Is ice ice?
March 6, 2016 4:40 AM   Subscribe

Glaciers, gender, and science: a feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research.

Sincere attempt to redress inequitable human-glacier dynamics, or just a Sokal-esque hoax? It's almost impossible to call.
posted by nicolas léonard sadi carnot (3 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: not sure the "is this crazy or what?" framing is the best way to go here; maybe something that includes more info about the authors and study, responses from different scientists? Or if it's an actual question, probably better to post at Ask Metafilter. -- taz



 
Such knowledge diversification, however, can meet resistance, as folk glaciologies challenge existing power dynamics and cultures of control within glaciology. For instance, in response to Cruikshank’s detailed and highly acclaimed research, geographer Cole Harris suggested instead that Cruikshank attributed too much weight to ‘Native’ stories and non-scientific understandings of glaciers. He questioned the relevance of indigenous narratives about sentient glaciers in today’s modern world by explaining how he consulted a colleague, ‘an expert on snow’, about why glaciers advanced rapidly (surged). The expert ‘spoke of ground water, friction, and the laws of physics. Is it possible, I [Harris] asked, that they surge because they don’t like the smell of grease? He looked at me blankly, slowly shook his head, and retreated into his office’
posted by leotrotsky at 4:51 AM on March 6, 2016


ice ice baby, ice ice baby.
posted by ennui.bz at 5:01 AM on March 6, 2016


On a similar tangent, a German academic journal titled Totalitarianism And Democracy has been taken in by a bogus “human-animal studies” paper about the role of alsatians in totalitarianism.
posted by acb at 5:07 AM on March 6, 2016


« Older Replication study fails under scrutiny   |   Cognition without Cortex Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments