The Geology of Star Trek: The Next Generation Episode “Chain of Command, Part I”

Like my fellow geoblogger Jessica Ball, I wish that I could be a geologist on Star Trek. I can think of no better, more exciting job than traveling the universe as a geological researcher for the United Federation of Planets. Sign me up, Starfleet!

Maybe one day in my life– or in my children’s or grandchildren’s lives– there will be opportunities for Earth geologists to travel to other planets and planetary bodies. Already, there are hundreds (thousands?) of geologists who work in the exciting field of Planetary Geology. However, today planetary geologists primarily rely upon remote sensing, rovers (on Mars and Earth’s moon), and little bits of space rock that fall to Earth to understand the geology of other planets and planetary bodies. While several humans have walked on the moon, only one geologist (Harrison Schmidt) has walked on the moon.

A few years ago I became interested in Star Trek after watching a few episodes of The Next Generation with some friends in graduate school. Now my husband and I are hooked on Star Trek. We’re currently watching Season 6 of The Next Generation, and I’m also watching Season 2 of Deep Space Nine (so that I have something to watch when my husband is away. He’s forbidden me from watching TNG without him). I’m contemplating buying a Star Trek uniform costume and visiting a Star Trek convention. Any suggestions, for either the uniform or a convention? Are there ever Star Trek conventions in Africa? Also, my husband and I (and also our friend Mo, a fellow Star Trek fan) have already penciled in a visit in 2014/2015 to the Star Trek theme park currently being built in Jordan.

I like Star Trek for many reasons, one of which is the favorable light in which science is portrayed on the show and also the rational way in which science (even if it’s fake “Star Trek science”) is used an explanation for mysterious phenomena which occur on the show. However, the science on Star Trek is often not real science. That is, the scientific explanations on the show are sometimes inaccurate– or at least apply a bit of poetic license to a scientific fact or theory. Also, much of the show’s technology, such as teleportation and warp drive, is not currently scientifically feasible. I recently learned about a book written by Lawrence Krauss called The Physics of Star Trek (next in the queue on my Kindle reading list!) that goes into some of the physics shown on the show.

After I heard about Krauss’s book, I thought to myself: why not write about the geology of Star Trek? This is the first post in what may become a series of posts about the geology of Star Trek. In this post I am going to point out some of the geological inaccuracies of a particular episode, but I hope that these posts will not always be about nit-picking the scientific details. I hope that the geology of Star Trek, even if sometimes scientifically inaccurate, can inspire some young people (myself included, perhaps?) to learn more about planetary geology and geology in general.

I can imagine several topics of interest regarding the geology of Star Trek:

-Types of planets encountered on Star Trek

-Geology of non-Earth-like planets

-Terraforming planets for settlement

-Geoengineering of environment (atmosphere, climate, weather, soil, etc.) and of plate tectonics

-Diversion of meteoroids / comets / asteroids from impact with inhabited planets and planetary bodies

-Volcanic activity of Star Trek planets

-Best geologic lairs for Vulcans, Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, and other Star Trek species

-Building stones seen/used on Star Trek

-Magnetic fields of Star Trek planets

-Atmospheres of Star Trek planets

-Geochemistry of Star Trek. If it hasn’t been done already, someone should really come up with a Star Trek periodic table. Which element names mentioned on the show are real and which are made up?

-Tools of Star Trek geologists (Do they just need tricorders? What geologic measurements can be made with a tricorder? Why didn’t I have a tricorder for my PhD thesis research?)

-Various mining operations shown in Star Trek

-What are those dilithium crystals made of, anyway?

Perhaps my blog readers can suggest additional topics?

