this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
999 points (98.6% liked)

memes

16164 readers
2741 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 47 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

1960s was when the hypothesis of continental drift was empirically confirmed (leading to modern plate tectonics) but it was part of a prominent family of hypotheses (contending with isostatic models) more than a century prior.

The most complete of these models was offered by Wegener (paper in 1912, book in 1920). European geologists were generally receptive to it in the 1920s, and by the 1940s it was the working assumption for most field work. The only geologists to outright reject the idea initially were part of a North American contingent.

As to why 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 of current work in the field (he was merely unaware of similar models offered previously) culminating in a summit seminar where a talk was given challenging the hypothesis and criticizing the methodology.

Interestingly, Wegener attended this talk, yet chose to remain silent. He never confirmed why. I would guess language barrier and shyness but I don’t know. Regardless, the matter was considered closed by those in attendance and his model’s acceptance by North American geologists lagged behind.

As a result, geology in American primary education saw the most dramatic curricular shift in the 1970s and 1980s. I suspect that’s why older Americans have this impression of a sudden change in scientific consensus. The true story is more interesting IMO.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 2 points 1 month ago

Agreed. It’s an instructive anecdote re: the importance of presentational clarity but also of charitable interpretation.

load more comments (4 replies)