Earth Sciences forum?

[bascule]

So, one of the hot button topics on these forums is global warming. I'd say it's definitely in the top 10 most discussed topics. I mean seriously, there are 85 threads with "global warming" in the title:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/search.php?searchid=843042

 

But where to discuss global warming? It seems to be spread out between General Discussion, Other Sciences, and Biology (Ecology and the Environment).

 

How about a separate subforum for Earth Sciences? This would include things like Geology, Geophysics, Oceanography, and the Atmospheric Sciences/Climatology.

 

Then finally these global warming discussions could have a real home!

[Phi for All]

I'll second that. If Cap'n doesn't respond here within a couple of days, I'll post a thread in the Mods forum.

[iNow]

I don't really care a whole lot, either way, but there's something to be said about not having too many topic buckets. It's gets really confusing in a hurry when trying to determine where to post a new thread, or even where to find data about a topic.

 

What's wrong with Ecology and Environment? That's where I thought we put GW threads, and it seems to be working fine from my perspective.

 

 

 

(After all, most of these AGW threads are so chock full of denialist crap that they'd be better off in P&S anyway).

[bascule]

What's wrong with Ecology and Environment? That's where I thought we put GW threads, and it seems to be working fine from my perspective.

 

Well:

 

1) It's under Biology. As much as I love biology atmospheric science is an earth science, not a biological science

2) If you do a search for global warming you'll find that many of the threads don't end up in Ecology and the Environment. As I said earlier they end up in Other Sciences or General Discussion

[Liquid Nitrogen]

A seperate forum will add more to confusion. IF you want to highlight the 'Global Warming' concept, start it anywhere but stick with it. People tend to create branches thinking they will get more exposure like this. You can collect all the links in one single thread and take-up the discussion from there.

[Baby Astronaut]

Nice idea bascule.

 

Well:

 

1) It's under Biology. As much as I love biology atmospheric science is an earth science, not a biological science

2) If you do a search for global warming you'll find that many of the threads don't end up in Ecology and the Environment. As I said earlier they end up in Other Sciences or General Discussion

If that's the case, why not make Earth Sciences a subset of "Other Sciences"? Also Ecology really does have no place under Biology

[bascule]

IF you want to highlight the 'Global Warming' concept

 

I don't want to "highlight the 'Global Warming' concept". I just think climatology/climate science is a substantial part of the discussion in this forum and thus deserves its own home.

[Psycho]

Well:

 

1) It's under Biology. As much as I love biology atmospheric science is an earth science, not a biological science

2) If you do a search for global warming you'll find that many of the threads don't end up in Ecology and the Environment. As I said earlier they end up in Other Sciences or General Discussion

Under your definition most would fit sub-forums would fit under many different categories making the whole board so confusing to use it would be pointless, Global warming and atmospheric sciences are part of the environment, in both the layman term and scientific.

 

Ecology is directly based of biology so I can hardly see how you can say it doesn't it there.

 

Whereas I would agree that geology could have its own sub-forum I would predict that most of the geology based topics are taken place within the evolution and morphology sub-forum due to them directly relating to that as well.

[Baby Astronaut]

Also Ecology really does have no place under Biology

Doh! I was confusing ecology with geology, bascule -- not making a crack at you.

 

Ok, here's my suggestion: don't make a new boards section.

 

Instead...

 

We can give "Earth Sciences" the spot occupied by "Amateur Science" (which itself could then go under "Other Sciences").

 

It can include geology, plus the atmospheric sciences, environment, and oceanography, none of which I see explicitly labeled/covered here.

 

 

And then shorten the "Ecology and the Environment" subheading under Biology to just "Ecology".

[bascule]

Under your definition most would fit sub-forums would fit under many different categories making the whole board so confusing to use it would be pointless, Global warming and atmospheric sciences are part of the environment, in both the layman term and scientific.

 

Ecology is directly based of biology so I can hardly see how you can say it doesn't it there.

