Perovskite is literally a semiconductor! But, yes, MinCup is a vibes poll, like all elections ;)
State Geologist of Oklahoma, Director of Oklahoma Geological Survey, nominally a structural geologist, phan, podcast listener, wannabe guitarist.
122 followers 108 following 168 posts
view profile on Bluesky
Perovskite is literally a semiconductor! But, yes, MinCup is a vibes poll, like all elections ;)
I was tempted to vote for Calcite since I always feel MinCup should favor the common sense minerals over the niche ones, but Perovskite is the most common, but in planetary interiors, and it has all sorts of cool mineralogy things going on. That was an unfair match up though.
There's something brewing in the corners of that evil yet inevitable entity called 'capitalism' wherein CO2 is actually quite expensive to consolidate and move around and use and stuff. Given that it is both a pollutant needing mitigation, and a valuable commodity, remains an un-leveraged situation.
I missed Match 2....
#MinCup25 Round 1 Match 2 - It's a battle of dark and light as soft, dramatic stibnite goes up against adorable cotton balls of okenite. Vote: www.mineralcup.org/2025/vote/r1... Results: www.mineralcup.org/2025/results...
Cool paper! Magali Billen explained this area to me years ago and there was some thoughts of an MG&G project. I don't recall the delamination idea floated (pun intended?).
Is it a pro/con mayo thing, or a broader discussion of its thixotropic properties and lack of cholesterol impact?
Just as an aside, has there been any work on FeTi basalts lately? Juergen Koepke and I had an idea about that that was NOT deep-earth related...
e.g. in detail we probably have less problem with Louise Kellogg's cartoon than the one in the post (though we certainly could argue till the cow's come home all the same) but what is a general person supposed to take away from any differences? Drawing is a great tool, but also a dangerous one.
Honestly, I'm not surprised. The way "academia" has displayed the interior earth and our discussions/debates about, have not well-served the public.
huh, thanks for the tip. I took my 12-year old horror-movie buff to Weapons, which is a neat counterpoint, as apparently the (right-wing) propaganda-sphere is weaponizing KPDH.
I think this paper is relevant: doi.org/10.1029/2007...
I think this paper addressed this a bit: doi.org/10.1029/2007...
Both a humblebrag and question. Our Force Chain paper is accepted! Check it out on arXiv. Now, the question: do we spring for OA at the journal (~2k$), or depend on arXiv for the most widely available copy: arxiv.org/abs/2504.20248
My bsky network is clearly missing a lot of important things; somebody texted me this one. Essential accoutrement for these times.
turns out smoking is good for you?
I love how I wrote this post yesterday, then today quickly reposted something with a completely incorrect take after glancing at the abstract. Either AI will save us all, or we all need to go back to the library for a few hours a week.
I deleted my post out of embarasment (more coffee!)
Hey! This is kinda cool. A near-real-time event and analysis related to a pretty ancient observation of curved slickensides (they're out there, even if not that widely reported)
An interesting question is if scientists can go back to a pre-social-media world, which required more work in terms of keeping up with the literature, but also more rewards in terms of deeper understanding and staying sharp.
The weird part is that scientists used to be pretty abusive on Twitter too, but now they're not on Bluesky. I mean, there's probably social science about that as well.
fascinating...hadn't heard of the Tia complex before; went through the Permian!
"you" being the author of the original piece...
This was the first post where I read the whole thing. If we want people who can think, read, and pursue a better society, how about we think about education sensu lato, and not a false panacea about STEM's higher calling (which, hate to break it to you, has its own massive problems).
I've relied on Scholar for at least a decade, and I think it's been a net negative. Too much dependence on networked papers, overemphasis on citation histories, too easy to shortcut actually reading the papers, Doubt what comes next will be an improvement but maybe we shouldn't shed too big a tear?
nice article. I was reminded by Carol Frost's article in GSA Today in March describing "the oldest rocks in the United States". I had to remember that the oldest zircon (which I believe is >4Ga) is not the oldest rock....
wish these scientists would make up their minds :)
right. So things like Congo, Uinta etc.. basins are relatively rare (and not that volumetrically significant)... I'll read it more carefully - scanned abstract and figures :)
Thanks! Fascinating.... seems wild that "sinks" are such a minor component, but I guess over geologic time it adds up, right? right? or.... are we really only accessing a minute part of the sedimentary record over geological time.
Of course I should know better than use words like "fascinating" for something that will inevitably bring tragedy to many.
fascinating. Jody B always talked/studied/traveled there and talked about this eventuality
guess with quality of work like this we can see that the sophisticated malignant actions occurring around the world aren't actually coming out of the WH?
dry gas futures/leases bought >3 years out now, Anadarko Basin in Oklahoma will be producing, companies like GE Vernova up >500% in the last few years... guess NatGas wasn't the bridging fuel so much as the destination?
