首页> 外文期刊>Global and planetary change >Geoscience meets the four horsemen? Tracking the rise of neocatastrophism
【24h】

Geoscience meets the four horsemen? Tracking the rise of neocatastrophism

机译:地球科学遇见了四个骑士?追踪新灾难主义的兴起

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Although it is acknowledged that there has been an exponential growth in neocatastrophist geoscience inquiry, the extent, chronology and origin of this mode have not been precisely scrutinized. In this study, we use the bibliographic research tool Scopus to explore 'catastrophic' words replete in the earth and planetary science literature between 1950 and 2009, assessing when, where and why catastrophism has gained new currency amongst the geoscience community. First, we elucidate an exponential rise in neocatastrophist research from the 1980s onwards. We then argue that the neocatastrophist mode came to prominence in North America during the 1960s and 1970s before being more widely espoused in Europe, essentially after 1980. We compare these trends with the EM-DAT disaster database, a worldwide catalogue that compiles more than 11,000 natural disasters stretching back to 1900. The findings imply a clear link between anthropogenically forced global change and an increase in disaster research (r~2 = 0.73). Finally, we attempt to explain the rise of neocatastrophism by highlighting seven non-exhaustive factors: (1) the rise of applied geoscience; (2) inherited geological epistemology; (3) disciplinary interaction and the diffusion of ideas from the planetary to earth sciences; (4) the advent of radiometric dating techniques; (5) the communications revolution; (6) webometry and the quest for high-impact geoscience; and (7) popular cultural frameworks.
机译:尽管已经认识到新触角地球科学的研究呈指数增长,但这种模式的范围,年代和起源尚未得到严格的审查。在这项研究中,我们使用书目研究工具Scopus探索1950年至2009年之间充斥于地球和行星科学文献中的“灾难性”词语,评估灾难性事件何时,何地以及为何在地球科学界获得了新的成功。首先,我们阐明了从1980年代开始新近催化研究的指数增长。然后,我们认为新催化论模式在1960年代和1970年代在北美盛行,然后在欧洲受到广泛支持,基本上是在1980年之后。我们将这些趋势与EM-DAT灾难数据库进行了比较,该数据库汇编了11,000多个世界范围自然灾害的历史可以追溯到1900年。研究结果表明,人为强迫的全球变化与灾害研究的增加之间存在明确的联系(r〜2 = 0.73)。最后,我们试图通过强调七个非穷举性因素来解释新灾难论的兴起:(1)应用地球科学的兴起; (2)继承了地质认识论; (3)学科间的互动以及思想从行星科学到地球科学的传播; (4)辐射测年技术的出现; (5)通讯革命; (6)网络测量法和对高影响地球科学的追求; (7)流行的文化框架。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号