Now that I’ve introduced “The Geology of Star Trek” series, let me move on to my first topic of discussion. In this post, I’d like to talk a little about the geology of a cave shown in the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode “Chain of Command, Part I.” In this episode, Captain Jean-Luc Picard, Chief Medical Officer Beverly Crusher, and Lieutenant Worf are sent on a covert mission to the Cardassian planet Celtris III to destroy a biological weapons facility. The facility is supposedly located in a deep underground cave. Decked out in black with various spy gear, Picard, Crusher, and Worf make their way through the cave to the supposed location of the weapons facility. When they arrive, they discover that there is no biological weapons facility. Rather, the intelligence about the supposed facility was leaked by the Cardassians as a trap to capture Picard. The episode ends with Picard being taken away by the Cardassians as Crusher and Worf escape.

Generalcavegeology — Sneaking through the cave on Celtris III.

The overall plot of this particular Star Trek episode is excellent, but the geology of the cave on Celtris III is somewhat implausible. I suspect that many of the walls of the “cave” are artificial and part of a Hollywood sound stage set-up. Some views of the cave interior also seem to feature painted backgrounds or special effects. Fake and painted rocks aside, however, there are still some fundamental problems and inconsistences with the geology of the cave.

For example, after reaching a steep drop in the cave, Picard says, “We’ll have to rappel from here. This is sheer granite. We’ll have to use fusing pitons.”

Cave5 — "This is sheer granite. We'll have to use fusing pitons."

Granite caves are not unheard of, but they are somewhat unusual. Caves are most commonly formed as solutional caves in soft, easily dissolved and re-precipitated rocks such as limestone, dolomite, and halite. The re-precipitation of minerals such calcite forms speleothems, including stalagtites and stalagmites, that are commonly found in solutional caves. Granite is a very hard rock that is not easily dissolved and re-precipitated. Therefore, solutional caves are not going to form in granite, and granite caves are not going to contain significant speleothem precipitates. The most common type of cave that forms in granite is an erosional cave, a type of cave that forms when flowing water (a stream or possible seawater) erodes rock to form a cave. Some granite caves also may form by seismic activity.

So far, I’m willing to buy that Picard, Crusher, and Worf are in a granite cave. A close-up shot of a fusing piton being inserted even makes the rock (or fake rock) look pretty similar to granite:

Cave3 — The rock looks granite-ish to me. Or maybe rhyolite-ish with phenocrysts.

However, the next few shots show that the “granite” cave has abundant speleothems, which would rarely (never?) occur in a granite cave! The big speleothems look much more similar to what would be seen in a classic limestone solutional cave:

Cave4 — Picard contemplates the cave, which now looks like a limestone cave!

Cave1 — Rapelling down a wall in the granite/limestone cave.

After Picard, Crusher, and Worf repel (500 meters, according to the dialogue) down the wall of the “granite” cave and continue walking along, they reach a solid wall and cannot progress any farther. Fortunately, Picard is able to tell with his tricorder that, “There’s a lava tube beyond here [the wall] that runs for 75 meters, and it connects with another chamber. We need to get through here.”

Lavatube5 — Investigating the rock wall with tricorders.

Hang on a minute! Aren’t Picard, Crusher, and Worf supposed to be in a granite cave (that strangely resembles a limestone cave in some shots)? Lava tubes are a common type of cave, but they aren’t going to be found in a granite cave, and they are very unlikely to be found at 700 meters depth (in one of the early cave scenes Picard notes that the supposed weapons facility is located ~700 meters depth, and the lava tube seems to connect very close to the supposed weapons facility cavern).

For those of you who are not familair, let me explain a little bit about igneous rocks. Igneous rocks are rocks which form from molten material, which is called magma in the subsurface and lava on the Earth’s surface. There are two types of igneous rocks: plutonic rocks (which form in the subsurface from magma) and volcanic rocks (which form on Earth’s surface from lava). Granite is one type of plutonic igneous rock. A common volcanic rock is basalt.

Lava tubes are common primary caves, but they are found close to Earth’s surface, not at 700 meters depth! Furthermore, lava tubes may sometimes be connected to other lava tubes or types of volcanic primary caves, but they are rarely connected to extensive networks of caverns. Since granite is a plutonic rock and not a volcanic rock, it is impossible for a lava tube to form in granite.

