1960s was when the hypothesis of continental drift was empirically confirmed with geophysical evidence, but it was a prominent family of hypotheses (contending with isostatic models) in decades prior.
European geologists were generally receptive to the idea of continental drift as early as the 1920s, and by the 1940s it was the working assumption for most field work. The only geologists to dismiss the idea initially were part of a North American contingent.
As to why the Americans in particular, there were a few reasons, but a big one is that they didn’t read German and the first English edition of Wegener’s book was a draft-quality translation with issues relating to clarity and “tone.” The author was perceived to be dismissive/unaware of current work in the field, culminating in a summit seminar where a talk was given challenging the hypothesis.
Interestingly, the author actually attended this talk, but chose to remain silent. He never said why he didn’t defend his idea. I would guess language barrier and shyness but I don’t know.
Regardless, the matter was considered closed by those in attendance and for some time his theory’s rate of acceptance among North American geologists lagged behind.
I’m seeing a recurring theme
Please don’t conflate American scientists and American politicians. There is absolutely zero intersection between those two groups, and if you don’t think American scientists are on the forefront of nearly every field of research I don’t know what to tell you…
You’re conflating modern sciences with historic geology, and tossing in a dash of denialism to boot. There’s a well known adage called Planck’s principle (IIRC) which basically says that science advances one funeral at a time:
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
Also, science was very much a good ol’ boys club of people that often came from wealthy backgrounds because they could afford the education to become scientists, so they were very much big egos trying to keep their theories and discoveries attached to their names even in the face of more correct or contradicting information.
Nowadays the egos may not be quite as large, though there definitely plenty that resist change due to ego or other personal interest, but absolutely politics influences science in multiple ways. It determines who gets funding, what commercial interests pay and benefit from the discoveries, and what gets presented to the public.
Sure would be nice if all scientific results were unbiased, accessible, and free, but unfortunately that’s not always the case.
I lack the knowledge to add anything important to that topic but I wanna say, it seems ridiculous for this to be true. Not believing a scientific theory due to tone.
Agreed. It’s an instructive anecdote re: the importance of presentational clarity but also of charitable interpretation.
To oversimplify: there was not a demonstrable process that could explain the movement of huge sheets of solid rock, that’s where the reluctance came from. It wasn’t until the ocean floor mapping of the 60s that we understood the non-random nature earthquakes and the existence of mid-ocean ridges that lead the scientific community to accept “seafloor spreading” as the mechanism of Alfred Wegener’s proposed continental drift.
Wasn’t a substantial element mapping during WW2? That was when they discovered the patterns/changes in earth’s magnetic field over millenia.
Still really random (to us), just a bit less now.
Just pointing, but people had been speculating about tectonic plates for a really long time. A century before geologists finally allowed one of them to point it and accepted looking into it, fringe scientists already had an overwhelming amount of evidence.
Did they have a cigarette after thinking about it though?
May I suggest a light read? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
Well now I am hella curious: What did they think caused earthquakes before the 60s? 🤔
Actually the post is wrong. Geologists had the general idea long before that. The detailed explanations were missing, but matching rock formations and borders and using common sense is quite old.
My grandfather went to school for geology in the 60’s (US), and told me that plate tectonics was taught to him as a new/tentative thing.
I wonder if some element could be related to being in the south - plate tectonics doesn’t really align with creationism that well, and too this day you can’t really safely teach human evolution. (Yesterday, I informed a high schooler that dinosaurs were real. He was pretty happy to learn this.)
Your moms bed.
Premarital sex
You kid but, at least in the US, we’re going to be perpetually a week away from returning to that time for the next 3 years and change - best case scenario.
Poseidon.
It’s like the new enlightenment is just right now.
We are also going to look back at bioteck from now and be horrified in a not so distant future.
I figure they first needed Inge Lehmann to figure out that there was an inner core, outer core, and mantle which she didn’t do until 1933, eight years after she started doing seismology. And it took three years before she published it which brings us to 1936. It was accepted fairly quickly but then came the war. And after the war seismology was really big on listening to nukes. Sixties makes sense.
Inge Lehmann - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inge_Lehmann
This scene was overheard in a 1950s pediatrician’s office, who then offered the soft-pack of filterless “toasted” smokes to the 8yr old and her mother.
Protect your child! Give them a Kent cigarette with a micronite filter.
Kent, the one cigarette that can show you proof of greater health protection.Nothing catches cigarette tar better than an asbestos filter 🚬👄
this fact brought to you by the delicious relaxing taste of Daisy Duke Cigarettes.
if you want a nuke, smoke a Daisy Duke!
“Take those lead paint chips out of your mouth! … wipes his face with some asbestos … now here mommy will show you how to make smoke rings … cough, cough, hack, hack, wheeeeeeeze”
Only if the kid was overweight, though