You'll be able to separate LLM from human dash users -- humans never use them correctly
I added a bucket list item to my future geo-tourism when I started reading about the Siliures and the Ordovices, e.g. www.ancientwalesstudies.org/id132.html
Interesting. I visited this for the first time a couple years ago and was struck by the unusual landscape, but since I've seen so few salt-tectonics localities, I didn't think twice about it. Guess it's widely considered to be an impact structure!
I don't read much on Substack and don't write there, but I am curious about this. A few pundits I like have set up shop there. What's the rumpus?
This is a very interesting hearing: naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eve...
not many people left working in DOI after the RIF/DOGE, so you might be a lonely fly.
possibly some epidote
Not serpentine, more likely chlorite-like minerals. I used to know the precise ones but I'm a little rusty (da-dum-dum).
Thanks for the followup! Minor point is that USGS (quoted in the piece) doesn't actually issue any permits, and the other agencies who do are constantly being accused of being too slow, so there's some kind of communications/politics at work here too (I mean, duh! :) ).
Devon is a majority stakeholder now, I believe
Is the comparison with Mountain Pass inappropriate then? Just curious.
TIL that every time you ask ChatGPT a Y/N question it uses a 1/2 liter of water...
The caveat is that often there are not many non-commercial outlets for publication. @keepitrheol.bsky.social spearheaded more avenues to publish geoscience at lower/no cost. We are reinvigorating our geological survey publication outlets too. As this evolves we can hopefully quantify "the problem".
I was a student at SUNYA; their geology degree was eliminated years ago as a broader consolidation of programs at SUNY schools and "butts-in-seats" calculations. The field could, in theory, live on their through their strong atmospheric science programs.
PFAS is a tough one because the state-level regulators are not equipped or funded to do the level of detection and remediation EPA has historically required, so even those in positions of responsibility will repeat the claim that it's just not so bad, and express surprise it remains an issue.
Really important to watch this: www.energy.senate.gov/hearings/202...
"For me, the answer now lies in refusal, the withdrawal of participation from systems that require dishonesty as the price of belonging." Today I am resigning from the National Science Board and the Library of Congress Scholars Council. I wrote about my decision in TIME. time.com/7285045/resi...
Great post/thread! I heard about this at the time, but forgot how cool it was. A couple of us used to speculate that some contourites - an enigmatic sedimentary rock - might form in these.
that is: yes, science academia (sensu lato) has not been succeeding at engaging the broader public and achieving various types of "operational excellence", and needs to have reform. But though related, that is not the same as reactive measures to the current imposed emergency and threat.
It's a maddening thing about this moment that two things can be true at once, and not have anything to do with one another, but 'thought leaders' conflate them. I find myself having to guard against such mistakes.
This article, though a niche topic for many, sums up the dilemma. On the one hand, there are leaders who - though you might disagree with them - do have a mature plan. On the other there is the "skinny budget" which cuts across their message: www.hydrogeninsight.com/policy/i-don...
Question: I've been told in your situation to get out of the car (which can get squished) and lie down in as low/sheltered a place as possible. Sounds like there wasn't even that near you, but the question remains if you'd have made it outside of the car on the ground?
Win Means was another mentor of mine, and he was a real stickler for "genetic terminology". I think he got a little carried away with that - used to argue against the term "pressure solution" to describe structures - but it is one of geologists' weakest suit (overuse of genetic terminology).
I will add, my adherence to it has perhaps hurt me more than helped me in my career because... well ... it's difficult, and.... people.
My Ph.D. advisor, Darrel Cowan really drove it into me. He had published his Baja-BC polemic right before I started working with him. I'm glad he did as, to quote Sean Willett, "it's the right way to do science" (going all the way back to the Greeks).
might be a case where the devil you don't know is better? We'll see....
Guess Russia needed to read some decline letters?
How's it going?, well, let me tell you... www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLqp...
OGS has released its 2024 annual report. We’re really proud of this one! To directly load the pdf click here: www.ou.edu/content/dam/... or you can find the link on our banner at: www.ou.edu/ogs or a link at our “about” page here: www.ou.edu/ogs/about
15% max overhead from DOE awards to Universities: if this actually translated into a sensible reform I could almost get behind it. But an upper University VIP once said to me that "IDC partly fills the budgetary hole research makes" which suggests to me, it's just more pain for the researchers.
Is the Variscan the most extensive fold belt of its kind?
It's shameful that the mainstream press isn't covering this more prominently. One of the most important moments I've seen in a long time.
I found some notes from a UCSC class Andy Fisher taught that I used for years (and since can usually reconstruct myself) to transform different vectors (strike, dip, whatever) between coordinate systems. Kind of demystified it all and let me go to dip-dip direction confidently.
oh my. the google AI agrees with Dan. Lie the hand on the surface with the thumb parallel to strike. If the AI thinks this it must be right, no?
huh.... RHR to me is thumb points up and the index and middle finger straddle strike and dip (e.g. like a vector diagram). I think Win Means's 1970's books cover this quite well and offer ways of using strike and dip to in turn work out strain and stress directions
We were taught with the Brunton "quadrant" method: strike in either direction then flip the compass to get the dip noting the dip direction. Early on I switched to RHR (0-180 strike). Then, about 10 years ago I converted to the "Swiss" method: dip-dip direction with a Sylva type compass.