To sum up, there are three geological issues with the cave featured in this Star Trek episode:

1. Granite caves are uncommon.

2. Granite caves do not generally contain speleothems such as stalagtites and stalagmites. These are generally a feature of solutional caves in rocks such as limestone.

3. Lave tubes are not found in granite caves and not found in caves at depth. This is because (a.) granite does not form from lava, and (b.) lava flows on Earth’s surface.

Bad geology aside, I do think that it’s pretty cool that Picard, Crusher, and Worf can map out the cave with their tricorders and that Worf can conveniently cut through a rock wall to the hidden lava (err… granite? limestone?) tube by using his phaser. Just check this out:

Lavatube1 — Crawling through the "lava tube."

If anyone has an extra tricorder and phaser lying around, could you please send them to me for my upcoming geologic fieldwork in Alaska? Thanks!

Happy Birthday, Jules Verne!

Movie poster for “Journey to the Center of the Earth.” Image taken from here.

David Bressan over at the History of Geology blog reminded me that today is the birthday of Jules Verne, one of my favorite authors. Happy Birthday, Jules!

Even more excitingly, on his blog David posted a trailer for the 1959 Disney movie “Journey to the Center of the Earth” starring Pat Boone. This is my all-time favorite movie. I first watched this movie as a young child at my grandmother’s house. One day, I found the movie in a pile of VHS tapes of children’s movies that my grandma kept to entertain her grandchildren. I watched the movie and loved it. From then on, every time I visited my grandmother’s house I had to watch “Journey to the Center of the Earth.” You know how children often have one book that they insist on reading every night? Or one movie they insist on watching all the time? Well, my movie was “Journey to the Center of the Earth.” If I stayed with my grandma for a week, I’d watch the movie every day. I think my parents purposely did not buy a copy of this movie because if they had then they’d have been forced to watch it even more often.

Many years later, when I was an undergrad at Dartmouth, my mom bought me “Journey to the Center of the Earth” on DVD as a Christmas gift. Perhaps that Christmas gift was the inspiration for the introduction to a paper that I wrote back in undergrad about hafnium (Hf) and neodymium (Nd) isotopes. Here’s a snippet from the introduction of that paper:

“Introduction
Contrary to the portrayal in Jules Verne’s classic novel Journey to the Center of the Earth, in which a group of scientists reach the center of the Earth by spelunking down a very deep cave, humans have barely scratched the surface of our planet’s outermost crust. Remarkably, almost all of the adventures that seemed so fantastic when Verne wrote about them in the late 1800s have become a commonplace part of human society. Inspired by the imaginings of Verne and others dreamers, humans have developed technology that allows people to travel around the world in far fewer than eighty days, dive far deeper than 20,000 leagues under the sea*, and soar high above the Earth. At least one Verne tale is still a dream, however: humans have not journeyed anywhere near the center of the Earth. In fact, the deepest hole humans have drilled is 12 km deep, a mere 0.2% of the Earth’s 6378 km radius (1). As scientists cannot directly sample mantle or core material, they must rely on other methods to learn about the physical and chemical characteristics of the Earth’s interior.

One of the methods modern scientists use to learn about the chemical composition of the Earth’s interior is the analysis of isotopic compositions in rocks on Earth’s surface. Geochemical analysis of radiogenic Hf and Nd [and other] isotope ratios in erupted lavas is a powerful tool for examining the processes governing the geochemical evolution of magma deep within the Earth’s mantle. Isotope compositions and their ratios are minimally affected by the immense physical stresses imposed at
great depths in the Earth’s interior, the processes of magma upwelling to the crust, and the final eruption at the Earth’s surface. Therefore, these analyses can be used to infer the compositions of the igneous source material as well as how these sources mixed and melted to form the rocks on the surface. Combined with major and trace element data, Hf and Nd isotope ratios can even be used to determine the degree of melting that occurred.”

