Geological Eyeblinks: A Rant

[The Vorpal Tribble]

I was idly reading an article about how some ancient chinese volcano dumped a lot of lava someplace, when they say in the middle, 'Which took only 500,000 years, which is but a geological eyeblink!'

That set me off. I hear this phrase all the freaking time in scientifical articles and it bugs the crap out of me. So much so I did some research and math.

A human, on average, blinks at the speed of 300 milliseconds. Roughly a 3rd of a second.

Keep that in mind.

Ok, average human lives to, in general, around 75 years old. The earth is estimated, by the scientific community, to be around 4.6 billion years old. The sun will likely live another 5 billion years. So lets rough it to the earth will survive to 10 billion years old.

With this knowledge here is the following:

10,000,000,000 divided by 75...

1 geological year = 133,333,333 years
1 geological month = 11,111,111 years
1 geological day = 383,142 years
1 geological minute = 15,964 years
1 geological second = 266 years
1 geological blink = 88 years


So Mr. Smarmy intellectuals and/or Ignorant Journalists, 500,000 years is NOT a geological eyeblink. It was around a day and a half. Plenty of time for good ole Earth to keep tabs on. So shut it.

Thank you :smallsigh:

[InaVegt]

You are awesome. <3

But we already knew that.

[cheezewizz2000]

The earth is estimated, by the scientific community, to be around 5.6 billion years old.

4.6 Ga by my understanding and in all the literature I've read. That said, you are awesome and I will provide a link to this post to all of my geologically-minded friends.

I'd like to clarify that I have never said "in the blink of a geological eye" or anything similar in anything I have written, though I have described things occuring in 1000s of years as "geologically instantaneous", which is even more inaccurate by your measure.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

4.6 Ga by my understanding and in all the literature I've read. That said, you are awesome and I will provide a link to this post to all of my geologically-minded friends.
Meant 4.6, typo.

Still basically middle aged.


I'd like to clarify that I have never said "in the blink of a geological eye" or anything similar in anything I have written, though I have described things occuring in 1000s of years as "geologically instantaneous", which is even more inaccurate by your measure.
Yeah, don't do that no more :smallwink:

[CarpeGuitarrem]

That's spectacular.

[Lord Herman]

Awesome. :smallbiggrin:

I'd award you an internet, but it seems they ran out. So you'll get a coupon for infinite (∞) cake instead.

[Pyrian]

Next up: why no movie ever made, no matter how long and how boring, has ever been interminable

[Innis Cabal]

I sorta feel this is even more annoying then the statement itself. It's along the line's of "Iceland is green and Greenland is cold" sort of statement. At least how I view it.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

I sorta feel this is even more annoying then the statement itself. It's along the line's of "Iceland is green and Greenland is cold" sort of statement. At least how I view it.
Oh, I know what you're getting at, someone being anal with the terminology, etc. However, its used all the time and it IS misleading, and if scientific communities are going to regurgitate the same ole phrase it should at least be one that's accurate.

[Pyrian]

...and it IS misleading...It's no more misleading than the notion that the Earth's geology has eyes with which to blink, or a mind with which to keep tabs on (or fail to note due to having blinked) the occurrence.

[cheezewizz2000]

Oh, I know what you're getting at, someone being anal with the terminology, etc. However, its used all the time and it IS misleading, and if scientific communities are going to regurgitate the same ole phrase it should at least be one that's accurate.

Misleading in that it makes you think the world is older than it actually is if you sit down and do the maths. If, however, you take it as intended and view it as a metaphor to help get across the IMMENSE scale of geological time, then it is not. Ok, so we're arguing the difference between a third of a second and a day and a half which, yes, there is a large difference, but both pale in comparison to the length of a human life. And that is rather the point, what is 88 years or 500,000 years when compared to 4,500,000,000 years?

Yes science should be accurate, yes science should be informative, but above all, science should be presented in a manner that is comprehensible to the lay man. Using the phrase "500,000 years is a geological blink of an eye" is much more understandable and easier to get your head round than "500,000 years is to the lifespan of the Earth what a day and a half is to the lifespan of an average human". All in all the point is that the lava was deposited quickly when compared to the duration of other geological events, and a little poetic license to get your point across can work wonders. As gamers and RPers, we should all appreciate that.

