Geomagnetic Extinction: A Paramount Science Disagreement
One of the most strongly divisive and imminently important issues in science is whether the known geomagnetic excursions of the last 100,000 years are coincident with major climate changes and loss of species.
The field is utterly divided, and a resolution is not only academically desirable, but evidence suggests that earth’s magnetic field is entering excursion again now, and if this geomagnetic secular variation presents a biosphere problem, the focus and discourse of various fields need a dramatic shift, now.
This disagreement was highlighted in February 2021, with major publications claiming both that the Laschamp geomagnetic excursion 42,000 years ago was a major extinction event (Cooper et al. 2021) and expressing doubt (Voosen 2021). Both were published in the same volume 371 of the prestigious journal SCIENCE, they created even more confusion in the field, and it is critical that the next round of academic discussions appreciates the magnitude of the issue, and issues involved.
We often see investigations in this field failing to include a broad enough array of issues. Let’s take the example of the well-publicized study in 2020, when it was proposed that the Neaderthal
extinction was the result of competition with modern humans, and not abrupt climate change or interbreeding (Timmerman 2020).
The existence of dramatic geomagnetic changes during the Neanderthal extinction is well established (Blanchet et al. 2006; Channell et al. 2017; Korte et al. 2019; Levi et al. 1990; Noel and Tarling, 1975; Svensson et al. 2006), and this was not part of Timmerman’s analysis, even though this causal link between the excursions and extinctions has been directly explored via the increase in UV light damage to biological cells and DNA due to destruction of the ozone by solar radiation during the excursion (Valet and Valladas, 2010; Channell and Vigliotti, 2019).
These studies and others have found a plausible causation for the extinction. The Valet and Valladas (2010) paper appeared in the same journal as Timmerman (2020), and Channell and Vigliotti (2019) appeared in the #1 geophysical journal – Reviews of Geophysics (AGU) – it was unacceptable to ignore those studies in this context, and yet it is a common feature of analyses in this field.
No study investigating the connection between these geomagnetic events and biosphere stress has considered both climate AND radiation exposure as causes of extinction, they pick one or
the other (Cooper et al. 2021 picked climate change), and there are further biosphere challenges during a geomagnetic excursion which also deserve attention in this discussion.
Recent studies have revealed numerous correlations between solar storms/cosmic rays and adverse biophysical outcomes like terminal cardiac events and strokes, multiple sclerosis and autoimmune flare-ups, migraines, seizures, and cognitive/emotional stresses. (Cherry 2002; Jarusevicius et al. 2020; Rozhkov et al. 2018; Shepherd et al. 2018; Stoupel et al. 2018; Vencloviene et al. 2018).
The potential dynamics of these biophysical correlations during a geomagnetic intensity minimum have not been explored in the literature, but there is unquestionably more exposure to those stimuli during an excursion, which means that the adverse reactions will be stronger and more numerous.
In a geomagnetic minimum, we should consider the well-understood stresses of enhanced UV-B exposure to microbes and plants, which directly impacts their photosynthetic processes, their
progeny (seed integrity), the herbivores that rely on them, and the carnivores relying on the herbivores. Another challenge comes with the loss of predictability and stability of migratory species; both birds and marine creatures (Granger et al. 2020; Keller et al. 2021) use earth’s magnetic field. It is reasonable to expect the excursion to negatively affect those species and their immediate superiors in the food chain.
The totality of these challenges, including radiation, bio-electromagnetic coupling, climate changes and competition with modern humans, likely worked as an ensemble of stresses that led to the Neanderthal extinction, that of other hominin species, and numerous megafauna known to have disappeared during past magnetic excursions. These stresses on the food chaincould have created further food insecurity and competition between species, such that even the human-competition-effect would be partially driven by the challenges that come with a geomagnetic excursion.
Modeling any subsegment of these challenges as independent variables is a considerable error in itself.
Today, the earth’s magnetic field is undergoing a well-known weakening and shift of the magnetic pole position. These shifts have been accelerating over the last century, with the polar motion
increasing, and the rate of geomagnetic strength now decreasing at five percent per decade, as opposed to five percent per century for much of the 1900s (Dickerson 2014). The recent identification of another acceleration of the field over the pacific sector in 2017 (Finlay et al. 2020) has put the subject in firm focus as a major ongoing event on our planet.
