all right well welcome the esc 1000
introduction to our science i am your
instructor Dave Cocchiarella and this is the
cover of your textbook the good earth
introduction to earth science by David
McConnell and David steer interesting
feature in the front of this this is the
molokini crater just off the coastline
of the island of Maui and I want you
look at the island of Maui back there in
the background you can see that it kind
of looks like maybe a contact lens on
its side or even the shield of a Roman
soldier on its side and that's because
most of the Hawaiian Islands are all the
white mountains are volcanoes they grew
up out of the sea bed and they are what
is known as shield volcanoes based on
the composition of the magma and lava
that creates them so we'll learn a lot
about the earth and earth science and
one of the things we talked about will
be shield volcanoes and then this little
crater that's out here in the ocean the
Pacific Ocean actually part of this
volcanic system this is a cinder cone
that popped up on this side of this
shield volcano at a previous time now
beautiful spot for diving in a marine
sanctuary so we're going to talk about
why the earth is the way it is and how
it got that way and it's always better
to know and that's why i reassigned to
such a great thing to study so this is
an induction neurosciences chapter one
we talk about our science and our
systems the scope of her science what it
means to do science to do good science
or maybe to do bad science and then
we're scientists fit into society this
is a typical beginning of any
introductory science class and then
we're going to jump into what's
happening with the earth our Odyssey
that is the study of our science begins
with the understanding that the earth is
a complex system of interacting rock
water air and life where components and
interactions of these four systems cycle
energy and mass throughout the whole
system the four systems of course being
the atmosphere the air in the weather
hydrosphere the water and the ice the
bias fear the plants and the animals and
the geosphere the land and the rocks now
this cycling of energy of mass refers to
the conservation of energy and the
conservation of
Master this is the fundamental concept
of physics that says within some domain
not an energy or mass can be created or
destroyed but they can be converted from
one to the other which is where we get
the basic formula e equals MC squared
energy equals mass times the speed of
light squared and the speed of light
squared is a constant and so essentially
telling us that energy is equal to mass
or energy and mass cannot be created or
destroyed but can be cycled back and
forth from one to the other
earth science and the earth system we
know that earth science is the
investigation of interactions among the
four components of the earth system the
atmosphere hydrosphere the biosphere in
the gs4 but it's also includes the the
interaction with the exosphere the Sun
and the assorted features some space and
the exosphere sometimes considered the
5th Earth system elements so certainly
we know the Sun interacts with the earth
system providing us ultimately with all
the energy at the earth system and in
the moon also interact with your system
with tidal forces of gravity so it's not
just the four systems those the ones we
can see and touch you and Arthur is also
now the fifth system what's in space and
an all around us in space to understand
earth science we need to understand what
science is at its core and in its
essence science is simply a process of
discovery now it's a process of
discovery that increases our body of
knowledge sciences information that can
be learned much of it just waiting to be
discovered science is also the curiosity
and protective creativity of scientists
and their search for answers to critical
questions but what science is not is a
list of facts to be memorized earth
science is a detective story in which
teams of investigators not always even
working together but teams of
investigators piece together evidence to
generate well-founded explanations of
the workings of our planet and that
evidence comes from observations and
data how do scientists collect that
data well through direct measurements in
direct information and modeling and of
course direct measurements is literally
going out there measuring what's
happening on the earth in the crust in a
sinkhole the Grand Canyon collecting
rock samples from an outcrop samples are
data collected at field locations now in
direct information is when data is
collected but then it's used for the
interpretation of something else
completely for instance we collect ice
cores literally long cores of ice and
many meters long down into the glacier
on top of Antarctica and from those ice
cores by setting that ice and the gas
bubbles in that ice we can interpret
eight and gent make interpretations that
is of of other things such as climate in
the distant past
so indirect informations collecting data
and then using that data for the
interpretation of something else and of
course modeling talk a lot about model
and we talked about hurricanes and
weather weather models hurricane models
modeling is also the creation of
physical models like a wave tank in
which we can study how waves interact
and a computer models and physical
models together maybe to determine how
the gulf of mexico and handle our
hurricane not the winds and the rain but
the storm surge and how large bodies of
water deal with waves being pushed
across them we use physical wave tanks
and computer models to collect that data
so here are some examples of that data
collection in the upper-left technician
is collecting bottles of water from the
ocean samples of ocean water for lots of
different research that's an example of
direct measurement and there's one of
those ice cores you can see the
scientists there and the lower right I
score can be used to measure the
composition of the atmosphere in the
distant past and that's a an example of
the collection of indirect information
and here is an example of one of those
wave pools look at the left side of this
this picture you can see the people's
this gives you an idea of just how large
this wave pool actually is and that is
your example of physical modeling and
during the course of this class we're
also going to take a look at computer
models specifically with weather models
by now most of you in one science class
or another have
exposed to the idea of the scientific
method and the scientific method is that
systematic approach to answering
questions and to do this we need
observations a testable hypothesis and
one or more predictions based on that
hypothesis the observations of course
empirical facts measurements information
data collected using the senses
something that can be confirmed by
others whether it's actual observations
in the field or observations and data
based on models that hypothesis a
testable explanation of the facts of the
observations they can also be verified
or falsified through experimentation so
it's an explanation of those facts of
the data that you that you measured were
observed but it's a testable explanation
they can be verified or in some cases
falsified through experimentation and
then a prediction with all this you can
make a prediction a statement of what
will happen in a given situation or set
of circumstances based on those
hypotheses and observations the
hypothesis for that explanation of data
or observations can be tested using
either inductive or deductive reasoning
remember hypothesis has to be able to be
tested by others in order for it to be
verified so what is inductive reasoning
drawing general conclusions from
specific observations so it involves
recognizing patterns in the data you're
drawing general conclusions from
specific observations here is an example
of inductive reasoning number 13 massive
hurricanes caused significant damage to
the United States during 2005 number to
Hurricane Katrina had a pressure of 902
millibars hurricane rita 898 millibars
and hurricane wilma 882 millibars the
inductive reasoning would allow you to
draw the general conclusion based on
specific observations that massive
hurricanes
with low air pressure around 90
millibars or less will cause large
amounts of damage if they make landfall
knowing that those three hurricanes with
central pressures of around 900
millibars cause massive damage can allow
you to make that general conclusion that
massive hurricane with central pressures
of about ninety millibars will cause
large amount of damage if they make
landfall the other methodology that can
be used to test the hypothesis is
deductive reasoning now in deductive
reasoning you are drawing specific
conclusions based on general principles
this involves applying laws and
principles to look at the data or the
observations and then to come up with
specific conclusions about that data or
those observations here is an example of
deductive reasoning from the world of
Tropical Meteorology again number one
all hurricanes form as low pressure
systems over oceans number 2 hurricane
sandy is forming in the Atlantic so the
deductive reasoning or the specific
conclusion based on a general principle
is hurricane sandy must be a
low-pressure system if all hurricanes
form is low pressure systems over oceans
and hurricane sandy is forming over the
Atlantic which is an ocean we then know
that hurricane sandy is also a
low-pressure system using deductive
reasoning we deduce that it must also be
a low-pressure system back to the
general notion of the scientific method
the scientific method is something
allows us to do science well-to-do good
science and science follows some basic
rules that are loosely defined as the
scientific method so a scientific
hypothesis is a tentative thing it can
be changed its it's something that's not
absolute it's just a hypothesis and that
hypothesis must be able to be either
completely or partially changed a
scientific hypothesis should be logical
predictable and readily testable and
test results should either support or
falsify that
novices a scientific hypothesis is based
on data from empirical based on
experience something you actually saw
empirical observations or experiments
and a scientific hypothesis offers a
well-defined natural cause to explain a
natural event if the hypothesis is
saying that volcanoes caused lots more
co2 carbon dioxide to be any atmosphere
there has to be a well-defined natural
cause that shows how co2 gets from the
volcano to the atmosphere or how this
you two causes a Latino causes co to be
in the atmosphere there has to be a
well-defined natural cause
so here is another example of a
hypothesis is an emerging hypothesis and
hypothesis that we hear a lot about in
the media today we're going to show how
this hypothesis has to be tentative
predictable empirical and also have a
natural cause global warming average
temperature of the earth is increasing
due to a buildup of greenhouse gases in
the atmosphere so that's our hypothesis
we look at all the data we make all
these observations and our hypothesis is
that global warming is occurring or our
hypothesis is that the average
temperature of the earth is increasing
