...
Show More
I faced an unwelcome prospect my first year in college: a mandatory lab science course. My options included Rocks for Jocks and Rat Psych. I took Rat Psych. Didn't learn much. But that's okay. Fifty years later I read Rising from the Plains and undoubtedly learned more about geology than I would have by signing up for Rocks for Jocks.
Not that I understood all, or most, of Rising from the Plains, focused on Wyoming and a geologist named David Love, whose life proved to be a western saga Wallace Stegner might have written, or, heaven forbid, James Michener. The problem was the avalanche of names and data centered on Wyoming's epic role in Earth's history, the collisions of forces and permutations of chemistry over billions of years. Fascinating stuff but hard to keep straight. Every chapter should be accompanied by a map. I love maps. And there should be photos, lots of them.
Nonetheless this effort in force-feeding the geologically uninitiated taught me a great deal, which I do not, dare not, hasten to explain, starting with the contrast between everything thought to be known about geology and everything yet to be known, the contradictions within plate tectonic theory, for example--how to resolve them...or just live with them-- the anomalies presented by certain rocks located where they shouldn't be, and so on.
Much of Wyoming is beautiful, notably the Tetons and Yellowstone. A fair amount is ugly. Now I would look at the ugly parts differently, thinking about how they got to be so ugly.
One of my favorite observations in this book concerns lakes, which are described as rivers who have lost their getaway driver.
Unfortunately the geology saga goes this way: once upon a time there were field geologists; now there are geologists holed up in offices. Field geologists focus on accumulating facts. Office geologists focus on theories--too bad for them.,
Not that I understood all, or most, of Rising from the Plains, focused on Wyoming and a geologist named David Love, whose life proved to be a western saga Wallace Stegner might have written, or, heaven forbid, James Michener. The problem was the avalanche of names and data centered on Wyoming's epic role in Earth's history, the collisions of forces and permutations of chemistry over billions of years. Fascinating stuff but hard to keep straight. Every chapter should be accompanied by a map. I love maps. And there should be photos, lots of them.
Nonetheless this effort in force-feeding the geologically uninitiated taught me a great deal, which I do not, dare not, hasten to explain, starting with the contrast between everything thought to be known about geology and everything yet to be known, the contradictions within plate tectonic theory, for example--how to resolve them...or just live with them-- the anomalies presented by certain rocks located where they shouldn't be, and so on.
Much of Wyoming is beautiful, notably the Tetons and Yellowstone. A fair amount is ugly. Now I would look at the ugly parts differently, thinking about how they got to be so ugly.
One of my favorite observations in this book concerns lakes, which are described as rivers who have lost their getaway driver.
Unfortunately the geology saga goes this way: once upon a time there were field geologists; now there are geologists holed up in offices. Field geologists focus on accumulating facts. Office geologists focus on theories--too bad for them.,