If you’re curious about the rest, you can read the full paper here, but please keep in mind that I wrote this in 2004 as a very young geochemist and that DUJS is a non-peer reviewed, undergraduate science journal.

If you like bad geology movies, go purchase “Journey to the Center of the Earth.” This is a bad geology movie at its best– the geology is laughably ridiculous, the special effects are sensationally awful, and the story is wondrously entertaining. If you’re like me, you’ll watch this movie several times a year, so you won’t want to have to order it from Netflix every time (sadly, it is not available on streaming). And make sure you order the 1959 version with Pat Boone. The 2008 version with Brendan Frasier isn’t nearly as good.

*Note that this is an error in my paper as 1 league ~ 5.6 km. So it is clearly impossible to dive 20,000 leagues in depth since the deepest point of the world’s oceans is only ~11 km deep at the Mariana Trench. In the title of his book, Verne is referring to the horizontal distance traveled under the sea, not the depth.

“Journey to the Center of the Earth” movie shot, image taken from here.

Movie poster for “Journey to the Center of the Earth.” Image taken from here.

Various scenes from “Journey to the Center of the Earth.” Image taken from here.

Bad Geology Movie of the Month: Four Quick Updates

Those of you who read my inaugural November Bad Geology Movie of the Month post may be wondering why I forgot to write about a bad geology movie in December and why I haven’t yet written about a bad geology movie in January. I apologize. Watching and reviewing bad geology movies takes time, and I am a busy graduate student. I think that my bad geology reviews may have to be a little more sporadic than once a month, at least until I graduate. We’ll see, though! Maybe some months I’ll review more than one movie. I’ll just write the reviews as I have time. I am also working on refining my format. For my first movie review I think I spent too much time describing the plot (humorous as the plot may be) and too little time analyzing the science (or lack thereof) in the movie.

For now, here are four quick updates relating to bad geology movies:

1. Since the AGU Sciences Meet Hollywood session back in December, I have been thinking about why I want to review bad geology movies. I realize that much of what I want to do is simply point out the scientific inaccuracies. Although pointing out errors may seem mean, I will try to do so in good spirit. I understand that Hollywood geology will never be completely accurate, nor should it be. If someone in Hollywood made a movie about how I do geology, I think it could be terribly boring. More often than not, I spend hours picking crystals and reducing data. Even when I am in the field, the pace of research is often painfully slow. I measure rocks for hours. I meticulously collect rocks. I find maps far too interesting. None of my usual science activities done at their usual pace would make for a good Hollywood plot. So, I understand why Hollywood has to “spice up the science” in order to make a film interesting.

However, I am going to pick apart the science in the bad geology movies– not necessarily because I wish the movies had been made differently, but rather because I want there to be a place on the internet where people can find answers to questions such as, “What’s wrong with the geology in ‘The Core?’ ” or “Can we really travel to the center of the Earth?” I want a place where people can find out about the accuracy– or inaccuracy– of geology in bad geology movies from real geologists.

2. My good friend Arthur– who is a geologist and fellow lover of bad geology movies– has agreed to join me in my quest to review and pick apart the science (and lack thereof) in bad geology movies. Arthur is a geophysicist and modeler while I am a geochemist and field-based geologist. Together, I think we will make a great team to review bad geology movies. We are discussing the best format for this– we will likely start a new blog specifically devoted to reviewing bad geology movies. If the site goes well, perhaps we can eventually invite some other geologists (a sedimentologist? a paleontologist?) to help us pick apart the science in bad geology movies.

3. Thanks to an inquiry about the forthcoming “Ice Age: Continental Drift” movie, I am now an official volunteer science consultant for the Science & Entertainment Exchange. I may or may not be contacted by people in Hollywood, but I’m happy that I’m in the database. So, Steven Spielberg– feel free to ask me questions about geochemistry or marine geology.

4. To tide you over while Arthur and I set up the bad geology movies site, I will be reviewing the geology in the three “Ice Age” cartoon movies over the next few weeks. I haven’t heard anything from the “Ice Age” people about adding a science extra to their forthcoming movie. However, just in case they do contact me I figure I’d better do my homework and re-watch their previous movies. I even bought the actual DVDs (on a grad student budget!) so that I can view all the DVD extras! Remember, if you want to support my campaign to add a science extra to “Ice Age: Continental Drift,” you can also write a letter or can join my facebook group here.

Update: “Ice Age: Continental Drift”

Adorable Scrat, image taken from here.

Last week I blogged about the forthcoming movie “Ice Age: Continental Drift.” I have not forgotten about my campaign to try to have some plate tectonics science added as a DVD extra or website feature. Below is a letter that I just sent to 20th Century Fox, Blue Sky Studios, and Ray Romano, the main voice actor for the movie. This letter could very well be ignored as the “ramblings of a crazy geologist,” but we’ll see if I receive any response.

If you’d like to support my “crazy geologist” campaign, you can join the facebook group here. If you want to send your own email or letter, below is the contact information that I was able to find. Let me know if you find any better contact information.

Contact Information:

20th Century Fox:
Address:
10201 W. Pico Bld.
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Email: askfox@fox.com

Blue Sky Studios:
Address:
Attn: Public Relations
One American Lane
Greenwich, Connecticut 06831

You can send a message to Ray Romano here.

My Letter:

Dear 20th Century Fox and Blue Sky Studios,

I am writing to you because I am hoping you might help me find an appropriate contact for someone working on the movie “Ice Age: Continental Drift,” the forthcoming 4th installment in the “Ice Age” cartoon movie series. I am a big fan of the adorable “Ice Age” movies. The teaser for the 4th “Ice Age” movie (available on youtube here) made me laugh and smile, even if plate tectonics by squirrel is a completely ridiculous idea. Indeed, the ridiculousness of the concept is a large part of why I find the clip so delightful.

However, I do worry– a little– about young children believing in plate tectonics by sabre-toothed squirrel after watching this movie. I think most children are smart enough to figure out that plate tectonics doesn’t really happen by squirrel. However, I wonder if there’s any way to talk the people in charge of the latest “Ice Age” movie into including an extra on the DVD or on their movie website that explains how plate tectonics really works. Even just a two or three minute clip– it could be a cartoon or an interview with a geologist– with a proper scientific explanation would be wonderful. I know that many children watch all of the extras on their favorite movies religiously.

Since so many children will be watching the latest “Ice Age” movie, this could be a great way to educate a large number of children (and maybe even some adults) about how plate tectonics works. Note that I’m not advocating any changes to the movie script. The “Ice Age” movies are delightful because they are so silly. At the same time, I think a scientific extra about plate tectonics would be a great thing to include. This could be a win-win situation– 20th Century Fox and Blue Sky Studios could do some educational outreach, and many children could learn a little science.

If there is anyway you could help me express this idea to the people behind the “Ice Age: Continental Drift” movie, I would be most grateful. To give you a little background on myself, I am currently a 5th-year PhD student working on a Marine Geology & Geophysics degree in the joint program between MIT and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. In addition to my research pursuits in geology, I write a geology blog Georneys (http://georneys.blogspot.com/).

If you would like to discuss the science of plate tectonics, I would happy to volunteer my services as a science consultant. I would also be happy to put you in contact with an education professional who has experience teaching plate tectonics to children.

I look forward to hearing from you!

All the best,
Evelyn

[Fancy-schmancy contact information removed]

Plate Tectonics by Squirrel– “Ice Age: Continental Drift”

My friend Arthur just made my day by sending me a link to the teaser for the 4th installment of the “Ice Age” movie series. This clip is adorable but also completely ridiculous scientifically.

“Ice Age: Continental Drift” Trailer taken from YouTube.

