Geologic Hazards

Volcanoes
Earthquakes
Tsunamis
Landslides
Sinkholes

Historical Geology

Coastlines

Geologys societal relevance

Environment

Oil Exploration

Past, Present, and Future Env ironments

Paleoclimatology
History of climate

Climate change
Climate processes

Earths projected carbon dioxide concentrations by 2100

(reaching levels not seen in the last 30 million years!)

CO2 Concentration and Radiative Forcing

Earths natural climate cycle for the

past 600,000 years

Temperature changes

From Kiehl: Science, 2011

Paleobiology
History of LIFE

50 Myr
Early Eocene

Origin of life
Evolution and adaptation
Extinction

Planetary Geology & Astrobiology

The importance of theoretical science?

Quantum mec hanics theor y ( 1920s) led to electronics us ed in todays
computers (from ipods to toasters)
Particl e acc elerators for s tudyi ng matter now us ed in di agnostic
imaging to detect cancers.
X-ray detec tors us ed to study stars and g alaxi es now us ed in s ec urity
airport scanners.

Cosmology
Planet formation

W hat is life?
Preconditions for
for life elsewhere
in the universe

Gecko foot pads inspire new internal bandages.

Evol uti onar y theor y used to disrupt evoluti on of pestici de r esistance i n
disease-transmitti ng mosquitos and anti-biotic resistance in bacteria.
DNA sequencing of entire human genome made possibl e by adapting
technology for studying star light.

Space travel? Asteroid mining, escape extinction, space weaponry

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

Firewalls f ailed to p rotec t computers from hack ers for
40 years.
Screening ai rline p assen gers does no t prev ent
explosive devices from getting onto planes.
Soldiers in Iraq did not get armo red vehicl es until 3 yrs
after need
In nature, organisms also face risks that are frequen t,
variable and uncertain.

Over 3.5 billion years, o rganisms hav e evolv ed an

enormous variety of methods to surviv e, grow and
proliferate on a continually changing planet.
Reduce or embrace uncertainty
Avoid centralization (too slow)
Cooperate (symbiosis)

Nothing I l earned [in high s chool] had any bearing at all on

the big and real questions. Who am I? What a m I doing
here? What is the world? What is my relationship to i t?

George G. Simpson
" This View of Life," 1964

Science can answer the BIG Questions

Is life inevitable in the universe?
Is i ntelligent life i nevitable?

Most Americans reject scientific claims about the

origin of life, humans, and our place in the universe

Ca n l ife evolve from non-living materials? How?

How does evolution happen?
Are we the products of unguided evolution or the
crea tion of a n intelligent designer?

Why do we die? Whats the meaning of life?

Gallup Polls
Humans God created
Humans evolved, evolved, humans in OTHER/
but God had no with God
No
present
part in process
opinion
guiding
form

2001

12%

37%

45%

6%

1999
1997
1993
1982

9
10
11
9

40
39
35
38

47
44
47
44

4
7
7
9

Is it fair to exclude non-scientific viewpoints on

the history of life from school curricula?

American
public

Previous
classes

More than 80% of Americans believe that the history of life can
only be explained by reference to supernatural causes.

It IS fair to exclude non-scientific

opinions on the history of life,
IF scientists can tell the difference
between true explanations and false ones
about the natural world and its origins.

The METHOD of science gives it

unique access to truth.

What is science?

Only one explanation can be correct.

Logical argumentation is necessary

but not sufficient:
Logical reasoning is necessary:
For example: If all humans are mortal, and Socrates is a
human, then we know Socrates must be mortal.

Why have men more teeth than women?

By reason of the abundance of heat and blood which is more in men than in women.
Aristotle
And the following from Bertrand Russel, British philosopher (1872 - 1970) :

Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he was twice
married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by examining his wives' mouths.

EXAMPLE:
The moon is populated by little green men who can
read our minds and hide whenever anyone on Earth
looks for them
We need evidence

Is this true?
There IS evidence supporting this hypothesis!
Humans landed on the moon and didnt see any green men.

What does this example show?

What does this example show?

We also need to start with scientifically TESTABLE hypothes es.

Supporting evidence is not all that useful.

Truth demands that we actively search for potential falsifying evidence.
Science systematicall y tries to eliminate testable hypotheses that are
demonstrabl y false.

An invalid (untestable) scientific hypothesis:

The moon is populated by little green men who can read our minds and
hide whenever anyone on Earth looks for them
There are no possible observations that could ever show this hypothesis
to be false.

A valid (testable) scientific hypothesis:

There are no little green men on the moon
It is valid because it can be falsified if we go to the moon and catch a little
green man. The original hypothesis is then wrong. We KNOW this. And
it is a FACT.

Why supporting
evidence is bad

What is Intelligent Design? And is it Science?

Intelligent design is the proposition that "certain features
of the universe and of living things work so well that they
must have been the work of an intelligent designer, not an
unguided process such as natural selection.
Is intelligent design science?

Does it give us a
refutable)?

1.

The human body

seems to be
intelligently
designed

Bones
Pound for pound strong than
solid steel bars yet lighter and
more flexible.

2.