due to the build-up of greenhouse gases
in the atmosphere that's the reason why
the earth's temperature is increasing
because of the build-up of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere now because the
Sun is hotter or the core of the earth
is hotter where there's a second star
close by but the hypothesis is that
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere
building up the earth is warming this
hypothesis is tentative estimates of how
much temperature is increasing will
change meaning some scientists and some
models give us a two or three degree
temperature increase over 50 years some
give us a two or three-day matured
increase over 500 years it's all so
predictable the prediction is that of
greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide
increased by this amount then
temperatures will increase by that
amount
its empirical we are making measurements
of increasing global temperatures we can
we have a record of global temperatures
and we can see an increase their and we
also have a record of greenhouse gases
in the atmosphere and we can see the
similar increase their so it's an
empirical thing we actually have
experienced or observations to to back
this up and we can provide this natural
causes climate records literally over
500,000 years show parallel changes in
temperature and greenhouse gases we can
show how there's a natural cause that
greenhouse gases increase the earth
temperature because greenhouse gases
absorb infrared radiation being emitted
by the earth and hold it and that's the
natural cause
so let's clear up the confusion between
hypothesis theory and law
alright a scientific hypothesis is a
testable explanation of facts or
observations or data
ok it's a testable explanation of the
facts you see a bunch of this and you
give an explanation of that continued
observations over time and by others
will confirm the hypothesis yeah we saw
a bunch of the same thing and that
confirms your hypothesis hypothesis is
10 of the tentative it has to be able to
change if new information is discovered
yes we saw a bunch of the same thing but
we also saw this and that slightly
changes your explanation a scientific
theory is now a well substantiated
explanation of some aspect of the
natural world that can incorporate facts
laws inferences and test the hypothesis
theory now is when we basically have an
agreement by the lion's share of the
scientific community based on the same
observations in the same data that
they've come to the same conclusions and
a theory that we're going to talk in
detail about later in the course is
going to be the theory of plate
tectonics and it's an excellent example
showing how good science built on
observations over literally hundreds of
years to come up with one theory after
another theory and now we have a
scientific theory that as well
substantiated scientific law is
something that is so strong and
so rigid that we typically don't see new
scientific laws there have been lots of
laws and the past but this notion that
hypothesis in theory has to be able to
be changed if new information is
discovered makes it more difficult to
have a scientific law but the scientific
law is in a statement that is so
strongly supported by theory and
observations that they are considered
unchanging in nature and again there are
some things that we think are absolutely
permanent don't change that always be
this way the Sun will come up tomorrow
that would be a law but if we had new
data that came in that was able to
change the the explanation or change the
prediction then that's where scientific
laws may not hold up but a scientific
laws something that's so strongly
supported that we think that will always
happen that way so the willingness to
continually question prevailing ideas
and the modified discard them as new
information becomes available is really
the strength of science this notion that
if new information comes in
we've got to be able to get rid of
discard or at least change old ideas and
if you're not willing to change with new
data then you're not doing good science
no scientist makes an observation or
suggest a hypothesis or develops a
theory alone this is all done by the
entire scientific community with
different people testing hypotheses
separately testing ideas separately
bringing in data separately and all
coming to the same conclusion now i have
used the term good science once or twice
already so what what are the actual
characteristics of good science
scientific explanations are provisional
their tentative ok they can they do and
they should change particularly when new
information comes about with sort of
heart on that a little bit now so that's
that should be clear to you that if new
information comes in science has to be
able to change and if science can change
its provisional tentative that's good
science scientific explanation should be
predictable and testable again you
should be able to test one to the other
you should be able to set up a situation
model it weather
physically or the computer or you should
be able to run experiments in a lab that
tests those scientific explanations
scientific explanations are based on
observations or experiments and
therefore they have to be reproducible
if you do an experiment that proves that
cold fusion is possible and economical
and so you go to claim that you can
solve the world's energy problems if
that experiment is not reproducible by
somebody else and that is not good
science that's just an outlandish claim
and then valid scientific hypothesis
have to offer that well-defined natural
cause our mechanism to explain the
natural events oh ok
