Mapping the geoblogosphere

It’s still a work in progress, but since I’ve already inspired Hypocentre via Twitter, I thought I might as well make this more public:

View Geoblogosphere in a larger map
The idea is simple enough – a lot of geology blogging is about places – particular outcrops and formations – and I’ve long thought that giving people access to that information would be extremely useful. Not only does it provide more context when someone is initially reading a post, but it also gives people travelling somewhere new a heads-up on interesting geology to look out for when they get there (strangely, most guidebooks are rather silent on this very important question).
I’ve still got a fair number of back posts to work through, which will probably be added to the map in piecemeal fashion over the next few weeks, but there’s enough points on there now to give you a flavour. Let me know what you think.
Ideally, I’d like to make this a group effort; I believe that with the whole geoblogosphere involved, we can sprinkle the entire globe with awesome geological content. Anyone who would like access to the map to add their posts, drop me an e-mail.

Categories: bloggery, outcrops

The puddle that was once a sea

This image, just released from NASA’s Earth Observatory, is both scary and beautiful

aral_sea.jpg

This is – or was – the Aral Sea*. 50 years ago, it was a substantial body of water. Then, the rivers that fed it were diverted for irrigation, meaning that the amount of water flowing into the lake fell below the amount of water being lost by evaporation. As a result of this imbalance, the Aral Sea began to dry up, and is now but a shadow of its former self.
If you’re looking for a powerful illustration of how quickly – and visibly – human activity can change the face of the planet, look no further.
*even though, as my hydro-coblogger** would be quick to point out, it’s actually a lake (or not – see comments below).
**who will hopefully forgive me for invading her disciplinary territory.

Categories: environment, geology, photos

Surfing the Google Wave

google_wave_logo.jpgThere’s no denying that the more I think about Google Wave, the more interested I get. My inner geek was applauding even when I first saw it in action on Saturday, but it’s only after a lot more thinking, and watching the presentation that you can view on the Wave homepage, that I’m starting to glimpse some of the ways that it might positively affect the way that I work, both as a scientist and a science communicator.
The best way that I’ve managed to think of a ‘wave’ is as a unit of on-line communication. The clever bit is that a wave can be an e-mail conversation, an online chat, a collaborative document, or a blog post, or even a little bit of all of them, depending on how you and others choose to interact with it. The even more clever bit is that suddenly every interaction you’re making on the internet is now collected together in something which looks like a Gmail inbox. Not only does this make it a hell of a lot easier to keep track of everything you’re doing online, but it also means that all those people who will happily use e-mail, but look scared when people start talking about wikis, and Friendfeeds, and tweets, will get access to the capabilities of these services without being pushed out of their comfort zone. It is when I realised this that I started to get more excited about what Wave could do for me as a scientist, because the usefulness of any new technology is determined not just by what it does, but by how easy it is to get people to use it – and by making it look and behave like ‘Gmail++’, Google may have made it more likely that colleagues who do e-mail and Word documents, and not much else, will give it a go. Wave lowers the geek threshold for using interactive web tools.
Lets consider one example of where I think Wave might work well: liasing with co-authors. When you’ve finished the first draft of your latest paper, you send it out to your co-authors for their comments and corrections. Each person sends you back a different set of corrections, which you then have to merge together to produce the final document. It’s a pain, especially in the parts where your two co-authors demand mutually exclusive changes. Now for me, the obvious solution to this would be to get everyone to make the edits in a wiki, so that everyone is working concurrently on the same document, and can see who is making what changes. But, unlike a good number of my colleagues, I know what a wiki is, and would be comfortable with using one. With Wave, an editable document would just pop into your inbox, and you just tell your technophobic co-author to treat it like a Word document. Add to that the ability to insert discussions over particular changes, and it all gets much more interactive and efficient.
A few other thoughts on stuff you could do:

  • At the conference: this post discussing the online “back channel” chatter at Science Online London observed that its potential usefulness was inhibited by the fragmentation between Twitter and Friendfeed, and the non-permanent record of the former. You could also add that the discussion is isolated from the talk itself. However, in the future you could create a wave with your slides, add a few notes, send it to all the people at the conference, and everyone can just interact with that. Even better, it could act as a venue for continuing debate after a talk, and would be a permanent record of both the presentation and the discussion around it. Indeed, a ‘poster wave’ might also be useful: how many times have you not had the time or opportunity to ask a question about a poster, due to crowding or the presenter not being present (it would also highlight which ones were perhaps exciting the most interest)?

