep sea life, fossil preservation and rock dating techniques. One cannot get over clever phrases like  “cathedral-like vaults” when describing clay mineral formation at a molecular level, “atomic wallflowers” in the U-Pb dating of detrital zircons and the “baroque complexity” of well-preserved graptolites. The only complaint I have about the book, then, is that while it jumps with the ease and intellectual curiosity between concepts required of such an investigation, it does not spend equal amounts of time on those concepts. Case in point: The word “graptolite” shows up approximately 60 times in the book, while “lithosphere” and “palaeomagnetism” appear not even once. Zalasiewicz loves graptolites, we get it.

The book has its excessively-detailed Tolkien moments, but it is that same passion and dedication which propelled me through Pebble and its beautiful take on a deeply-buried mudstone’s oil window – “not only did that pebble yield up its own few drops of oil, but it also allowed through it many more such droplets that travelled up from the strata below, on their way towards the surface.” And following that the transformation of that mudstone into the metamorphic rock slate, in a majestic act of mountain-building known as the Caledonian/Acadian orogeny.

No scientist should be without a sense of humility and humor. In his generous use of terms like “reasonable,” “estimate,” “conundrum” and “working model,” Zalasiewicz sends the message clearly that geological analysis is a forensic science – an investigation using all currently-available tools and theories – and the only thing we know is that there is a lot more to know.

Out there, somewhere, will be the Rosetta Stone of the chitinozoans … waiting to be released. Someone will find it, and realize what it is … Then, there will be brief fanfare among palaeontologists, and celebrations and the concoction of a purple-prosed press release. And the next day, palaeontologists (one or two with slight hangovers) will get back to work, for there is much more work to do out there, and many more mysteries to be solved.

Admittedly, it is hard to review an earth science book without an eye to science education and literacy. Given that an introductory geology class is the only science class many students take at the university level, I offer that this book with more illustrations (and scale bars on existing illustrations) would serve as an excellent textbook, thanks in large part to its readability, with more formal classroom learning following along with its chapters. I can guarantee that many a budding geologist will emerge from its pages, the amazing tale of this lowly pebble no more.

There is a pleasure in the pathless woods,
There is a rapture on the lonely shore,
There is society where none intrudes,
By the deep sea, and music in its roar.

The Dark, Blue Sea by Lord George Gordon Byron


Disclosure: Oxford University Press gave me a copy of the book for review purposes. No other form of compensation was received.

1 comment

I’m gonna need my own zip code.
Because I’m fat, I’m fat, sha mone.

Fat by Weird Al Yankovic

Two nicely-written opinions on America’s love-hate relationship with body fat. Despite the crazy amount of travel and delicious baked goods on my schedule this time of year, I’ve managed to fend off the Christmas 10. It’s not heroic self-discipline on my part (natch) but my stomach now rejecting any food and drink beyond a certain limit. Hooray for glucocorticoids.

Madison.com | Wisconsinites May Be Fat And Drunk, But At Least We’re Honest About It

If you call somebody on the phone in Connecticut, Massachusetts or Vermont and ask how much they weigh, meanwhile, they will say, “Practically nothing. I look pretty good, quite svelte, actually.” Your average Wisconsinite, in the meantime, will say, “I weigh roughly the same as a horse. I am so fat I can barely waddle to the bar ” although I do make it there somehow.”

This sort of honesty and good humor, I believe, is what gives us such excellent mental health in comparison to other skinnier and supposedly more sober places. And, the fact is, there are only six states with better mental health than we have, based upon the number of days we tell interviewers we limit our activities for mental reasons. In other words, we Wisconsinites function well on a day-to-day basis ” so long as there’s beer or donuts nearby.

Reason | Obama’s Obesity War

Yes, parents have the right to decide what their children eat”but let’s not pretend that many of them don’t make woefully bad decisions. One-third of American children and teenagers are overweight while nearly 20 percent are obese”a shocking rise since 1980, when the childhood obesity rate was barely above 5 percent. One need only look around to confirm these statistics. The consequences already include a spike in early-onset diabetes and high cholesterol. Things will get worse when fat children become fat adults.