volcanoes or a function of magma and the
Earth's surface so how did the magma get
there what's causing it to come up to
the earth I mean there's got to be an
explanation or mechanism and if you
don't have that mechanism in place
that's not good science not all science
is good science and this can of course
be a particular concern when you're
dealing about science is reported in the
popular media science absolutely cannot
answer every question it can't deal with
ethics morality or culture or societal
norms are no experiments that cannot
come up with theories are laws that
control any of those things but
oftentimes people use science or tax
science in order to advance their own
personal agenda so the common pitfalls
are the common characteristics of bad
science include attacking the scientists
rather than a science
the misuse of authority confusing cause
and effect or just bad data so attacking
scientists rather than the science this
is a situation where individuals are
attacked the made personal attacks on
them as opposed to science that they're
doing and not uncommon when religiously
views do conflict with science misuse of
authority
this is when people argue from the
position of authority and this often
happens when politics conflicts with a
science somebody high authority takes a
position that I'm in this position and
therefore i'm right and they're not
really concerned
during the science confusing cause and
effect this notion that if this happened
then that must have been the reason and
that's not always the case sometimes a
reason for occurrences for the
difference so confusing cause and effect
and also poor statistics using bad data
empirical data incorrectly just good
data sometimes using correctly all parts
of characteristics of bad science
so what is society's responsibility
science and what is sciences
responsibility to society
it seems like an open any question but
we're talking about the ladder there's
actually some very specific points
scientists and science is meant to alert
people to the Earth processes
specifically hazards that could possibly
cause damage or loss of life science is
also there to provide for material needs
of society by managing natural resources
sciences there to protect us from our
own activities that may endanger the
natural environment and science is there
to ensure for the future of humanity
from global threats such as climate
change or near Earth objects asteroid
impacts that type of thing
how do science and society interact well
earth scientists role in society is to
alert people to the Earth processes or
hazards that may cause damage or loss of
life so which type of natural hazards
are most significant and the region
where you live so dang see Florida here
with Jacksonville in new orleans as well
the hurricane and potentially flooding
in our case flooding is going to be
coastal flooding which is likely to be
brought on by tropical storm but and all
different parts of the country there are
different hazards that scientists are
responsible for letting people know
about you for instance you know if you
live in Seattle or San Francisco or Los
Angeles you're fairly we're already the
earthquakes are a problem but did you
know if you're Memphis earthquakes
earthquakes can be an issue as well how
the content types of things that
scientists are scientists are
responsible to let people know about in
terms of alerting people to Earth's
processes
in terms of hazards that may cause
damage or loss of life so great you let
somebody know what what what else can a
scientist do well scientists work toward
prevention and also toured mitigation or
adjustment as it's listed on the slide
prevention of courses in which hazards
are we most likely or least possibly
able to prevent flooding is one of those
things flooding can be prevented through
flood walls or lovies hurricanes
probably can be prevented
tornadoes likely not but science can
have strategies for minimizing the
impact of those hazards like building
codes and areas of frequent earthquakes
that's adjustments made by science our
mitigation strategies proposed by
scientists earth scientists should also
help to provide for material needs of
society by managing natural resources
including renewable resources such as
water and soil also non-renewable
resources such as oil coal and metals
and earth scientists typically want to
work toward a sustainable society a
society that satisfies its need for
resources without jeopardizing the needs
of future generations
do we have a sustainable society now are
we capable of becoming a sustainable
society in the future and this notion of
sustainable or sustainability is
something that as you're looking toward
your coursework in the future and what
you might want to study further and
perhaps even make a career out of
sustainability is a word that we're
finding in very high level positions now
in major corporations that did not exist
10 years ago and so sustainability and
the science of sustainability is a great
way in the future to make a living earth
scientists also want to protect us from
activities that may endanger natural
environment so earth science
this should be working toward preventing
human-induced air and water pollution
that can cause long-term harmful effects
to ecosystems should provide methods in
a science to help clean up following
major catastrophes like deepwater
horizon oil spill on the Alabama
coastline so that's another role of the
earth scientists in society is the
protection from of of society from
activities that may endanger natural
resources in terms of the role that our
