This Course
It would be fun to take a tour of all the national parks and learn a little about each. But Penn State would not award you General Education credit for such a course—you are supposed to be taking a tour of a field of knowledge, in this case, geology.
So, we will take a tour of geologic ideas. But some of the best geological features of the world are enshrined in the U.S. (and other!) national parks. We will use national parks as illustrations, delving into park history and culture when we can, but concentrating on those things that illustrate how the Earth works.
Scientific Literature: An Introduction to Exercise 1
Scientists communicate in a lot of ways, but the most important is through refereed scientific literature. Any scientific paper is first submitted to a learned journal, and the editor sends the paper out for peer review. In this, several recognized world experts read the paper and make sure it is “good.” Are the methods described well? Are uncertainties given? Is proper credit assigned to other sources? Do the equations make sense? Are substantive conclusions reached? If there are obvious errors, then the paper is sent back to the author or authors for revision. If the paper is unclear, or can’t be read well, or information is omitted, if unsubstantiated claims are made, or if anything else is wrong, the paper is sent back for revision. Only when the paper clearly and logically presents new results, will it be published.
Peer review takes a lot of time and effort. Peer review also slows down the publication of important results. (The papers authored by Drs. Alley and Anandakrishnan which have been of greatest use to other people were also the ones that had the hardest time gaining approval from reviewers, who check especially carefully on the big stuff.) And, there is no guarantee that the reviewers will get everything right; errors do sneak by. However, peer review raises the quality of the scientific literature above the quality of other sources that are available to you.
You can find information in many places—books, magazines, newspapers, the Web, speeches by public officials, graffiti in restrooms, etc. Some of this information is more reliable than others. In general, the more permanent a publication is, and the more expensive it is to get you the information, the better the information. (So the Web, which is cheap and has a huge turnover in websites, includes an immense amount of nonsense as well as some good stuff.) But, there are surely exceptions to this “rule.”
If something matters, the refereed scientific literature, with its long traditions, its focus on accuracy, and its appeal to nature to test ideas, is the most reliable source available. Textbooks, lectures by professors, and other ways we give you information aren’t bad, but the refereed scientific literature is still better. You’ll have the opportunity to explore this in Exercise 1.