Our electrified society, air travel, communications and more have all developed in an age where earth’s magnetic field was much stronger than it will be during the zenith of this excursion event. We now have more than the climate, radiation, food-chain disruption and solar-geomagnetic biology connections to consider in this upcoming event- we are at risk of losing our modern, electrified society.
It is a common misconception that earth’s last major magnetic event was the famous Laschamp excursion 42,000 years ago, but the Mono Lake, Lake Mungo, and Gothenburg magnetic
excursions occurred more recently, along with a minor event known as “Hilina Pali”, and one earlier in the timeline that shows up in Vostok corings. These events are fast-flips, rapid reversals, and these occur in a cycle of ~12,000 years. Gothenburg was ~12,000 to 13,000 years ago, and earth’s field is performing the excursion again- right on time.
Looking ahead to the next round of academic studies on this topic, it is imperative that the field give appropriate treatment to all the potential biosphere stresses invoked by a weakening
magnetic field and shifting magnetic pole position.
This includes (1) the loss of ozone and climate changes, (2) the radiation effect from both extra UV and galactic cosmic rays – on the entire food chain, (3) the navigational disruption to species caused by the magnetic change, (4) the geomagnetic interrelationship with critical biological processes, and (5) the dependence of modern society on electricity, and the increased vulnerability of these systems to both cosmic rays and solar flares while earth has a weaker planetary magnetic shield.
The world is watching, and the future may depend on how well we understand these changes and the challenges they present.
References
(Bibliography)
Blanchet, C.L., Thouveny, N., de Garidel-Thoron, T., 2006. Evidence for multiple paleomagnetic intensity lows between 30 and 50ka BP from a western Equatorial Pacific sedimentary sequence. Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 25, Issues 9–10, Pages 1039-1052, ISSN 0277-3791, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2005.09.001
Channell, J.E.T., Vázquez Riveiros, N., Gottschalk, J., Waelbroeck, C., Skinner, L.C., 2017. Age and duration of Laschamp and Iceland Basin geomagnetic excursions in the South Atlantic Ocean. Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 167, Pages 1-13, ISSN 0277-3791, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2017.04.020
Channel, J.E.T., Vigliotti, L., 2018. The Role of Geomagnetic Field Intensity in Late Quaternary Evolution of Humans and Large Mammals. Reviews of Geophysics, Volume 57, 3, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018RG000629
Cherry, N., 2002. Schumann Resonances, a plausible biophysical mechanism for the human health effects of Solar. Natural Hazards 26 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015637127504
Cooper, A., Turney, C., Palmer, J., Hogg, A., et al., 2021. A Global Environmental Crisis 42,000 Years Ago. Science Advances, 371, 6531. DOI: 10.1126/science.abb8677
Dickerson, Kelly, 2014. Earth’s Magnetic Field is Weakening 10 Times Faster Now. LiveScience.com https://www.livescience.com/46694-magnetic-field-weakens.html
Finlay, C., Kloss, C., Olsen, N., Hammer, M., et al., 2020. The CHAOS-7 Geomagnetic Field Model and Observed Changes in the South Atlantic Anomaly. Earth, Planets and Space 72, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-020-01252-9
Granger, J., Walkowicz, L., Fitak, R., Johnsen, S., 2020. Gray Whales Strand More Often on Days with Increased Levels of Atmospheric Radio Frequency Noise. Current Biology 30, 4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.01.028
Jarusevicius, G., Rugelis, T., McCraty, R., Landauskas, M., Berskiene, K., Vainoras, A., 2018. Correlation between Changes in Local Earth’s Magnetic Field and Cases of Acute Myocardial Infarction. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15, 3 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15030399
Keller, B., Putman, N., Grubbs, R.D., Portnoy, D., Murphy, T. Map-Like Use of Earth’s Magnetic Field in Sharks. Current Biology 31, 13 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.03.103
Korte M., Brown M.C., Panovska S., Wardinski I., 2019. Robust Characteristics of the Laschamp and Mono Lake Geomagnetic Excursions: Results From Global Field Models. Front. Earth Sci. 7:86. doi: 10.3389/feart.2019.00086
Levi, S., Audunsson, H., Duncan, R.A., Kristjansson, L., Gillot, P.Y., Jakobsson, S.P., 1990. Late Pleistocene geomagnetic excursion in Icelandic lavas: confirmation of the Laschamp excursion. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 96, Issues 3–4, Pages 443-457, ISSN 0012-821X, https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-821X(90)90019-T
Noel, M., Tarling, D., 1975. The Laschamp geomagnetic ‘event’. Nature 253 https://doi.org/10.1038/253705a0.