… the cult of thinness poses its own health risks, including dangerous diets and eating disorders. It is equally true that no one, adult or child, should be treated cruelly because of body weight. But the answer is not to go to the other extreme and normalize, if not glamorize, obesity or the lifestyle choices that create it. Conservatives have often argued that, in order for a free society to flourish, individual freedom must be coupled with self-restraint. Perhaps some appreciation of this old-fashioned virtue is just what’s needed in the debate over food and fat.

0 comments

Sainted Mother Of JoePa. This is all some overpaid graphic design group can come up with as the Big Ten’s much-awaited new logo?

You have got to be kidding me.

SBNation Cleveland’s Martin Rickman: “It’s good to see that they went out and grabbed a branding firm worse than the one that did that atrocity of a GAP logo earlier this year. The Big Ten refuses to be outdone. Should we hire Jim Tressel’s six-year-old nephew to draw something up?”

And the dropping of the other stinky cleat: the new Big Ten Twelve Ten’s division names are … wait for it … Legends and Leaders. The shock of 6000+ Chicago Tribune readers is nicely encapsulated in the results of this poll.

Didn’t the internet get GAP to reject its cheesy new logo in one week’s time? The Big Ten and its money deserve better than Jim Delaney and this.

3 comments

Truer Words

One of my favorite people emerges momentarily to say:

Things are changing, but that, it now strikes me more than ever, is a stupid thing to write. If there is one thing my generation can vouch for with certainty, it is change. There were no such things as cell phones, or blogs when our lifetime began, after all. But still, despite the obvious dynamic nature of the macroscopic world, it bears repeating, I guess, that my little microcosm is changing.

Amen, sister.

0 comments

We have arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster. We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces.”
–Carl Sagan

Your wish is my command, dear readers. You asked for a post on seeing Neil Tyson speak and you get it.

For those of you who don’t know Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson (shame on you), he is an astronomer, director of New York City’s Hayden Planetarium, author and, most importantly, educator and champion of science literacy. Back in September, D and I attended one of his lectures at the beautiful Playhouse Square Theatre in downtown Cleveland.

Adventures in Science Literacy: A Cosmic Perspective was the title of the lecture. “Or adventures in science illiteracy,” as Tyson began the evening.

"Say it with me: Biiiilllllllliiiioooooonnnnns."

Who is a scientist?

Tyson describes this person as “one who is aware of the way things work, fluent in math and empowers ideas, behavior and survival.” As he said on Lab Out Loud:

The most important feature [of the science-literate] is an outlook that you bring with you in your daily walk through life. It’s a lens through which you look that affects how you see the world. And the science literacy that can be promoted along those lines shows up in a lot of ways …  So science literacy is not the know-it-all who’s fluent in science jargon; science literacy is the person who knows how to question the world around them, and en route to an answer that’s deeper than you would otherwise get.

While a well-educated scientist or science-literate is preferred, note that nowhere does this description say anything about the stereotypical haughty, liberal nerd in glasses, lab coat and ivory tower. But also note that Tyson and some other scientists in the media like him got here through their knowledge and willingness to impart that knowledge.

There was then a series of interesting tidbits including one on the visualization of the periodic table: by atomic number, by melting point, by nation of discovery and the fact that, even by the mid-1800s, half of the current table remained to be discovered. I remember momentarily entertaining some rather profound thoughts on science philosophy (more or less continuous through time) versus science methodology (discontinuous; dependent on available inventions of the time) and promptly losing them to the lecture. So it goes.

The rest of Tyson’s talk related to the impact of science illiteracy on formerly exceptional nations and societies. Ahem. Yes, he’s talking to us, America.

