Triple Point
Burke’s Law: Toward a Reasoned Discussion of Deep Time
By T. Mark Harrison and Adrian Lenardic | October, 2022

Physical scientists generally believe we can never prove something to be true, but only falsify hypothetical propositions. In a data-rich environment, we would ideally specify null and alternative hypotheses and test the statistical significance of both. But those studying deep geologic time are limited by a profoundly incomplete rock record that itself may reflect significant preservation biases. Popper (1945) argued that “while the theoretical sciences are mainly interested in finding and testing universal laws, the historical sciences take all kinds of universal laws for granted and are mainly interested in finding and testing singular statements.” This is hardly a condemnation of historical geology; one does not study the Archean to prove quantum mechanics, but rather to constrain conceptual models based on physical laws assumed to be constant through time. Thus, testing concepts regarding ancient Earth requires different rules adapted to the paucity and type of evidence available.
Although carbonatites are now known worldwide, much of the early work to identify them was done in Africa, particularly around Oldoinyo Lengai (Tanzania) led by the late John Barry Dawson (1932–2013). Barry was a professor at the University of Edinburgh (UK) when one of us (KG) was there during the 1990s doing a PhD on alkaline igneous rocks and carbonatites; his interest and enthusiasm for the subject was infectious. Barry’s initial work on Oldoinyo Lengai, and his recognition of it as a carbonatite volcano, was done when he was a geologist for the Geological Survey of Tanganyika, around the time of Tanzanian independence. This was a time when colonial attitudes still strongly governed the way geological work was done in Africa, and the early papers on carbonatites abound with names of former colonies such as Rhodesia, Nyasaland, and South-West Africa.
Read MoreThe publication of scientific work is foundational to our disciplines. To ensure equitable publication standards during the global flow of knowledge production, professional societies and publishers must take positive steps to avoid biases that might hinder the publication of scientific work (see Liévano-Latorre et al. 2020). Biases among editors and reviewers can be unconscious and be influenced by different aspects of an author’s identity: country of origin, first language, affiliation, gender identity, ethnicity, and/or other factors. These biases could result in challenges to publication rates and visibility in key journal forums for under-represented groups (Lerback et al. 2020). Ensuring that there is diversity in the peer review and publishing process, and on editorial boards, may help to eliminate bias.
Read MoreThe notion of open access (OA) began to gain traction in the mid–late 1990s (Laakso et al. 2011). The Bethesda Statement (2003) followed a year later with the definition of ‘open access’ as: “free, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit, and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship.”
Read More