 |
 |
On this topic, there is a brilliant paper in press in Geoscience Canada written by Paul Hoffman concerning Wegener's scientific career and the intricacies of the response of his peers to his continental drift theory. The paper is 5MB and hence can not be appended to this message, but for those interested I could send you the PDF separately. I append the last paragraphs of Hoffman's paper, which I think are very telling. " The noted American historian Mott T. Greene pointed out that neither Wegener's opponents nor his supporters, "seemed to have a clear grasp of a theory which comes having read it carefully" (Greene 1984). He suggests that, "the reason for this is a kind of guilty secret: most scientists read as little as they can get away with anyway, and they do not like new theories in particular. New theories are hard work, and they are dangerous-it is dangerous to support them (might be wrong) and dangerous to oppose them (might be right)." He concludes that, "most scientists wait until someone they trust, admire, or fear supports or opposes the theory. They can get two for one-they can come out for or against without having to actually read it, and can do so in a crowd either way." There is a good deal of truth in this, but a case could be made that Wegener's opponents tended to read him too closely, fixating on problematic details while missing the merits of the big picture. Finally, some say that Wegener was a loner, who had no students and founded no school of followers. Yet, Wegener's colleagues consistently describe how unaffected Wegener was by fame, how students were attracted by his openness, humility and clarity of expression (Benndorf 1931; Wegener 1939; Georgi 1962). Wegener had students and followers; they followed him to Greenland, not continental drift. I yield the last word to Sir Edward Bailey, writing (coincidentally) on the 50th anniversary of Wegener's The Origin of Continents (Bailey 1962), the nadir of his theory's prospects, and a decade before the plate tectonic revolution: "From the human point of view there are two features of the Wegener hypothesis that arouse my continual wonder. The first is that Wegener stumbled on what may yet prove to be the greatest geological discovery of all time before he himself had begun to study geology. The second, that, after he had ransacked the literature and marshalled a hitherto meaningless wealth of apparent corroboration, he is treated by most geologists and physicists as a mere purveyor of nonsense." Cees van Staal Dr. Cees van Staal, senior scientist Geological Survey of Canada / Commission Géologique du Canada Natural Resources Canada / Ressources Naturelles Canada Government of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada 625 Robson Street / 625 rue Robson Vancouver, BC, V6B 5J3 Canada 604-666-2997 fax/télécopieur 604-666-1124 [log in to unmask] -----Original Message----- From: Tectonics & structural geology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stuewe, Kurt ([log in to unmask]) Sent: October 24, 2012 08:48 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: alfred wegener As most of you will know, 2012 is the 100st anniversary of the 1912 publications of Alfred Wegener on continental drift that are often hailed as the discovery of plate tectonics. Alfred Wegener later became a Professor at Graz University (until his death in 1930) and we are therefore organizing a small symposium in honor of his discovery on November 9th at Graz University. Should any of you be near enough so that the interest in the event outweighs the burden of travel, then we very much welcome you to the event ! I attach an invitation. Kurt Stüwe ------------------------------------------ Ao Prof. Dr. Kurt Stuewe Institut fuer Erdwissenschaften Universitaetsplatz 2 A-8010 Graz AUSTRIA http://wegener.uni-graz.at http://www.alpengeologie.org --------------------------------------------