Rozhkov, V.P., Trifonov, M.I., Bekshaev, S.S., Belisheva, N.K., Pryanichnikov, S.V., Soroko, S.I., 2018. Assessment of the Effects of Geomagnetic and Solar Activity on Bioelectrical Processes in the Human Brain Using a Structural Function. Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology 48 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11055-018-0564-x
Shepherd S., Lima, M.A.P., Oliveira, E.E., Sharkh, S.M., Jackson, C.W., Newland, P.L., 2018. Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields impair the Cognitive and Motor Abilities of Honey Bees. Nature, Scientific Reports 8 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26185-y
Stoupel, E., Radishauskas, R., Bernotiene, G., Tamoshiunas, A., Virvichiute, D., 2018. Blood troponin levels in acute cardiac events depend on space weather activity components (a correlative study). J Basic. Clin. Physiol. Pharmacol. 29, 3 DOI: 10.1515/jbcpp-2017-0148
Svensson, A., Andersen, K.K., Bigler, M., Clausen, H.B., Dahl-Jensen, D., Davies, S.M., Johnsen, S.J., Muscheler, R., Rasmussen, S.O., Röthlisberger, R., Steffensen, J.P., Vinther, B.M., 2006. The Greenland Ice Core Chronology 2005, 15–42ka. Part 2: comparison to other records. Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 25, Issues 23–24, Pages 3258-3267, ISSN 0277-3791, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2006.08.003.
Timmermann, A., 2020. Quantifying the potential causes of Neanderthal extinction: Abrupt climate change versus competition and interbreeding. Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 238, 106331, ISSN 0277-3791, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2020.106331
Valet, J.P., Valladas, H., 2010. The Laschamp-Mono lake geomagnetic events and the extinction of Neanderthal: a causal link or a coincidence? Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 29, Issues 27–28, Pages 3887-3893, ISSN 0277-3791, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.09.010
Vencloviene, J., Brazine, A., Dobozinskas, P., 2018. Short-Term Changes in Weather and Space Weather Conditions and Emergency Ambulance Calls for Elevated Arterial Blood Pressure. Atmosphere 9, 3 https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9030114
Header image: Vector Stocl
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Robert Beatty
| #
“These events are fast-flips, rapid reversals, and these occur in a cycle of ~12,000 years. Gothenburg was ~12,000 to 13,000 years ago, and earth’s field is performing the excursion again- right on time.”
Compare this statement with that in the third referenced PSI article of July 10, 2017:
“Some 800,000 years ago, a magnetic compass’ needle would have pointed south because the Earth’s magnetic field was reversed. These reversals typically happen every several hundred thousand years.”
Seems like there is still plenty of room for further research.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert,
You continue to amaze me with your SCHOLARSHIP!!! A mining engineer by profession but with an very, very informed READER of SCIENCE HOBBY. Who just does not read but ponders what he reads and tries to understand (explain) what is not well understood.
I will have to do a literature search to find what Gothenburg was but I accept that about 12,000 years ago that at this time a glacier covered the farm in eastern South Dakota at 45 degrees N latitude where I was born and lived for my first twenty plus years. And I have read about geological evidence of the earth’s magnetic field reversals. Which as yet I have not read that these reversals have been caused by HUMANS.
I strongly believe that there are many NATURAL PHENOMENA which NATURALLY OCCUR whether or not if we understand them. We need to be in awe of these mysteries of these little understood PHENOMENA.
Irregardless of whether we will ever explain what we observe, I know Robert and I and many previous SCIENTISTS of the past have found GREAT enjoyment trying to better understand that which we do not KNOW!!!