As an excercise in pedantry, this whole thing is still awesome though.

[KenderWizard]

I have almost never (I would say never, but I may have just forgotten) come across people using "geological eyeblinks" as a thing. My geology professors tend to go with "which is a very short time indeed, compared to the age of the earth". Possibly because they're just as concerned about proper use of comparisons as the OP is! :smallsmile:

I've heard "which is nothing on a geological time scale" a lot, but usually for periods of time less than 100 years, which is about an eyeblink, it turns out!

Very interesting point, nonetheless, and I'll be sure to jump in now if I hear anyone using "geological eyeblink" incorrectly!

[Innis Cabal]

Oh, I know what you're getting at, someone being anal with the terminology, etc. However, its used all the time and it IS misleading, and if scientific communities are going to regurgitate the same ole phrase it should at least be one that's accurate.

Why? Your placing scientific accuracy based on...human standards. Maybe that period of time is an eyeblink for the earth. It's had how many since the creation of time? It's accurate when speaking about the Earth. Not everything should be measured to the human standard.

[Mx.Silver]

I sense that someone doesn't fully understand figurative language.

[Froogleyboy]

VT, Have i told you lately that you friggen rock? If not, then YOU FRIGGEN ROCK!

[ghost_warlock]

Why? Your placing scientific accuracy based on...human standards. Maybe that period of time is an eyeblink for the earth. It's had how many since the creation of time? It's accurate when speaking about the Earth. Not everything should be measured to the human standard.

Yah. What we really need to do is get a good average of eyelid blinking times across a variety of species, rather than taking humans as some golden standard. But, even then, it'll still be just an average until we find the earth's actual eyelids and measure how long they actually take to blink.

Of course, all this assumes that the earth has eyelids and not some sort of lidless compound eye...

[Gorgondantess]

Huh. Cool. My grandfather will be a geological eyeblink old this November!

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Huh. Cool. My grandfather will be a geological eyeblink old this November!
HA! :smallbiggrin:

[_Zoot_]

Good work! Now I will be able to insist on the correct use of this term! Thanks! :smallbiggrin:

[Dispozition]

Oh my god VT, if I didn't already want to have your babies in some bizarre way, I would now.

[Lord Raziere]

Oh my god VT, if I didn't already want to have your babies in some bizarre way, I would now.

......you know what would be an interesting study? if scientists gone around and recorded the number of males that have said this against the number of females that have said this.

[Dispozition]

......you know what would be an interesting study? if scientists gone around and recorded the number of males that have said this against the number of females that have said this.

Males would always win. Simple as that. Or...not exactly win, but come out with more numbers.

[purple gelatinous cube o' Doom]

VT, I think you decided to take a very literal meaning of the phrase. I however don't, and just see "geological eyeblink" as more of a figure of speech, to which I get the idea they're trying to come across with.

[Lord Raziere]

Males would always win. Simple as that. Or...not exactly win, but come out with more numbers.

Which is interesting in itself because males can't have them, so it either is evidence that awesomeness at a certain level overrides sexuality or sexuality simply isn't that big of a dividing factor as people think.

[PhoeKun]

Which is interesting in itself because males can't have them, so it either is evidence that awesomeness at a certain level overrides sexuality or sexuality simply isn't that big of a dividing factor as people think.

Mostly it means that men are more likely to spontaneously say such a thing because they don't have to worry in the back of their heads that somebody will actually take them up on it. :smalltongue:

edit: Oh and by the way, the general cut of this thread's jib makes me weep for the future of figurative language. Pedantic nonsense.

[Phase]

I normally agree with this sort of pedantry, Tribbs, but this time around I have to agree with Innis. This sort of thing isn't bandied about as some sort of scientific fact, it's basically saying "Compared to the duration of the Earth's existence, this event is rather insignificant."

I mean, why do humans have to be the basis for the eyeblink anyway? Our species is due to go extinct any thousand millennia now, barely the blink of a geological eye.