The Dangers of "Earthnocentric" Bias

Forget the good 'ole days, the yester-years, or any other romanticized time period just before antibiotics. As a geologist, I'd like to go back to the Paleozoic Era. What could possibly be better than getting to see complex life first emerge from primordial algal ooze?


Life unquestionably began in a series of blockbuster pyrotechnics and chemical reactions flashier than any Olympic ceremony. (Perhaps nearby aliens charged admission and sold the broadcasting rights for a mere planet or two? Perhaps not.) Since I couldn't have afforded the cover charge, it's probably a good thing I missed the show by five or six hundred million years.


If I can't vacation in the Paleozoic, I can at least console myself with a much cheaper version of planetary Dish on Demand. The super-low installation fee equal to one rock hammer fits my budget, and natural sedimentation records Earth processes automatically. Unfortunately, we geologists haven't figured out where the remote control is buried, so some episodes are missing--like Gone with the Dinosaurs, Part 3 of 3.

Perhaps one of the most shocking things about biological evolution is that it really does occur in episodes. The successes and failures of species are highly punctuated; only a tiny fraction are prolific enough to make guest appearances in Earth's lithic script. Even then, for better or worse, their tales run like Hollywood pilot episodes. Most of them don't make it, and stardom is ultra-rare.

When friends ask me what I think about global warming, I'm forced to admit I see life as miraculous and fragile. The boundaries of geologic periods are usually defined by mass extinctions, and there are lots of them: the Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous, Permian, Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous, Paleogene, Neogene, and my favorite--the Holocene--which, thankfully, does not yet have an upper boundary.


Death is so frequent it's a convenient tool for delineating Earth's stratigraphy. For geologists, it's a sobering perspective. But really, why should anyone else care? It's not like we're even remotely related to trilobites or woolly mammoths, right?


Sadly, we humans don't even have the physical durability of cockroaches. We might be adaptable; we've invented many wonderful things like air conditioners and heaters, and I love them. But we have yet to prove our adaptability on a global scale--a comfy living room can't shake a stick at a comfy atmosphere. And it's the atmosphere we need to survive.


Ironically, I often beg my progressive friends to try to keep their Earthnocentric bias in check--to avoid the "keep the Earth healthy" terminology and the worship of all things "natural." To a geologist, the slogan sounds like, "Make sure you keep this bucket of rocks nice and clean or the mud stones might get sick." Instead, it's critical we turn our focus to the survival of our species, and those upon which we depend--probably most of them.


Still, Earthnocentric bias is rooted in intelligence and good, hard work. Many conservative leaders, on the other hand, make me furious when they say, "Phooey on global warming--climate change is natural. What's not to like?" This reaction speaks to the other problem with Earthnocentrism...


Other than the fact that cyanide is natural, Earthnocentrism's organic focus unwittingly helps derail environmental reform. It can't be denied that our climate naturally fluctuates, and conservatives love to point it out. In doing so, they shove the discussion way, way off track. It doesn't matter at all if climate change is natural. Just for the sake of argument, let's assume that much of it is. Does that mean we should help it? Accelerate it? Bring a quicker end to the Holocene with machines that amplify the effect? They've got to be kidding.


In general, geologists are very cautious about raising alarm bells. They're trained in collegiate infancy to understand the human and financial fallout caused by predicting volcanic eruptions that don't happen, not to mention other disasters. So when climate scientists speak up, I listen.


We owe it to our species to do whatever it takes to keep our climate safe for people. If that means fighting warming trends, natural or otherwise, then so be it. I'd much rather fight planet Earth than go extinct.


I still dream of visiting the Paleozoic at the very moment life bursts forth with diversity and vigor. I imagine the first ferns opening their fronds; the first fish discovering their fins; the first corals building their homes out in the open ocean. You might call me Earthnocentric, too.

~Elizabeth A. Scott
(P.S. Have you seen the remote?)