However, Du Troit is very clear, accept the theory of continental drift means to "rebuild all our textbooks, not only is the geology, but also includes the ancient geography, ancient meteorology and Geophysics textbook" (P.5). He says, without a doubt,オークリー メガネ, "drift that embodies a great and fundamental truth", while Taylor and Wegener put forward a &quot,http://2013oakleysunglasses-jp-sale.webnode.jp;revolutionary" hypothesis (p.Vii).Du Troit is not the only Wegener's theory as "revolutionary". In 1921 the "science" magazine on 1922 researchers, "natural" magazine of unnamed commentators, F.E. Weiss in 1922, 1926, Van de Gracht and some other friends and enemies, have used the term. Daly (1926260) put the theory of continental drift is said to "new amazing interpretation", many geologists believe it too bizarre, even is staggering, "a revolutionary concept". Philip Reich also hinted that Wegener views of the novel and revolutionary, he pointed out, "land movement for us, like the movement of the earth for our fathers (1922338).". In the "Journal of Geology" in 1928 published an article on "Tulsa essays" article, Riker explicitly use Wegener's "revolutionary theory" such terms.Wegener himself is very clear, his new ideas has the potential to revolutionize. In 1911, it is in his published a year ago his new ideas, Wegener wrote to his peers, teachers W. Cobain. He wrote, "why we shilly-shally, unwilling to give up the old view?" "Why do people trying to stop the new concept of up to ten years or even thirty years? Perhaps because it is a revolutionary?" Then he attached the bold and simple answer to his question: "I think life is not old ideas for more than ten years"!Because of the character of the revolution of the theory of continental drift, there must be more than usual, as strong evidence that this theory has scientists support. To make any fundamental or radical change is accepted by the scientific community, or must have with no chink in one's armour or irrefutable proof, or must have more than all the existing theory of the obvious superiority. Obviously, in this century 20-30, Wegener's theory still does not have these two conditions. In fact, until the 50's to find this "with no chink in one's armour" evidence. Moreover, to accept Wegener's view means must be thoroughly reconstruction of geological science and all. Obviously, in the absence of indisputable evidence, of course people are reluctant to do so. University of Chicago geologist R.T. Qian Bolin in the 1926 American Association of petroleum geologists conference proceedings wrote, in a meeting of the Geological Society of America meeting on 1922, he was heard to say: "if we accept Wegener's hypothesis, we must forget all of the knowledge in the past seventy years and start all over again." Now, this statement is correct. We should note that, in the words of Qian Bolin in forty years and in different senses are again. In 1968, Tuzo Wilson (1968A, 22) wrote in a Book: "since the earth is really active objects with slow way of moving, and we are not to regard it as basically static, so we must thoroughly change our previous theories and textbook, from the beginning of a new the concept, establish a new science.
Related articles:


http://schoolbs.idc.nkwl.com/home.php?mod=space&uid=128665&do=blog&id=2024934