[A valid question at this point is whether America is indeed growing in the direction of science illiteracy and the accompanying decline of rational empire. Yes, on religious and secular fronts. A note on the latter, which Tyson doesn’t really get into here: While there are a lot more domestic and foreign scientists working in American academia, government and industry than at the height of the atomic age, I refer back to the Sagan quote at the beginning of this post and point out that there is a growing divide between those who understand and develop science and technology and those who don’t. And both sides aided this uncommunicative over-specialization – scientists were all “Back off, I’m a scientist” while laypeople said, “Get in the lab and prolong my now comfortable-consumer lifestyle.” The compartmentalization and commodification of science superposed a culture of science. With that, back to Tyson.]

“America is sliding into scientific insignificance because of religious dogma.”

We have always been a religious nation, but the attack on science by religious fundamentalists in the United States worries Tyson, and rightfully so, because it is taking its toll on our economic viability going forward. (According to the World Economic Forum, the US ranks 52 out of 139 nations in quality of university math and science instruction. In 2010.)

Tyson points to the Arab-Muslim world as a stark example of the impact of religious dogma (not religion itself, mind you) and where such prevailing thought has led the region: oppressive socio-economic conditions outside the super-oil-rich states, the mistreatment of women and active schools and terrorist cells of religious extremism in every country. All of this, according to Tyson, was the fault of one late-11th-early-12th-century philosopher named Ghazali who is reported to have single-handedly moved Islamic thought from the realms of theology and Aristotelian inquiry to faith and faith alone. Reading more about him, I am less inclined to look on Ghazali as the Augustine of Hippo of his time and vilify him alone for the decline of rational Islam. Also, hailing from a culture that created and practised rational knowledge systems that predate the west’s by, oh, a few millennia, I allow fully for many different means of and reasons for knowing. (Epistemology through the ages FTW.) However, underlying what can be termed science, be it western Aristotelian or eastern Vedic, is empiricism, i.e. observation, inquiry and measurement, and never faith in any dose.

Times of social, political and economic stability and growth are good for science and progress, which in turn create more years of stability and growth. Of course, this feedback loop has a tragically negative corollary. We tend to circle the wagons, get more conservative and view any change with suspicion in the face of real and perceived threats. So, it’s a pity that the invading Crusaders and Mongols turned the volume up on existing Muslim fundamentalists, which hasn’t let up to this day, given continuous instability in the region since the Middle Ages.

The greater pity is that Europe and the West would never have seen science as we know it had Arabs not translated Aristotle’s, Archimedes’s, Ptolemy’s, Euclid’s and countless other Greek scientists’ works and kept them alive in the Islamic Golden Age, as Tyson reminded us that night. Al Biruni, Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Ibn Rushd (Averroes) – I remember reading about these men and buildings in Kuwait named after them. And it makes me sad.

“Katrina did not cause the disaster in New Orleans. Faulty levees did. What country do we live in?”

Just like that, Tyson connected it all back to America and bridged two of my worlds with those very words.

He prefaced this statement with something along the lines of not allowing ourselves to be spoonfed news and views, but instead that knowledge of science helps us develop our own ways to question the prevailing narrative and check if it makes sense. To borrow a similar sentiment from another of his lectures, “I don’t require that you understand the geological crystalline structure of quartz. What I would like you to have is a way for you to [ask and] answer questions about that.”

[Placeholder for some interesting stuff he said on American growth and decline that fell out of my head, but will jump right back in when I stop thinking about it.]

Naturally, some parents in the audience had the obvious question, “How do I get my kids interested in science?”

Tyson’s answer: “Get out of the way! And get out of the way as a minimum. As a maximum, further stimulate curiosity by surrounding kids with things that they can explore on their own.”

Neil deGrasse Tyson In Cleveland

As is the case with any speaker who wants to be invited back, Neil Tyson ended on a hopeful note. “Rational thought will prevail over superstitious thought.” He reminded us that “we have more scientific television programming than ever before” (note to self: put Big Bang Theory in Netflix queue) and that religion can work with science, an attempt at reconciliation that didn’t sit well with half the audience, but one that I understand having grown up in a very Hindu but very scientific family. Can we get to that place in America? I sure hope so. It’s that or certain collapse. Can modern America lend itself to such synthesis and movement? I don’t know.

What do you think? If you have or haven’t seen and listened to Tyson in person, I’d like to hear your comments.

1 comment