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert,
I have discovered that ‘Gothenburg’ is an University in Sweden where they have science department which summarizes itself as: “Environmental science studies the threats to our common future on Earth, but also the opportunities human society has to tackle these challenges. As a student of the master’s programme in Environmental Science, you will gain in-depth knowledge and competence regarding all aspects of environmental problems (causes, emissions, impacts, and mitigation measures), and how those aspects interact. You will be prepared to work as an environmental expert, working towards a sustainable future.”
Is this the academic problem (TUNNEL VISION) you are HINTING at when you mentioned Gothenburg in relation to about 12000 years ago???
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert and other PSI Readers,
Was hoping to read a response from you this morning. But I understand you are busy.
However, PSI Readers, I also came to this article and Robert’s comment to point to unquestionable evidence of the EARTH’S SHIFTING MAGNETIC FIELD that is being measured (observed) with a simple magnetic compass. The position of the magnetic NORTH POLE has been observed to clearly shift in the past and certainly during the last several years.
So Robert’s comment is not a I THINK but it is HE KNOWS because there is other HISTORICAL PHYSICAL EVIDENCES also.
I do not know if Robert has an explanation of what causes this PHENOMENON and I certainly DO NOT. But I am certain that we cannot ignore its IMPORTANCE as the IDEA OF CONTINENTAL DRIFT was ignored because NO ONE COULD EXPLAIN HOW CONTINENTS COULD DRIFT.
A KNOWN HISTORICAL FACT is that Wegener proposed (hypothesized) on the basis of observed physical evidence just as we have observed that the NORTH MAGNETIC POLE DRIFTS MUCH MORE RAPIDLY THAN THE CONTINENTS ARE NOW OBSERVED TO DRIFT.
I conclude this comment with the conclusion of Richard Feynman’s 1955 address to the National Academy which any PSI Reader can read in its entirety in Feynman’s book titled “What Do You Care What Other People Think?”
“It is our responsibility as scientists knowing the great progress which comes from a satisfactory philosophy of ignorance, the great progress which is the fruit of freedom of thought, to proclaim the value of this freedom; to teach how doubt is not to be feared but welcomed and discussed; and to demand this freedom as our duty to all coming generations.” (Feynman)
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Robert Beatty
| #
Hi Jerry,
Thank you for taking the time to comment. I was only aware of your comments when PSI published a list of them again.
John O’Sullivan might like to say why these notes have not appeared in recent editions. They form very useful points of contact for our members.
My remark was to note a published discrepancy which indicated to me that the science of pole reversals is far from being well understood. This is important, because the effects of pole reversals are also poorly understood. However, it appears to be associated with extinction events, and certainly would be impactful to the many examples of fauna which rely on pole positioning during migration. If the imminence of a pole reversal is true, we need to give it much more serious consideration. It is evidently associated with earth core technology, which would be a good starting point, and probably relevant to the all consuming discussions on AGW.
My motto is ‘the past is history, the present is real, and the future is speculation’. However, when it comes to science, the past is real – provided it has been accurately interpreted, and therein lies the main reason to always check science for its currency.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert and hopefully PSI Readers.
Robert, you wrote: “My motto is ‘the past is history, the present is real, and the future is speculation’. However, when it comes to science, the past is real – provided it has been accurately interpreted, and therein lies the main reason to always check science for its currency.”
PSI Readers and Robert, HISTORY IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT REGARDLESS WHAT THE TOPIC (SUBJECT) IS!!! And this is not only my opinion and it is, as Robert states, to the human activity which we now term SCIENCE.
The book with the title—The Holy Bible—is a BOOK OF HISTORY which claims to BEGIN in the BEGINNING!!!
I read that Einstein stated (history): “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”
When I read what Galileo wrote (1638 AD), I find he refers to what Aristotle taught before he (Aristotle) died in 322 BC, nearly 2000 years earlier. Today, I doubt that many SCIENTISTS have ever READ what Galileo wrote less than 500 years ago.
