The Rocks Don't Lie, But They Can Be Misunderstood

Allen F. Glazner, Victor R. Baker, John M. Bartley, Kevin M. Bohacs, Drew S. Coleman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Although the adage "the rocks don't lie" is true-rocks are literal ground truth-their message can be misinterpreted. More generally, it is misguided to favor one form of inquiry, such as field observation, over others, including laboratory analyses, physical experiments, and mathematical or computational simulations. This was recognized more than a century ago by T.C. Chamberlin, who warned against premature adherence to a "ruling theory," and by G.K. Gilbert, who emphasized the investigative nature of geological reasoning. Geologic research involves a search for fruitful, coherent, and causal hypotheses that are consistent with all the relevant evidence and tests provided by the natural world, and field observation is perhaps the most fertile source of new geologic hypotheses. Hypotheses that are consistent with other relevant evidence survive and are strengthened; those that conflict with relevant evidence must be either revised or discarded.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)4-10
Number of pages7
JournalGSA Today
Volume32
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2022

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Rocks Don't Lie, But They Can Be Misunderstood'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this