General Science, Humor, Media Criticism

“Recent” Is Apparently Relative

11 Comments

I love this headline: “Moon’s Scarred Crust Hints at Recent Activity, Scientists Say.”

Yes, it was only fifty million years ago. Seems like it was only yesterday. They grow up so fast.

It reminds me of the joke about the guy nodding off at the lecture on the sun. “What?! When did you say it would expand into a red giant?” “I said a couple billion years.” “Oh, that’s a relief. I thought you said a couple million.”

11 thoughts on ““Recent” Is Apparently Relative”

  2. Why the snark? Is this along the lines of scientists are wrong about Global Warming or Climate Change or whatever the correct moniker for concerns about CO2 and climate that scientists are wrong about everything?

    This topic of whether the Moon was geologically active in “recent” times is a big one in terms of whether the Moon is a proper topic of renewed space exploration, or not, either by robotic probes or by humans. OK, OK, 50 million years ago is what, the Paleocene on Earth, soon after the demise of the dinosaurs and when the mammals were still getting their act together.

    But it has been thought post-Apollo that the Moon “hasn’t done anything” for billions of years, and there has been a kind of “Nothing to see here, please move along” attitude towards lunar exploration since then. Why haven’t we been back to the Moon in 40 years? Maybe because it is thought there is nothing of interest there.

    Yeah, yeah, all of the arguments about Moon being a bad destination for renewed human space exploration, that maybe we should go to Mars or visit interesting asteroids. But they tell me that one geologist (selenologist?) swing a hammer and collecting samples can do much, much more than a whole swarm of robots or perhaps much more than the test pilots-turned-geologists that got sent there apart from one PhD Caltech person.

    So this is nothing like the mistaken worry about the Sun turning into a red giant in 5 million instead of 5 billion years, because none of us will live 5 million years let alone see any descendent of ours face that problem as the average mammalian species doesn’t even last 5 million years in the fossil record. The article plainly states that if some kind of moon quake could have happened 50 million years ago, it could just as well have happened last year in terms of the rate things change on the moon (and yes, they can date this kind of thing with crater counts, and this was developed by Gene Shoemaker, the PhD advisor to the one geologist who did make it to the Moon).

    So yes, scientists say a lot of things, now don’t they in press releases of that kind. But for some surface feature to form on the Moon in the last 50 million years from a non meteoritic impact process is huge scientific news, if it holds up, and with potentially huge influence on the direction of space exploration. So maybe I am naive and not “in” on why calling 50 million years ago “recent” is funny.

    1. I think it was just something that made him chuckle a little. I saw it earlier on his twitter feed gadget, and I thought it humorous but nothing major. I think Rand just likes to note things that he found funny and pass the humor along without reading so much into it.

    1. Who is Dr. Enstein? Is he one of those doctors from UW Health who wrote a fraudelent sickness-excuse notes for a Madison, WI teacher last year and then received a disciplinary letter from his employer?

  4. Rand,

    BTW, in reading the article it appears 50 million years is basically the high side estimate. They may be much, much newer then that once actual samples are collected for dating.

    [[[“We think they’re less than 50 million years old, but they could be 10 million years old, could be 1 million years old, could have happened 40 years ago,” Watters told SPACE.com. “The intriguing picture that’s emerging of the moon is that there is recent geological activity going on.”]]]

    Again, it shows the Moon is much more active, and interesting, geologically then folks thought it was. You have to wonder about the discoveries a couple of MER size rovers would be making if they were on the Moon, especially given how much more area they would be able to cover without the huge time delay that handicaps the use of rovers on Mars.

    1. Mars being geologically active is great news for colonists. Active means greater mineral concentrations.

      Or did you think an occasional quake is just too, too scary. I’d buy tickets for that ride except they just don’t last long enough to be really fun.

      A company I worked for move from CA to Seattle just before they had a quake. During the quake, as we all stood in doorways, we were debating the magnitude (as I watched a string of roadway lights dancing.) Perhaps in NV they’re afraid of earthquakes (but give little thought to residual radiation from bomb tests.)

      Ask a martian about the dangers of quakes and you’ll get some funny looks.

Comments are closed.