  • Virtual “group meetings”. New data to thrash out the meaning of, or a recently published paper to dissect? Post it to a wave, send it to any interested parties, and kick off a discussion not limited by the availability of meeting rooms or your fount of all knowledge being on a different continent. Given the importance of visualisation in geology, the smooth incorporation of multimedia in waves makes this far more feasible (and useful) for geologists than it perhaps has been up to now. On similar principles, the geoblogosphere could get together to produce a kick-ass collaborative post when reacting to say, a big earthquake.

  • Overseeing student group projects. The replay option would allow us at the front of the class to more easily check on progress, and check that every student is making a contribution.

I could continue: for the geeky amongst us, I haven’t even talked about possible automation using robots yet! Feel free to discuss your own ideas in the comments. Could you have a field trip wave, for example?

Categories: academic life, gifts and gadgets

Field Trip Diary: Part 3

One of the unfortunate casualties of my recent blogging hiatus was that I left the account of my trip to Oman unfinished. Once you’ve reminded yourself of the story so far (Part 1, Part 2), let’s continue the parade of pretty photos.
Day 10. Today started out with another long car journey – this time to the northwest corner of Oman. We skirted to the north of the Wahiba sands, a massive sea of sand dunes, all of which seem to be gradually moving north-east and threatening to engulf the highway. Many of the telephone poles at the roadside were already half buried by sand, indicating an ongoing and fairly rapid migration.
In order to reach today’s sampling target we had to put ourselves completely in the hands of our Omani colleagues, and a GPS, and drive out into the desert to reach an inlier of 800 million year-old basement riddled a swarm of igenous dykes.

JebelJalaan_dykes.JPG

Igneous rocks are very useful for paleomagnetic studies, not only because they’re chock full of magnetic minerals but because they are much easier to date – and knowing the age of the magnetic signal is pretty important if you’re trying to reconstruct tectonic movements over time. Interestingly, the best rocks for palaeomagnetic studies are the finer grained parts near the faster-cooling margins, but for radiometric dating you want the larger mineral grains in the slower-colling centre. So because we wanted to date these dykes, double the weight ended up in the back of our Landcruiser.

Continue reading

Categories: fieldwork, geology, outcrops, photos

Science Online – the London Edition

This weekend I’ve been down in London for Science Online London 2009 conference, held at the Royal Institution yesterday. Those of you who follow my Twitter feed will know I was using it to live-blog the event (along with many others), and I’d like to think that the (slim) majority of my tweets were actually pertinent to the discussion in the lecture theatre. Nonetheless, here are my thoughts into a brief overview of the sessions I attended.
Legal and Ethical Aspects of Blogging
(in true lawyer style, I’ll note that I’ve given an interpretation of what was said in this very thought-provoking session, so it should not be taken as gospel. After all, I’m not even sure what ‘tort’ means)
I’m probably not the only blogger who gives very little thought to the legal consequences of putting my stuff up on the internet. However, the take-home message from Jack of Kent and Dr. Petra’s illuminating presentation was that just because I don’t consider myself to be particularly adversarial, that doesn’t mean that I can be complacent about my legal safety. Legally, the moment that you put up a blog post (or make a comment on another blog or forum), you are a publisher; and whilst the ease with which you can now get stuff into the public domain – and bypass the gatekeepers of the mainstream media – is a major attraction, by freeing yourself from that layer of control, you also lose the protection that comes with it. No-one but you is going to check for potential libel prior to publication, and you will have to rely on your own legal resources should any claims result.
Also, blogging under a pseudonym is no protection at all: as blogging is a public activity, you have no right to privacy and people can legitimately join the dots by any legal means they like – more importantly, they can join the dots through less than legal means and then work backwards to construct a legal post-hoc trail. This doesn’t mean that pseudonyms are useless (a very good point was made about how a pseudonym does for the most part allow you to keep your professional and online identities separate in the eyes of Google), but it does mean that, just like everyone else, pseudonymous bloggers should never publish anything that they wouldn’t be held to. And if you want to avoid libel, avoiding making actionable comments basically boils down to limiting critical remarks to effects (e.g. pointing out flaws in a particular study) rather than motivations (making personal judgements, such as allegations of dishonesty). Also, If you’re using your professional persona online, it would be a good idea to make sure that you adhere to the relevant codes of conduct
Finally, if you do somehow attract a claim, don’t panic, but do take it seriously. Clearly identify the phrase, paragraph, or post which is at issue, and don’t be afraid to admit and correct a mistake (although I’m not sure the latter doesn’t break one of the cardinal rules of the Internet).

Continue reading

Categories: bloggery, conferences, public science