So, very few people, SCIENTISTS even, know that Galileo wrote in the common Italian language, which was translated to English by Henry Crew & Alfonso de Salvio and published in 1914 after an English translation had not been available for about two centuries. So few know that Galileo’s began: “The constant activity which you Venetians display in your famous arsenal suggest to the studious mind a large field for investigation, especially that part of the work which involves mechanics; for in this department all types of instruments and machines are constantly being constructed by many artisans, … “
Robert, maybe you know the inventor and manufacture, R. G. Le Tourneau did, but I doubt many readers, who might read this, will have a clue about this. And when I refer to the name—Louis Agassiz—I find few SCIENTISTS today who have any idea of who he was and did. except for Geologists. Who know he saw erratic boulders laying on the surface of the ground and calculated they have been moved where they lay by glaciers which had covered much of the Northern Hemisphere’s continuous down to 45N latitude and someplace even further South. But I doubt if many Geologists are now aware that Agassiz claimed his greatest achievement was that he had taught some of his students TO OBSERVE. And suspect that many of the today’s EDUCATORS are clueless about the methods of teaching that Agassiz used to teach his students to observe. In fact, I doubt that many EDUCATORS, of today, consider that TEACHING STUDENTS TO OBSERVE should be an OBJECTIVE of formal education.
I hope some will read this comment and share their thought about what I have just shared.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Robert Beatty
| #
Jerry,
You have proved your SCHOLARSHIP with these insightful comments. There is a happy balance between reading history and science which must leave time for original thinking. One must not forget that there is an awful lot of “history” which is not constructive, or accurate, but can take an infinite amount of time to analyse, resulting in wasted effort.
As we age, life helps take care of this by making it more difficult to read the text and thereby leaving more time for original thought – if used judicially.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert and PSI Readers,
I like to read and quote that which might be beneficial for others to read. James Gleick wrote a detailed biography about Richard Feynman titled ‘Genius’.
In a section titled ‘All His Knowledge’ Gleick quoted what Feynman had written to a correspondent in India. “Learn by trying to understand simple things in terms of other ideas—always honestly and directly. What keeps the clouds up, why can’t I see stars in the daytime, why do colors appear on oily water, what makes the lines on the surface of water being poured from a pitcher, why does hanging lamp swing back and forth—and all the innumerable little things you see all around you. Then when you have learned what an explanation really is, you can then go to more subtle questions.”
Robert, you are a mining engineer, can you explain how it is that the solid earth’s surface layer is very heterogenous with localized concentrations of valuable ores and ‘fossil’ fuels instead of being more homogenous like the oceans which are basically uniform in nature???
Explain how the earth’s ‘surface’ temperature can ever be colder than that the atmosphere’s temperature only about 1.5 meter above the surface!!! For there is a theory which predicts that the temperature of the atmosphere should decrease with increasing distance above the surface.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert and PSI Readers.
(https://wildfiretoday.com/2021/10/21/multiple-atmospheric-rivers-to-bring-massive-precipitation-to-west-coast/). Explain how meteorologists can make this prediction.
I am waiting to see what actually happens. And if the prediction is validated, these meteorologists need to write an article how they made this prediction. For someone must know.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert and PSI Readers,
In the case of the predicted extreme precipitation for California I will attempt to explain how it might be being predicted. For while I questioned that such could be predicted, I also questioned how it might be predicted.
Now that we know about atmospheric jet streams we also observe that precipitation events commonly occur beneath them and the clouds of these precipitation event can be easily observed from satellites. For it is now common knowledge that the jet streams that reach the USA initially pass over southeast Asia (Japan). So I have begun to study the atmospheric sounding data being measured and reported there. (http://weather.uwyo.edu/upperair/sounding.html)
As a result I found (observed) something which I was not expecting. Relative to the “Precipitable water [mm] for entire sounding” to which I have recently referred, I discovered these values under the strongest and thickest jet stream over Japan could be 10 to 20 mm while in the absence of such intense streams, at nearby sounding sites, the values were 40 to 50 mm and sometimes even more. Also, the relative humidities of the atmosphere, in which there were these super-cooled cloud droplets, was often 150 percent. Which I read is explained by the fact that supercooled water droplets have a higher vapor pressure than ice crystals at the same temperature.
I have long reasoned that water vapor is the fuel of the atmospheric heat engines which ‘drive the atmosphere’s circulations. And I know that heat engines have waste heat energy which must be removed if any heat engine is to notto quickly destroy itself. For, the numerous localized thunder storms have lifetimes of maybe only 30 minutes.