And though ignored by most of the major news feeds, Corey Booker going on Hour 17. Go get 'em!
fascinating (and of course tragic)
very cool looking study
When I hear from folks the message is that there are very few managers left doing more work than ever, with a level of stress, confusion, and complexity that can't be understated. They also feel like nobody out in the scientific community has a clue what is going on.
I hope I have the time to watch this. I don't necessarily fall in line with this idea (though it seems correct) or the style of scientist (though he's awe inspiring for his dedication) but I have never watched a Gene Humphreys talk I didn't walk away from excited and thinking about the Earth from.
Surely Columbia politics and functionality (or lack thereof) also reflects the donor class (e.g. what is their version of a Board of Regents?). Probably takes more than $1M to sit at that table though ;)
interesting finding
I raised this point with a Fed colleague a few weeks ago and they looked at me with stunned disappointment that I hadn't figured out that the whole chain of command has been replaced and aligned with the orders.
turtles
I was really stunned to find out how little we know about the mid-water zone when I was part of a deep submergence research group a few years ago. It's going to be challenging to have our knowledge stay ahead of the possible impacts of deep-sea mining, even only a few such mining efforts.
I really like this one because I was there! Or at least close to it. Pito Deep, and I think we saw some neotectonic fault-rocks there too: doi.org/10.1029/2008...
Hah! I just checked. Dickson Cunningham's writeup did. TBH I kinda enjoyed it because I just knew his book and hadn't realized how extensively he'd published. I'd imagine his family-friends obit focused more on his non-publishing life.
I kinda think that was Brian Windley's obit the other day 😱
This is something I spend a lot of time doing as part of my State Geologist core mission - trying to prevent valuable collections from winding up in the landfill. I wish folks would reach out to surveys whenever something like this is looming on the horizon.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=StTq...
Social engineering at its finest? Hi there @sentimentbot.bsky.social !
Just describing reality: Lower taxes have been here for a long time already, and gov science funding has been decreasing and shifting to public-private partnerships for a long time as well. Current admin is a further (dramatic, abrupt) shift away from agency support and the public funding side.
interesting. I haven't looked at that yet, will do. At a glance though, it looks a bit modeled on a lot of science-funding streams, not necessarily government agency backed.
What does that number include? I mean, it could be federal spending if you included big chunks of DOE and DOD, but actual governmental science spending outside of that is <100B$, if not <$50B in "the before times".
Something like 25% of US wealth is in 'businesses', and not all traded. By the time you get to big traded ones, e.g. Apple, you are in a big chunk of US wealth (~5%), but those do accomplish some pretty groundbreaking science. But there's a wide range of earth-science stakeholders...
It's funny, but the Rest is History podcast (highly recommended) often returns to Watergate being bad, but not nearly as bad as Iran-Contra, which was sort of forgotten the next week.
Cherokee friend of mine always says "we've already had our apocalypse".
So cool. Ernie Anderson was always into that stuff. Got a little carried away some times: doi.org/10.1130/2010...
That is an active discussion in state geological surveys; will pass-through to states increase to fill gaps. Could extend to municipalities. Not sure there's the money there though. e.g. folks lobbing insults at Pasadena about the fires, but it has a relatively normal average income and poverty rate
Meanwhile, we're starting to see meaningful breakthroughs trickle out of the private sector - yes, mostly in the AI and Chip space (Microsofts comes to mind), but elsewhere too. How can we leverage this pattern for earth-system monitoring and basic geosciences?
Not flippant at all! I don't have the tactical answers (beyond the usual). But the macro case is clear. The public sector is being (has been for a while) raided to honor lower tax rates and larger spending, and science has been on the chopping block for a while.
And to clarify, I'm not trolling here, and one could argue it's heartless to post something like this. But things do seem rather extreme, and I'm not sure there's a return to business-as-usual. To quote Hunter S. "when the going gets weird, the weird turn pro"....
I'm a liberal, even a bit of an MMT fan, and a public-sector scientist. BUT I also think these current events underscore a problem with pubic funding. With wealth consolidation at the top, should we scientists look more closely at a more comprehensive private-sector science funding model?
I'm certainly not defending the current funding cuts and outlook, but with wealth distribution so off scale, and many billionaires claiming to be concerned, is there a model for a private investment that would still pass muster scientifically?
Just that the fact that a section of a basin winds up uplifted (relative to the floor) and cannibalized does not make it a different basin, is all.
Just was re-reading Jeff Knott's stratigraphy review. I see your point, assuming that's Nova Basin (more or less). Kinematic change in the Neogene or so.