Heart v alv es
Even the best made one last only
a few years and crush red blood
cells with each closure

3.

Brain
Capacity to recall small details in
a fraction of a second, even after
decades.

4.

Sensory-motor system
Image of snake hits retina, cells
transmit signal to brain, brain
decodes
signal,
determines
appropriate response, sends
signal to arm and leg to jerk
away . . . All in a fraction of a
second.

testable hypothesis (potentially

But s ome parts seem like they were designed by a prankster

Evolution is so good at im proving traits that we so metimes forget
that ther e ar e imp erfection s. Th ey ar e exp ected if these wer e
accidents of evolutionary history without a designer.
We crave fats and sun yet they give us heart disease and cancer.
We age! (and not gracefully!
e.g., lower back problems,
prostate cancer, alzheimers,
incontinence, erectile disfunction,
arthritis, teeth fall out, vision loss)
25% of us are near-sighted

The tube that

carries food and
liquid to your
stomach
cr oss
the tube that
carries vital air to
your
l ungs
(guarantees that
many of us will
eventuall y c hoke
to death).

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6084/974.full.
pdf?sid=a176215b-fd2d-4333-9191-06985fcd35ef

The Vagus Nerv e

This detour is even more

ridiculous in giraffes.
The nerve travels all the way
down the neck just to turn around
again and go back up to the
larynx.
Thats a detour of 15 feet, even
though a direct route would have
taken it just a few inches.

Vertebrates have recurrent laryngeal nerve

that branches off the vagus nerve and runs
from brain to larynx.
It coordinates breathing and swallowing,
sound production. An intelligent design one
that is not wasteful or arbitrary would have
the nerve run straight to its target.
In fish, the nerve runs in a straight line.
However, in the evolution of animals with
necks, this nerve got caught behind a
pharyngeal arch.
In humans, the nerve runs way down into the
chest, loops around one of the main arteries
of the heart (a U-turn), and goes straight back
up again. A ridiculous detour.

Thousands of examples of poor design in our DNA

Human ge nome is littered with d ecomposing corpses of once functional

structural genes (remnants of evolutionary past).

The Vagus Nerv e

We have 20,000 protein-coding genes.

T his solution, while awkward, wasteful, and
perhaps even dangerous for mammals, was
simpler than a major rewiring of a more direct
route for the nerve.
A designer would have gone back to the
designing board, because a designer has
foresight.

4000 of those gen es ha ve mutan t copies floating abo ut. B ecause of their
close similarity, the y p redispose chromosomes to pair abno rmally during
meiosis, leading to a host of deleterious additions, in versions, deletions, and
translocations of genetic material.

Evolution can not plan ahead. When necks

evolved, the vagus nerve was already
trapped behind the aorta.

In patients with s evere bacterial

infections, the i mmune s ys tem
responds by detecting pathogenass ociated molecul ar patterns
(PAM Ps), whic h are expressed by
a variety of pathogens.

And some parts seem like they were designed by someone

predisposed towards physical cruelty and violence

Shrike

In s ever e trauma, mi toc hondria

(whic h wer e once fr ee-li vi ng
bac teri a earlier in evol ution) are
damaged and r eleas e the s ame
PAMPs i nto the bl ood. Even in
the
abs enc e
of
microbial
infection, the i mmune s ystem will
begin to act as if it is under attac k
by pathog ens after tiss ue tr auma.
Some of those i mmune s ys tem
responses have been linked to
organ failure.

http://www.nature.com/nature/j ournal/v464/n7285/pdf/464041a.pdf

And some parts seem like they were designed by someone

predisposed towards physical cruelty and violence

Shrike (Impaler)

Some snails ca n drill holes through protective

s hells of clam prey

The universe is HOSTILE to life as we know i t.

Tunguska event
June 30, 1908
Siberia
The explosion knocked
over an estimated 80
million trees covering
830 sqare miles.

Why intelligent design is not science

Do these observations refute intelligent design?
Is there any room to claim that the world we live in
was optimally designed by a benevolent creator?

Some versions of intelligent design acknowledge apparent poor design in nature.

We have simply failed to understand the perfection of the design.

(UNTESTABLE)
or
Designers do not ne cessarily pr oduce the be st desig n they can. A designer may
have good reasons for poor engineering (doesnt want to spoil us).
(UNTESTABLE)
Or
Bad design is on purpose. AIDS was created to punish immorality.
(UNTESTABLE)

Conclusion

http://www.csm onit or .c om /USA/Educ ati on /201 1/01 25/R ep or t-c ar d- on science-Most-US-s tu de nts -ar en -t -pr o fici en t

I.D. is either refuted or its untestable.

Refuted or untestable hypotheses do not belong
in a science classroom.

Teaching I.D. as science is actually harmful!

Critical thinkers do not use supporting evidence.
Critical thinkers do not argue that untestable hypothes es are true.

When only 1 or 2 percent of

children score at the advanced
levels on NAEP, the next
generation will not be ready to
be world-class inventors,
doctors, and engineers.
The NAEP results also showed
big achievement gaps between
races, income levels, public- and
private-school students, and
gender.
National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP)

Programme for International

Student Assessment (PISA)
A wo rldwide study b y the Organis ation fo r
Economic Co-operation and Development
(OEC D) in member and non -member n ations
of 15-year-old school pupils' scholastic
perform ance on mathem atics, science, and
reading.

