Quantcast

«

»

Jun 08 2013

For Queen and Country

I don’t know who came up with this meme, but I love them. Introduce me if you know the originator.

geo keep calm

Yes, Mum!

There are some utterly spectacular, drool-worthy images on the Pinterest page I filched that from. Go enjoy, and drop by this snazzy science meme Pinterest while you’re at it.

4 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    rq

    So much *drool* on that first one, and the second one, too!
    I love the rainbow rocks of China, and the opal geode, and… the lava fountain, and the prehistoric animal alphabet, and the giant ammonite, and the Slovenian caves… *drool*
    And to think it’s all right here on earth! (Or was.)

  2. 2
    sc_770d159609e0f8deaa72849e3731a29d

    <URLhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrHkKXFRbCI
    A brief history from the rediscoverer. Barter Books.
    Until recently the Churchillian version- “Keep buggering on”- was better known

  3. 3
    cope

    Dana,

    The Pinterest page you link to has just the right resonant frequency to cause me pain because several of those images (I only followed through on the first few obvious ones I noticed) are fakes. I have been a student of geology since the 1950s, a geologist in the 1970s and a teacher of earth science since the 1980s. I love rocks, fossils, crystals, geodes, outcrops, scree, folds, faults, slickensides, graded bedding, boudinage, lava flows and, yes, even unconsolidated sediment. The things we can learn from studying the most boring, lack-luster and ugly rocks there are is astounding to me. Therefore, it pains me to see that folks feel that the “real world” is not enough and they need to augment it. To people like me, however, the real world is amazing enough.

    The ginormous ammonite, the STS launch through the clouds and at least the top image in the dual “what a total lunar eclipse looks like from space” are not images of reality. The ammonite is a model made for a BBC documentary (as explained by one of the two gentlemen in the image). The STS launch is a PS and Lightroom composite image (as explained by the creator of the image). Both of the images purporting to be “lunar eclipses” are actually meant to show solar eclipses. Additionally, in the top image, viewing a total eclipse is only possible from within the umbra which is shown as the dark shadow projected on the Earth below and the point of view of the photo is not within that shadow. Also, too, the representation of the Milky Way below the Moon/Sun is a 360 degree panorama composite image obviously added to the image.

    How did I single out these images as being of dubious authenticity? As for the ammonite, do you have any idea how heavy a fossil/rock of that size would be? Two guys holding it balanced on edge would have been at great risk of at least smashed toes and feet were it to slip over in their direction, not to mention the risk of it shattering into a zabillion pieces. In the case of the STS launch, within 10 seconds of launch, STS would have initiated its roll program and not be traveling vertically and since launch constraints did not allow for launch into total cloud coverage as low as would be encountered in the first 10 seconds of launch, it is obviously a composite. Also, shadow angles are inconsistent: the SRB shadow against the main fuel tank indicates a relatively low angle while the shadows cast by the clouds on each other indicates a much higher angle of the Sun. As for the top eclipse picture, the instant I noticed the Milky Way, I realized it was a composite image. Exposure times for sharp pictures of the Milky Way would be much longer than those for totality during a solar eclipse.

    I feel bad dissing anything that seeks to elevate the science and appreciation of geology (and my complaints are with the Pinterest page only, Dana, I am a huge fan our yours) but, hey, we’re all just looking for truth as the real world offers it up to us, yes?

    1. 3.1
      rq

      I had a bad feeling about the ammonite because of the ease with which they were holding it up, but I went with my scientific glee at seeing one so large. As for the rest of it, I would never have guessed. Disappointing, yes. But I feel better for knowing, for being slightly more wary of amazing science photos (but not too much – my first inclination is still to be delighted and amazed). :) So thanks for the reveal, and also the interesting analysis of a few photos! I did learn something.

Comments have been disabled.