tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post2783343422594829497..comments2024-03-22T11:55:50.335+13:00Comments on Not PC: Global earthquake animationPeter Cresswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-26287786381540865902016-12-06T07:47:09.818+13:002016-12-06T07:47:09.818+13:00This sort of thing is absolutely fascinating. Two ...This sort of thing is absolutely fascinating. Two things jump out at me that I'm not sure would jump out at most readers: <br /><br />1) None of these points represents a single datum. Earthquake centers and epicenters are calculated based on triangulation, using data collected at an astonishing number of seismomiters. That data needs to be sifted and the noise removed. This is largely automated these days, but you still have to have someone verify that this is really an earthquake and not a truck going by (the school I went to had a seismometer literally bolted to the bedrock and trucks still caused it trouble). <br /><br />2) This data does not presuppose tectonic theory. The acceptance of tectonic theory is one of the more dishonorable in geology's history. While the rejection of Wagner's continental drift has an important lesson (a theory without a mechanism isn't scientific), the debate soon degenerated into the type of rhetoric that would embarrass fourth-grade boys. At least one journal completely abandoned any pretense at scientific rigor when it came to publishing papers opposed to tectonic theory. But when you look at this data, it's crystal-clear that SOMETHING is going on. It's a fascinating study of the application of proper epistemological concepts! Dinwarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06138006602385020048noreply@blogger.com