Can Anybody Make Maps?, part II
Earlier GG groused about some map projections that are (in his opinion) of little use (an opinion that insulted one of those who used that “projection”). Some recent experience suggests even greater transgressions.
For some reason a lot of the thermochronological literature doesn’t list latitudes and longitudes with their data. So to locate these points requires scanning their maps (the only place there is geographical data) and georeferencing them. And what happens when this is done?
You discover that the only located point is mislabeled. That the scale bar is wrong by a factor of two. That geologic contacts appear to be far afield. Towns or peaks are in the wrong places. All of which suggests it is quite likely that the data points themselves are hopelessly lost. Just great, gang.
Now the good news is that these were papers from the 1990s, so maybe these failures are now gone from the literature. We can only hope so. Or maybe this is a deep ploy to keep geochronology going–after all, if you realize that the geographic position is important, you might have to go back and redo the study to be sure where things were…