[Geowanking] Geophysics vs. Geography: Why does one love geowanking and the other not so much?

Mon Nov 17 07:01:41 PST 2008

MG wrote: "...while technology is allowing ordinary people to do some of what they (and only they) could do earlier."

There is a reason professionals exist. If you want to build your new garage up against a property line derived from Google Earth and "further investigation on the ground" go ahead.

It's kind of like asking your buddy from the bar to visit WebMD and then perform your vasectomy. 

In some cases professionals are necessary because they protect the health and welfare of the public. Anyone who thinks an untrained individual can locate property lines based on a "corrected" satellite photo and some poking around with a metal detector has no idea of the complex issues that are involved in boundary surveying.

I will admit that new technology has allowed the "common man" to do things that once required a surveyor with special training. For example, you can now use GPS to locate topographic features. This used to require special optical instruments and special training. In this case, I think the expansion of technology and the removal of the professional can be a good thing, especially in an economic sense. It makes our world more efficient.

Landon
Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268
Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Gould Carlson [mailto:gould at lsi.uji.es] 
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:52 PM
To: Landon Blake
Cc: Sean.Gorman at fortiusone.com; Sean Gillies; Geowanking at geowanking.org
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Geophysics vs. Geography: Why does one love geowanking and the other not so much?

your example seems to put the finger on the problem: professionals (surveyor in
this case) fighting tooth and nail to keep control over a certain
domain...while technology is allowing ordinary people to do some of what they
(and only they) could do earlier.  I would not label your politician
technically ignorant (maybe a bit naive): in a sense he is foreshadowing the
future....people are going to stop contracting surveyors for many tasks that
they can do (in a good-enough manner) themselves (hopefully the imagery they
use is corrected). This is inevitable: people used to have professional
chauffeurs, secretaries took dictation and then typed letters, etc. and now we
do these things ourselves thanks to technology and usability engineering.

People normally do not go to GE for GIS activities, but to have a quick look
from above and then investigate further on the ground...no need for a GIS or a
surveyor.

MG

p.s.- by the way, the initial post starting this thread seems not to have
sufficiently juxtaposed geoscientists and geographers....I'd say both like
virtual globes and both like their professional tools, all in good measure and
where appropriate.

Quoting Landon Blake <lblake at ksninc.com>:

> I have enjoyed the comments so far on this topic. I thought I would
> share an eye-opening experience of my own that might illustrate a
> negative consequence of "neogeography".
> 
> The local chapter of my state land surveyors association testified in
> front of the County Board of Supervisor in support of a small tax on
> recorded deeds. The tax would be used to fund the County Public Works
> Department's efforts to preserve property corner monuments in the
> County. In my particular area this is sorely needed, and the fund would
> do a tremendous public could if it was handled properly. 
> 
> One of the County Supervisors looked right at our group and said
> something like this:
> 
> "I don't even understand why you guys or even the public needs property
> corner monuments any more. Can't you just look on Google Earth to see
> what you own?"
> 
> I was shocked at this level of technical ignorance in an elected
> official, and for the first time in my life I saw how neogeography (or
> more importantly a misunderstanding of neogeography) had the potential
> to cause harm.
> 
> I think digital globes like Google Earth and NASA WorldWind are awesome,
> but that doesn't mean that the ignorant people in powerful positions
> can't cause damage. The internet (Google) can't cure all of man's
> problems. :]
> 
> Landon
> Office Phone Number: (209) 946-0268
> Cell Phone Number: (209) 992-0658
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: geowanking-bounces at geowanking.org
> [mailto:geowanking-bounces at geowanking.org] On Behalf Of
> Sean.Gorman at fortiusone.com
> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 3:10 PM
> To: Sean Gillies
> Cc: Geowanking at geowanking.org
> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Geophysics vs. Geography: Why does one love
> geowanking and the other not so much?
> 
> Both (Brent and Sean) good points.  I don't think anyone on this list or
> in general is saying geographic theory or critical thinking is bad.
> I've even seen GIS theory books on Andrew Turner's desk (neo poster
> child natch) ;-)  If anything I'd argue that neo is leading more people
> to become interested in geographic theory and methods.  New folks may
> not learn them through a four year degree program or an ESRI training
> class, but it does not mean they can't become well versed in the
> subject.  
> 
> Also I'd call Google Earth a data visualization tool not a data analysis
> tool.  Most folks do their data analysis in something else then
> visualize it in Google Earth.  So, I'm not sure that Google Earth is
> really supplanting geographic analysis (i.e. the climate modeling
> replacement analogy) although it is definitely debatable.  
> 
> Just seems there is an artificial divide between paleo and neo that is
> not really based on much substance.  Unless you count vague references
> to mistakes being made and bad things happening.  Just curious what is
> driving it all - outside of my various conspiracy theories.
> 
> FortiusOne Inc,
> 2200 Wilson Blvd. suite 307
> Arlington, VA 22201
> cell - 202-321-3914
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sean Gillies" <sgillies at frii.com>
> To: Geowanking at geowanking.org
> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 5:15:36 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Geophysics vs. Geography: Why does one love
> geowanking and the other not so much?
> 
> Sean.Gorman at fortiusone.com wrote:
> > I would not normally spam the list with one of my own blog posts, but
> I'd love to get thoughts from the list on the topic.
> > 
> >
> http://blog.fortiusone.com/2008/11/14/geophysics-vs-geography-divergent-
> viewpoints-on-the-geoweb/
> > 
> > In short it seems the geophysicists have really embraced geowanking
> type things - check out their special session on spinny globes:
> > 
> > http://conferences.images.alaska.edu/agu/2008/index.htm
> > 
> > Now compare this to Mike Goodchild's quote in the latest ArcNews:
> > 
> > "In 2005, Google Earth was released, and people with little or no
> background in GIS, geography, or cartography began using it and other
> similar services to discover the power of map making. Some even began
> calling themselves neogeographers. Suddenly it was possible to do some
> powerful things with geospatial data without committing to what was
> often a difficult and lengthy learning process....But mistakes (by
> neogeographers) were and are being made, as often happens when powerful
> technology is put in the hands of people with little background in its
> underlying concepts and little experience in thinking critically about
> its products."
> > 
> > I have a lot of respect for Mike's academic work but this seemed a bit
> over the top.
> > 
> > Any thoughts or response?
> > 
> > best,
> > sean
> 
> I suspect we'd see somewhat different attitudes if an easy-to-use
> climate modeling application that is to the CCSM as Google Earth is to
> Arc* were unleashed on the public. Google Earth is disruptive to GIS, it
> isn't disruptive to geophysicists. I sympathize.
> 
> Still, the length and difficulty of the GIS learning process is being
> exaggerated, don't you think?
> 
> Sean (still suffering from Post Navier-Stokes Stress Disorder)
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at geowanking.org
> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at geowanking.org
> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
> 
> 
> Warning:
> Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects
> including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have received this information in error, please notify the sender
> immediately.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at geowanking.org
> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
> 
> 

--------------------------
Michael Gould
Universitat Jaume I
Castellón

Warning:
Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately.

_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
Geowanking at geowanking.org
http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org