 

So you're okay with atmospheric science being classified as a biological science?

 

Whereas I would agree that geology could have its own sub-forum I would predict that most of the geology based topics are taken place within the evolution and morphology sub-forum due to them directly relating to that as well.

 

Most of the threads in "Ecology and the Environment" are about global warming. If we're classifying the containing topic by what we expect most of the threads to be, then why doesn't climatology/atmospheric science deserve its own forum which isn't under biology?

 

Geology is most certainly not a biological science.

Edited July 13, 2009 by bascule

[GutZ]

Geology is most certainly not a biological science.

 

Exactly. There really isn't a debate there.

 

I think it would also be more fitting of a science forum to have a section of geology. We have soft sciences such as politics and psychology.

 

I am sure it won't be the most popular section, but till will also bring interest.

 

I am surprised that they have don't have or popularized a topic analyzer for forums. Like how you guys have keywords for subjects, have the forum read for key words and automatically place it in the correct forum.

[Theophrastus]

I agree with Bascule on the general idea, and support it full- heartedly. This is definitely something that is required for this forum, as I find, all too often, geology threads, instead left to sit in the Other Sciences section; we might as well find a proper place for it.

 

I agree with baby astronaut on the modification of Ecology and the Environment, to Ecology, which I suppose take to concern itself moreso with biodiversity, and the like. I don't like the elimination of amateur science, as we need a place for applied concepts, as well as simply theoretical ones.

 

It may be asking too much, but is there any means of reorganizing posts, so that the relevant posts in ecology and the environment, are shuffled to their respective category?

 

As for the sub- categories, I like what Bascule said- oceanography, atmospheric sciences/ climatology, geology, and (a little unsure on this one) geophysics. Any thoughts? (given the nature of the question, this is directed particularly to the mods, but if you wish to take part; By all means!)

[iNow]

Avoid having too many buckets for topics. I can't stress that enough. Some logical points were made above regarding placement, but adding folders (forums and subforums for every little thing) just makes things HARDER to find, not easier. Keep it simple. Keep it high level, and the topic umbrellas will naturally encompass a great number of threads in a clear way.

[bascule]

Keep it simple. Keep it high level, and the topic umbrellas will naturally encompass a great number of threads in a clear way.

 

When many threads on a particular science start popping up in "Other Sciences" and "General Discussion" I think it's indicative people can't find the proper place to put them. Just to venture a guess, I'd say it's because right now the proper place to put global warming threads is under "Biology" which doesn't make sense.

[bascule]

So... any word on this?

[Baby Astronaut]

I'll second that. If Cap'n doesn't respond here within a couple of days, I'll post a thread in the Mods forum.

Btw, did you post in the Mods forum?

[bascule]

Btw, did you post in the Mods forum?

 

I'm going to guess: no.

 

It would be nice to hear back one way or the other.

[StringJunky]

I don't want to "highlight the 'Global Warming' concept". I just think climatology/climate science is a substantial part of the discussion in this forum and thus deserves its own home.

 

I agree with you Bascule. Climatology is a science and when it is discussed in the General Discussion section this often means it is not treated properly with respect to debating discipline and supporting evidence like in the Pure Science/Math's forums...when someone makes an unsubstantiated comment moderators don't seem to intervene and demand it...this is General Discussion after all and sloppiness is allowed!

 

I also agree with iNOW and the need to avoid too many categories, so my idea would be to alter General Discussion and rename it called Discussion, which is split into General Discussion and Technical Discussion. All the scientific posts that don't fit in the existing categories can be put in Technical and given their due respect and required forum discipline.

[bascule]

There is a place to discuss climate science/atmospheric science presently: the "Ecology and the Environment" subforum of Biology... because climatology is a biological science, right? Err...

[StringJunky]

There is a place to discuss climate science/atmospheric science presently: the "Ecology and the Environment" subforum of Biology... because climatology is a biological science, right? Err...

 

A logical anomaly only understood by the administration.