Talk:Arthur Holmes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Geology (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon Arthur Holmes is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Untitled[edit]

Vandalism removed. Vsmith 18:45, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Who sez geologists can't be glamorous? <G>
Cheers, Pete Tillman 21:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Continental drift[edit]

I don't think we need 'now largely accepted'. How many geologists would seriously question it these days? Pterre (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, yes, OK, but Continental Drift has an uneasy history, and Plate Tectonics is the fashionable term. Think of Snider-Pellegrini (fl. 1858), who spoke of Continental Drift caused by Noah's Flood. Hence my parenthetical note. But I shan't go to war about it... Maybe <(now subsumed into the modern idea of Plate Tectonics.)>.John Wheater (talk) 22:41, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Was Holmes or Boltwood the first to use uranium-lead radiometric dating?[edit]

This article says that in 1911 Holmes was the first to use uranium-lead radiometric dating to determine the age of rocks. However, the article on Bertram Boltwood says that he was the first to meaure the age of rocks by the decay of uranium to lead in 1907. Which is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.73.31.50 (talk) 19:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Both are right, I think. Boltwood compared Uranium to Lead values in a variety of rocks to see if there was a relationship. He found that there was, but the ages were not the point of the analysis. This source [1] says that he used published values from various analysts interested in the chemistry of the minerals. It was Boltwood's results that encouraged Holmes to attempt the "first analysis specifically designed for age dating purposes". You could I suppose say that Boltwood established that dating was possible using U/Pb, but that Holmes was the one who turned into a workable dating technique. Mikenorton (talk) 20:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Religious upbringing should be noted?[edit]

I think that Arthur Holmes religious upbringing should be noted. Consider [2], "The Dating Game: One Man's Search for the Age of the Earth", by Cherry Lewis at p27 it is clear that the account for the age of the Earth presented to him was inspirational in his search. Seems an important point that appears to be excised from most biog/obits that I've found. Indeed no one even mentions his parents, which is normal in a biography or similar work. Pbhj (talk) 22:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC)