|
FROM THE EDITOR | May 1999 |
Three cheers for the multitalented! In the United States and the rest
of the world, we
generally admire those with the greater vision. Take the Academy Awards.
The multitalented actors who write the screenplays and direct the
films get our praise (and a lot of our money). Why is it that creative,
multitalented geoscientists do not receive such admiration? Raised glasses
and multiple funding offers reward the multidisciplinary actor. The multidisciplinary
geoscientist gets raised eyebrows and no money. For a profession that thrives
on creativity, it’s strange that those who are the most creative tend to
be penalized.
In this month’s “Comment,” AGI Executive Committee member
and Johns Hopkins University professor, Steven M. Stanley, describes his
own multidisciplinary experience. Provocative, but credible, work on the
origin of Pleistocene continental glaciation has netted Stanley a range
of reactions. His multidisciplinary ideas have given everyone from paleoceanographers
to anthropologists a big target to strike. But, he has also given them
much to examine, discuss, and verify.
Stanley brings to light an interesting dilemma. Our science
thrives on new ideas, yet the universities and funding agencies tend to
discourage those who “think outside the box” — at least, the younger scientists
who draw on multiple disciplines. His concern should be a warning for us
to examine how we reward creative science — especially now that after decades
of specialization, our finely focused topical boundaries are starting to
blur. As Stanley suggests, now is the time to encourage more multidisciplinary
research and reward multidisciplinary researchers.
Sherri Cooper’s feature article offers a good example
of a practical multidisciplinary approach. By examining a variety of clues
from the Pamlico and Neuse river estuaries in North Carolina, Cooper (Duke
University’s Nicholas School of the Environment) has been able to see changing
trends in ecosystems during the past 1,000 to 2,000 years. Like many coastal
zones, the use of these estuaries and the surrounding land has changed
dramatically over just a few decades. Cooper’s multidisciplinary approach
reveals the change in fauna and flora in the estuaries as well as changes
in the local geology and climate. By setting baselines for the expected
ranges of these natural systems, we can begin to understand the impact
of human activity along estuaries.
In our second article, John McBride suggests that we stop
summarily dismissing old data. For the past three years, the Illinois Geological
Survey has been collecting seismic data shot decades ago in the central
mid-continent. Tapping petroleum companies as a data source, the survey
has collected thousands of miles of seismic profiles. For the first time,
the deep basement structure of the Illinois Basin is coming into focus.
McBride’s work shows the value of older data and reinforces the need to
save and re-examine this information.
In our final feature, William Houston and Colleen Riley
(Michigan Technological University) show us how to be multidisciplinary
in education and public outreach. We all know through our everyday activities
how unaware most people are about Earth. Houston and Riley report on a
successful program they’ve developed that encourages university students
and professors to get involved with K-12 students and, by default, the
general public. They feel that it is a necessary part of a geoscientist’s
professional education. Their “experiment” is providing predictable results
— geologists can make a solid, public outreach contribution and nongeologists
can learn.
Finally, I want to mention a transition at Geotimes.
Jan Childress, our managing editor, is leaving us. A talented writer, editor,
and manager, Jan has helped guide the publication through a very challenging
period. Her talents will be missed.
Good reading.
Victor V. van Beuren
 |
Geotimes Home | AGI Home | Information Services | Geoscience Education | Public Policy | Programs | Publications | Careers  |