Unsolved Questions and Paradigm Shifts in Geoscience

Science and knowledge are never finished, each new answer brings forward new questions. Geosciences are not the exception.

Little by little we use our previous knowledge to solve our problems and questions, much like brick and mortar, we create ever-complex and bigger buildings, hopefully, robust ones.

Our ‘knowledge buildings’ serve us to predict phenomena, advance technology, in short, to progress. We pile on top of them, but at some point each new brick is more difficult to place. This stage suggests that a new paradigm is needed, forcing our buildings to be inspected, reassessed, and sometimes entirely dismantled in order to give way to novel and better ways to understand our world.

The National Academy of Sciences (U.S.A) recently published its vision regarding research opportunities in geoscience for the starting decade: A Vision for NSF Earth Sciences 2020-2030: Earth in Time [1] The document presents the following 12 questions:

1. How is Earth’s internal magnetic field generated?
2. When, why and how did plate tectonics start?
3. How are critical elements distributed and cycled in the Earth?
4. What is an earthquake?
5. What drives volcanism?
6. What are the causes and consequences of topographic change?
7. How does the critical zone* influence climate?
8. What does Earth’s past reveal about the dynamics of the climate system?
9. How is Earth’s water cycle changing?
10. How do biogeochemical cycles evolve?
11. How do geological processes influence biodiversity?
12. How can geoscience research reduce the risk and toll of geohazards?

*The critical zone is the reactive skin of the terrestrial Earth, extending from the top of the vegetation through the soil and down to fresh bedrock and the bottom of actively cycling groundwater (NRC, 2001; Sullivan et al., 2017)

Some of them may surprise at first glance, they were thought as more or less resolved; at least it seemed so in our introductory courses. But, while investigating them, new knowledge gaps are found and novel research opportunities arise.

Interdisciplinary, Diversity and Development
This type of document is widely consulted by research groups, not only due to its scientific value, but also due to the likelihood to receive grant funding while focusing on those questions. These panels and reports become science guidelines, influencing decisions and policy.

How would these questions change had the panels writing them were more diverse? Not only in terms of discipline but also in terms of lived experiences? Would the range of priorities change? Would novel questions arise? The last few decades have provided more opportunities for people traditionally excluded or underrepresented in the world of scientific research to move forward. In fact, a recent study documented the positive impact of their innovations, but paradoxically, this does not result in better recognition of such scientists [2]. There are still hurdles and  more to be done to unleash this potential.

Geoscience observes the present as the key to the past, mainly as a function to advance in the future, but this future will only be sustainable when structures are in place for everyone to equally contribute and benefit from advances in geoscience. In this readjustment is where our next paradigm shift will emerge[3]. Will you be part of it or will you rather stay fossilized in a miogeosyncline?