This clip makes me smile and laugh, but I do worry– a little– about young children believing in plate tectonics by sabre-toothed squirrel after watching this movie. I think most children are smart enough to figure out that plate tectonics (which isn’t called continental drift, by the way) doesn’t really happen by squirrel. However, I wonder if there’s any way to talk 20th Century Fox and Blue Sky Studios into including an extra on the DVD or on their movie website that explains how plate tectonics really works. Even just a two or three minute clip– it could even be a cartoon– with a proper scientific explanation would be wonderful. I know that many children watch all of the extras on their favorite movies religiously.

If I wrote a letter and tracked down the contact information for the people in charge of the “Ice Age” movies, would other geologists also write letters and help me with my campaign? Note that I don’t want them to change their script– I just want them to include some educational information as a sort of extra. There is plenty of time for this campaign as the movie is not scheduled to come out until 2012. I’ll get started on my research, but please reply below or send me an email if you’d be willing to support my effort– even if it’s just signing a letter that I write to Fox.

Also, I have a few connections to the entertainment industry through some skeptical friends of mine. I’ll do some networking and try to come up with the best way to reach Fox & Blue Sky Studios, the two organizations in charge of this movie.

AGU Movie Event

“The Core” movie poster. Image from wikipedia.com.

“Deep Impact” movie poster. Image from wikipedia.com.

For those of you who like bad geology movies and who are attending the American Geophysical Union conference next week in San Francisco, I just wanted to advertise that there is an event called AGU Sciences Meet Hollywood.

The director of “The Core” and the screenwriter for “Deep Impact” will be there, among others. Sounds like fun!

This event takes place Tuesday night in Moscone Center South, Room 300. Hope to see some of you there!

Bad Geology Movie of the Month- Magma: Volcanic Disaster


Above photo (of DVD cover) taken from Amazon.com.

I just realized that today is the last day of November and that I have yet to post my Bad Geology Movie of the Month! I can’t let November pass by without a movie, so for this month’s movie I’ve selected one of my all-time favorite Bad Geology movies- “Magma: Volcanic Disaster.”

Before I give my review, let me explain a little more about the Bad Geology Movie of the Month. First of all, what is a bad geology movie? A bad geology movie is any Hollywood-style flick with a geological theme. Many bad geology movies are mainstream films such as “The Core”, “Deep Impact”, “The Day After Tomorrow”, “2012”, and “Dante’s Peak”. Others are made-for-TV (often for the SciFi or SyFy channel), low budget flicks that often copycat mainstream movies. For instance, there were several copycat, made-for-TV “Journey to the Center of the Earth” movies made the same year that the high-budget Brendan Fraser flick was released.

So, why do I call these movies bad geology movies rather than just geology movies? This is because, in most cases, Hollywood geology is just that- bad geology. Scientifically inaccurate geology. Exaggerated geology. Stereotypical and skewed geology (and geologists). Some geology movies do better than others at staying true to geological science, but most do fairly poorly. Many geology movies have completely ridiculous geology- giant crystals growing in cavities deep in Earth’s mantle, dinosaurs living at the center of the Earth, Hawaiian-style lava erupting from a Cascade-type volcano, complicated geophysical models programmed in mere seconds by hero geologists, neutrinos heating up Earth’s core, and so on.

However, despite the abundant bad geology in these movies, I absolutely love geology-themed Hollywood-style flicks. I have an extensive collection of bad geology flicks, and I am always on the lookout for more flicks to add to my collection. The $5 movie bin at Wal-Mart is one rich source of bad geology movies. My family usually gives me 1 or 2 bad geology movies for Christmas, and others are loaned or sent to me by scientist friends who know my interest.

I like bad geology movies because they are entertaining (they spice up the science!) and can inspire people to become interested in real science. For instance, I first became interested in geology when as a young child (perhaps 5 or 6) I watched the 1950s Disney movie “Journey to the Center of the Earth.” This movie is an absolute gem of gems in the bad geology movie category. Pat Boone sings his way to the center of the Earth with his companions! With an accordion! I will most certainly write a review of this movie another month. I loved this movie as a child- I used to watch it every single time I visited my grandmother’s house. A few years ago, my mom bought me a DVD of the film, so now I can watch it whenever I want. The movie is scientifically inaccurate in countless ways, but despite that the film sparked my interest in real geology and now, many years later, I am a geologist. I suppose I also like bad geology movies because they make me feel smart… I can debunk Hollywood geology! Yay!