So I reason (ponder) that the jet stream lifts (bernoulli effect) the hot atmosphere from the top of the thunder cloud. Thus cooling the thunderstorm so it does not destroy itself and the precipitation continues as the storm slowly moves eastward under the fast moving jet stream.
As I see the possibility that extreme jet streams lift the lower atmosphere with its load of supercooled droplets I see the question: As the condensed water droplets, which remove water vapor from the atmosphere, are lifted into the jet stream, I see the question: How is it that these dense droplets do not settle down out of the jet stream???
My answer is the centrifugal effect. The jet stream is moving eastward faster than the atmosphere below it!!!
I ask you Robert, is this the creative reasoning (pondering) you advise me to sometime to do?. I hope someone has pondered this so that I am not the only one with this idea.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert and PSI Readers,
Even though I am very aware of the somewhat modern technology WEATHER RADAR, I totally forget about it too often.
Here is something which I suspect with which you might be able to help me. We have that simple weather station which has an out-door sensor and in-door sensor which, in our case, reports air temperature and relative humidity being measured by these sensors. But I suspect one or the other sensor is measuring atmospheric pressure but not reporting it.
And it also forecasts possible cloud conditions and possible precipitation events. Lightning is not common in this part of Oregon but this morning I see symbols which I believe is forecasting possible lightning events and the more violent windy weather associated with lightning events.
My question is: this there some simple inexpensive instrument which can detect the ‘electrical field’ that is related to lightning??? Of course, the knowledge of any PSI reader beside Robert is welcome. And I something even remember I can Google this. So I will.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Robert and PSI Readers,
“IT IS OFTEN VERY (MOST) DIFFICULT TO SEE THE OBVIOUS.” (JLK ???)
Fundamental factors of weather are known to be Solar Radiation, Atmospheric Temperature, Atmospheric Pressure (AP), Wind, Relative Humidity (Atmospheric Dewpoint and/or Frostpoint Temperature) and Precipitation. We generally know decreasing Atmospheric Pressure predicts the possibility of stronger winds, clouds, and possible precipitation. And we know that rapidly decreasing Atmospheric Pressure predicts strong (violent) winds and signification precipitation.
And finally we know that the Atmospheric Pressure decrease significantly with increasing elevation (distance from the center of the Earth instead of distance from the Earth’s surface. Hence, I know the instructions, which came with our Electronic Weather Stations (EWS), stated the EWS had to measure AP for a significant period of weeks, if not months to determine the NORMAL AP at the EWS location.
And I like to quote Einstein: “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.” So Robert and PSI Readers, forget about any of my previous pondering as I am sure the EWS considers the changes in AP relative to the Normal AP of its location. .
Still interested in what you might ponder if it is different than mine.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
LLOYD
| #
Constant use of capitalization online is like YELLING in a small room. There is no need for that as I believe the PSI audience can discover the salient points.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi LLOYD and PSI Readers,
First, PSI Readers, LLOYD is a GOD SENT.whether or not if he understands this. For HE reminded me of what I had written that I had forgotten. So thank YOU, LLOYD, thank you!!! For you are keeping these comments (this conversation) before the attention of other PSI READERS..
For conversations (Royal Society) are very important. If we read what Galileo wrote in his well known book, but seldom read book, we would see that he wrote imaginary conversations. However, when I read David Brewster’s 1840 biography titled ‘the Martyrs of Science I found that Galileo, Tycho Brahe, and Johannes Kepler probably had actual conversations with one another.
But of these three Martyrs only Galileo was a teacher. I have been a teacher and I have read that somewhere and sometime Galileo had stated: “We cannot teach people anything; we can only help them discover it within themselves.” We teachers can provide information but the student is the one who must learn. Which is actually what I consider that Galileo does in the imaginary conversations of his book. His imaginary narratives are simple, illustrated, reads and if one would actually read what HE wrote, I believe (but don’t know) that many PSI readers would find what he wrote more interesting and simpler (easier to understand) than anything that I, and many others, write here at PSI.
However, at the same time I add: To really learn one might need to read what Galileo wrote more than once.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
PS!!! Critically important is that one read the PREFACE that the publisher (Louis Elzevir) wrote to the book’s READERS!!!
Reply