Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
way to explain it is by laboriously piecing together small parts of each individual puzzle. When you
start talking about panaceas, he says, that's the first step towards donning blinkers and losing all sight
of what's really out there.
Nick takes his obsession with details out into the field. He has been known to stand up on a cliff
top with an ironic grin, throw out his arms, and say: “Hallelujah, come on down, all you believers!”
He heard Billy Graham say that once, inviting the converts down to the stage, and it struck him as the
perfect metaphor for geologists reverently making their way down to the rock face and the precious
clues about the Earth that lay therein. But in reality, Nick is more of a Doubting Thomas. When he
goes to see the rocks for himself, he has to put his hands in the wounds. He has to see the processes for
himself. Only when every single question, however small, has been fully answered and every doubt
satisfied, does he allow himself to believe.
And on Paul's field trip to Namibia, that attitude proved disastrous. Between Nick and Paul there
couldn't have been a more dramatic clash of personalities and styles. Nick wanted to find holes in
everything. He argued incessantly about every outcrop and every interpretation. Paul, on the other
hand, didn't want to know. From the first day and the first outcrop, it became obvious to Nick—and
everyone else on the trip—that Paul didn't really want to hear alternative interpretations. Paul had con-
vened the field trip to persuade people, not to hear his theory criticized at every turn. The more Paul
refused to listen to Nick's criticisms, the more determined Nick became to find fault.
Nick, in confrontational mode, can be truly infuriating. I first met him in the departure lounge at
Las Vegas airport, months after Paul's field trip. By then, Nick was implacably opposed to the Snow-
ball. His first words to me were, “Snowball Earth is dead.” He didn't say, “I disagree with some as-
pects of this theory,” or “I think there are certain problems with the interpretation.” He said it was
dead. The airport was full of geologists on their way to a conference, and many of them were buzzing
with the Snowball idea. It was manifestly alive and kicking. But rather than pointing that out, I replied
that I'd be interested to hear why he believed that, and mentioned that I too had visited Paul's field
site in Namibia. Nick curled his lip. “Oh,” he drawled scornfully, “so Paul's taking
tourists
to the field
now, is he?” That was the most damning thing he could think of to say. Later he apologized. Though
Nick is exasperating in the heat of battle, he can also be humorous and pleasant when he backs off. He
said he had just spent the past few days arguing with a long-standing adversary about how exactly to
interpret some rock arcana. He had, he explained ruefully, “come out punching”.
Paul's response to this kind of behaviour, though, was equally infuriating. Paul has a habit occa-
sionally, if you've said something that he doesn't want to hear, of simply erasing it from the airwaves.
He might do this with anything he doesn't want to comment on—an anecdote about someone you
know and he doesn't, an opinion he disagrees with, an emotional experience that he can't connect to.
When you say one of these things, he doesn't react in any way. He just pauses until you've finished,
and then continues with whatever he was talking about before. Rather than ignoring your comment
in some pointed way, he behaves in every sense as if you simply didn't say it. Sometimes, talking to
Paul, I've caught myself wondering if I really did say something, or just spoke it in my head. It can be
unsettling, but it's also relatively infrequent.
But with Nick, Paul began to do this constantly. Many of the other scientists on the trip started to
feel uncomfortable. This behaviour seemed just as bad as Nick's continual carping. During a field trip,
up on an outcrop, you're
supposed
to discuss things. Dan, the “people person”, did his best, trying to
engage Nick in just the sort of discussion that Paul was eschewing. But it didn't help. Nick was scorn-
ful of Dan's interventions. Dan wasn't a field geologist, and he knew little about rocks as ancient as
these. He was no substitute for Paul, and Nick had no qualms about saying so.
