(The beginning of a) Journey to the lost world of scientific arguments

Quaternary News 0 Comments

Some days ago I “re-read” an interesting article about some phenomenon in the magnetic fabric of some sediments (Ellwood, 1984a) and I realized that there are some comments and arguments about the conclusion of the results (Løvlie and Torsvik, 1984; Ellwood, 1984b).

The fact itself, that there was a scientific argument I can read about, made me think: where did the scientific arguments go recently?

I mean, during some conferences and workshops you can have some in the coffee breaks (besides the networking…), and you can also listen to some after the presentations with a very limited times. On the other hand, in various (written) medium, its rare nowadays (or I just can not find them). There is one field of the Quaternary where it is relatively common: the arguments about the human evolution. Or I just don’t know about the others…

I believe, written scientific arguments are necessary, however the “article factory” of the 21th century does not really fits this idea…

What is your idea? Feel free to share your opinion…

 

References

Ellwood, B. B. 1984a. Bioturbation: minimal effects on the magnetic fabric of some natural and experimental sediments, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 67, 367-376.

Ellwood, B. B. 1984b. Reply to comments of R. Lovlie and T. Torsvik concerning “Bioturbation: minimal effects on the magnetic fabric of some natural and experimental sediments”, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 71, 351-352.

Løvlie, R., Torsvik, T., 1984. Comments on the paper “Bioturbation: minimal effects on the magnetic fabric of some natural and experimental sediments”, by Brooks B. Ellwood, Earth and Planetary Science Letters 71, 349-350.

Published by

Balazs Bradak

Keywords: paleomagnetism, magnetic fabric, paleopedology, (loess) stratigraphy, environment reconstruction and planetology

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *