DEPARTMENT XII 

 SCIENCES OF THE EARTH 



(Hall 3, September 20, 11.15 a. m.) 



CHAIRMAN: DR. G. K. GILBERT, U. S. Geological Survey. 

 SPEAKERS: PROFESSOR THOMAS C. CHAMBERLIN, University of Chicago. 

 PROFESSOR WILLIAM M. DAVIS, Harvard University. 



THE METHODS OF THE EARTH-SCIENCES 



BY THOMAS CHROWDEE CHAMBERLIN 



[Thomas Chrowder Chamberlin, Professor and Head of Department of Geology, 

 Director of Museums, University of Chicago, b. September 25, 1843, Mattoon, 

 Illinois. A.B. Beloit College, 1866; A.M. 1869; Ph.D. University of Michigan, 

 1882; Wisconsin, 1882; LL.D. University of Michigan, Beloit College, Columbia 

 University, 1887; University of Wisconsin, 1904; Sc.D. University of Illinois, 

 1905. Professor of Geology, Beloit College, 1873-82; State Geologist, Wisconsin, 

 1876-82; U. S. Geologist, from 1882; President of University of Wisconsin, 

 1887-92; Geologist of Peary Expedition, 1894. Member of National Academy 

 of Science; Washington Academy of Science; Chicago Academy of Sciences; 

 Wisconsin Academy of Science, Arts and Letters; New York Academy of Sci- 

 ence ; American Academy of Arts and Sciences ; American Philosophic Society ; 

 Geological Society of America; Geological Society of Washington; Geological 

 Society of Edinburgh; Geological Society of London. Author of Geology of Wis- 

 consin; text-book on geology. Editor of Journal of Geology; numerous special 

 papers.] 



IT is my assigned task to review the methods of the earth-sciences. 

 The technical processes of the constituent sciences are peculiar to 

 each and are inappropriate subjects for discussion before this com- 

 posite assemblage; but the fundamental methods of intellectual 

 procedure are essentially common to all the earth-sciences, and to 

 these the address will confine itself. 



That which passes under the name earth-science is not all science 

 in the strict sense of the term. Not a little consists of generalizations 

 from incomplete data, of inferences hung on chains of uncertain logic, 

 of interpretations not beyond question, of hypotheses not fully veri- 

 fied, and of speculation none too substantial. A part of the mass is 

 true science, a part is philosophy, as I would use the term, a part is 

 speculation, and a part is yet unorganized material. However, I like 

 to think of the aggregate, not as an amorphous mixture of science, 

 philosophy, and speculation, but as a rather definite aggregation of 

 these, not wholly unlike the earth itself. The great mass of our sub- 

 ject material may be regarded as a lithosphere of solid facts. Around 

 this gathers an atmosphere of philosophy, rather dense near the con- 



