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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 3:10 PM To: Sean Gillies Cc: [email protected] 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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] 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? [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] 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 [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