scientists play in society lastly maybe
this is a bit of a larger scale but
lastly our scientists are there to help
ensure the future of humanity from
global threats now the two main global
threats were talking about these days we
talked a lot about this course or
climate change of course but also things
like near-earth objects and asteroid
impacts in earth scientists are looking
at both of these situations to try and
determine can we prevent them or if we
can't prevent them can we at least
mitigate the impact so as you can see
the earth scientists not just about
rocks but has a major role and society
and helping society be a better place
for all of us so we'll wrap up chapter
one and an introduction into earth
science with a look at where humans
where homo sapiens a stand in the
history of Earth and what has been the
impact of this species Homo sapiens on
earth so speaking of theories one story
that had to change a great deal as new
data came to light was the theory as to
how old the earth is how did the earth
get here
geologists are scientists I think of the
time that Earth has been in existence on
a scale known as the geologic time scale
the geologic time scale is the scale of
distinct time intervals from right now
all the way back to the formation of the
planet and they recognize some of those
distinct time intervals based on classic
features that they find in the raw
record we can go to the Grand Canyon and
because the grand canyon of the whole
Colorado Plateau was uplifted the whole
massive region the Four Corners area
uplifted by some tectonic activity and
then the the Colorado River dug down
into that uplifted rock and expose all
these different layers from the neogene
to the paleo seems the Cretaceous down
to the the devonian and they were Vicki
and all the way down to the Cambrian we
can see these distinct time intervals in
the rock record of the geologic time
scale now on the left and millions of
years you go down that calm you can
alway back to 4,500 million years not
four million years not 45 million years
not 450 million years but 4,500 million
years or 4.5 billion years ago and
scientists scientists believe that the
earth was formed some 4.5 billion years
ago and and in a very beginning very
little exist in the rock record known as
the Hayden . and really right on through
the proterozoic a period which only
takes us takes us all the way up almost
4000 of those 4,500 million years so we
really don't begin to see things in the
rock record until we get to that period
of about 500 million years ago the
phanerozoic we talk about the paleozoic
mesozoic in the Cenozoic and and from
that we start to see things and the rock
record in the point of this is first off
to try and give you your very first peek
at geologic time and just how large it
is and then some idea how the eons and
the eras and periods and echo epics had
been broken down the Paleozoic broken
down into the camera or Vicki and
silurian devonian and so on and so on
and then let's say the the the
Carboniferous period is the Mississippi
and the Pennsylvania and that's when
Cole was being formed so all these
different periods and epics and errors
and even yawns are all distinct in the
rock record and that's your geologic
time record so if we go all the way up
to the Cenozoic era
and then into what's known as a
quaternary period we said the
paleocene-eocene on up to the police to
seeing that's the Ice Age and the
Holocene the Holocene is that the epic
that is given to the last 11,700 years
of the Earth's history and this eleven
thousand year period is the time since
the end of the last major ice age so it
was during the police police to seen
that the last major ice age occurred now
since then there have been small
climatic shifts
we've had some warmer periods and cooler
periods but generally in the Holocene
it's been a relatively warm . that's
what referred what's referred to as
interglacial period between glaciations
and so the the epic that we are in right
now 10,000 11,000 seven years ago until
present is known as the Holocene and
scientists or at least some scientists
are beginning to think that we need to
put a new line and you change in the
record and have a new epoch have a whole
scene be something that's in the past
and new epic based on the impact that
humans homo sapiens have had in the rock
record so scientists like Nobel
prize-winning scientist paul crutzen has
suggested that human activity is
produced such a sweeping change the
earth itself since about the time of the
industrial revolution that we have a new
. now inner that would be known as the
Anthropocene and so the suggestion that
is if if the earth is around another
four-and-a-half billion years that
geologists looking at the rock record
with see the places seeing the Ice Age
see all the things in the rock that say
the ice ages were occurring things that
show the glaciers were around and then
would see in the end the same there in
the rock record above that the whole is
seen which is that more temperate warmer
. about 11,000 years 11,700 years and
these scientists are suggesting that
that then they begin to see a change in
the rock record and that change in the
rock record would have begun to occur
sometime around
like eighteen hundreds during the
industrial revolution when suddenly
scientists begin to see things in the
rock record like an increase in co2 that
indicated the impact of humans on the
planet and that new epic they want to
refer to as the Anthropocene alright
well that was chapter one of the good
earth
introduction to earth science again I'm
instructor de otra and we'll see you for
chapter 2