Hypothesis Testing
1.

TESTABLE h ypoth eses (ali en exampl e, God, etc .). Testabl e

hypotheses ar e those that, at l east i n theor y, c oul d be falsified
through observation or experiment.

2.

W e must make ever y att empt to u se evid en ce to REFUT E

h ypotheses, not su pport th em . Supporting evi denc e is ON LY
cited by pseudo-science.

3.

W hat else are we missing?

It w as firs t performed in 2000 and then

repeated every three years.

An example of hypothesis testing:

Hypothesis:
The driver of the white car was at fault.
There is only ONE true story.

This hypothesis may be the true one.

But is this a testable hypothesis?
In other words, is it possible to know whether
this hypothesis is true or false? Fact or fiction?

Hypothesis:
The driver of the white car was at fault.

Hypothesis:
The driver of the white car was at fault.

Test 1: Ask the driver of the white car.

Test 2: Ask the witness in the rear-view mirror.

Is this a falsifying or supporting observation?

Is this a falsifying or supporting observation?

Is this a strong test or a weak test?

Is this a strong test or a weak test?

10

Hypothesis:
The driver of the white car was at fault.
Test 3: Check a security camera on a nearby
building that has a perfect view of the
intersection.
Is this a falsifying or supporting observation?

Is this a strong test or a weak test?

Hypothesis:
The driver of the white car was at fault.
If all 3 tests give the same account, we can confidently
reject or fail to reject the original hypothesis
ALL conclusions are provisional.
What if the drivers give conflicting accounts?
What if the security camera gives a different account than
the drivers?

Wha t is SCIENCE?

Wha t is SCIENCE?

1.

TESTABLE h ypoth eses (ali en exampl e, God, etc .). Testabl e

hypotheses ar e those that, at l east i n theor y, c oul d be falsified
through observation or experiment.

1.

TESTABLE hypotheses

2.

W e must make ever y att empt to u se evid en ce to REFUT E

h ypotheses, not su pport th em . Supporting evi denc e is ON LY
cited by pseudo-science.

2.

W e must make ever y att empt to u se evid en ce to REFUT E

hypotheses, not support them.

3.

Strong tests vs. weak tests!

1 strong test is better than 1000 weak tests.

3.

Strong tests vs. weak tests!

4.

Cautiou s conclusion s. Scientists tr y to falsify hypothes es, not

prove them or acc ept them (except provisi onall y).
The
strong est sci entific s tatement i n favor of a hypothesis is that it is
not yet falsifi ed (but well keep tryi ng). Science is a VERB, not
a noun.

Sci entific Models

Simplified representations of reality (objects, phenomena, processes)
Goal is to produce models that are NOT contrary to reality

Atom
(object)

Evol ution of Li fe
(process)

Gra vity
(phenomena)

Wha t is SCIENCE?
1.

TESTABLE h ypoth eses (ali en exampl e, God, etc .). Testabl e

hypotheses ar e those that, at l east i n theor y, c oul d be falsified
through observation or experiment.

2.

W e must make ever y att empt to u se evid en ce to REFUT E

h ypotheses, not su pport th em . Supporting evi denc e is ON LY
cited by pseudo-science.

3.

Strong tests vs. weak tests!

4.

Cautious conclusions.

5.

Theories vs. hypotheses . . .

11

Weaknesses of the Scientific Method

IF a hypothesis survives repeated tests and attempts to
falsify it, then the hypothesis becomes elevated to the
status of THEORY.
The stronger the tests, the stronger the theory.

1.Some very good ideas may be impossible to

test (they are not within the realm of science)
Some dinosaurs had camouflage skin

This does not mean theories can never be overturned.

A supreme being created the universe

It only means that it is highly unlikely that we will ever
find evidence to the contrary.

Weaknesses of the Scientific Method

There is no god

Homo neanderthalensis depicted as brutish cave man

2.Science is only as good as the hypotheses we

are clever enough to invent.
Culture and history play a strong role in which
hypotheses occur to us at any given time.

Strengths of the Scientific Method

1. Strong tests that try to refute a hypothesis are the only proven way to
separate truth from fiction.
2. It is unprejudiced. It doesnt matter who does the test. The results
should be the same.
3. It works! Its not just a matter of opinion.

4. It is conservative.
(strong vs. weak tests; refutation vs. support)

Buried their dead with flowers

5. Its honest. Scientists attack their own and each others ideas.

Helped the sick and wounded

12

Can scientists test hypotheses

about the past?
Is it possible to know anything about events or lifeforms
that occurred millions (if not billions) of years ago?
We cant go back in time and do experiments or make
direct observations.

potentially

v
Are these claims testable? Can we refute them?
The Earth is 6000 years old.
All life appeared in its current form.
Earliest life was complex, not simple.

Life evolved in the sea.

Early humans hunted dinosaurs.
Humans evolved from primate (ape) ancestors.
Climate change causes mass extinction events.

13