Of course, the bad geology in these flicks can be dangerous, like all misrepresentations of science in Hollywood. But the bad geology is not all bad. Some geology professors actually have their students debunk the bad geology in these movies. I’m not convinced that this is the most efficient way to teach geology, but I can see how it is fun and useful. In a geology class made up mostly of non-majors, debunking the bad geology in movies is actually very practical. If students aren’t going to go on to become geologists, much of the “geology” they encounter may very well be filtered by Hollywood. If they can learn a little geology and use this knowledge to evaluate the accuracy of Hollywood geology, all the better.

Also, I do want to cut Hollywood a little slack. Movies need to be fast-paced and entertaining. Science, including geology, can at times be too slow-paced and boring for Hollywood. I can understand how Hollywood distorts geology to make it more interesting and fast-paced. Many weeks, I know, my geology consists of not-so-thrilling activities such as picking tiny crystals under the microscope for hours or applying statistics to a set of data. Even in the field, I often spend hours measuring things and sampling a sequence of rocks painfully slowly. Science requires meticulous care and documentation, and that can take time and can, indeed, be boring.

However, I’d also argue that science- real science!- can also be amazingly cool. I think that it is totally possible to write an entertaining, geologically-accurate movie script. In fact, that is on my to-do list- one of my many things I want to do after I graduate and am a bum for a little while. I’m moving abroad (my fiance lives overseas) and need to go through immigration, so I’m using this as an excuse to take a few months off and do things like brush up on a couple of foreign languages and write a geology movie script. I’ll probably just watch television and go rock climbing and hiking all the time, so we’ll see if the script ever materializes.I hope it does.

Although Hollywood science has an abysmal reputation when it comes to being scientifically (in)accurate, there is some good science in Hollywood and also some hope for Hollywood science. I highly recommend that you check out The Science and Entertainment Exchange, a forum for science and entertainment professionals to exchange ideas and knowledge. This exchange aims to make the science in movies more accurate and also to help scientists become better at explaining their science to a general audience.

Back to the bad geology movies, though. I have found that the *best* bad geology movies are the ones that are most entertaining: either because the thriller (but often scientifically flawed) plot is well-written and well-acted and has you biting your nails (even if you *know* Earth’s core can’t do whatever it’s doing to destroy the planet) or- more commonly- because you find the movie hilarious because of a scientifically ridiculous plot, poor acting, poor special effects, and stereotypical scientific characters. Most bad geology movies are “serious” movies though a few (and I have to admit, these are probably my favorites) are more light-hearted- such as the two Disney versions of “Journey to the Center of the Earth.” Unfortunately, some bad geology movies are just bad. They are not entertaining at all- they’re just mediocre and boring. They’re not good enough to be thrillers and they’re not bad enough to be funny. They’re just sort of “meh” with some bad geology thrown in.

In order to review several aspects of each bad geology movie, I am going to rate each movie (from 1 to 5 stars, whatever a star is… not really a scientific unit of measurement, but I’ll go with it) in several categories:

Category 1: Quality of Movie Production
This will give you a sense of if this film is low budget or high budget. If low budget, this will give you a sense of just how low budget. Low budget is not necessarily bad, though… it can be very, very funny!

Category 2: Quality of Acting
I am not an actress, so this rating will be very subjective. Basically, this rates how good a job the actors and actresses did with a script that may or may not be well-written and may or may not be scientifically accurate/plausible.

Category 3: Accuracy of Geology
My assessment of the scientific accuracy of the science in each movie. I welcome input on this from other geologists, since I am not an expert in all fields of geology.

Category 4: Entertainment Value
Sure, the production quality may be poor and the acting crap and the geology nonsensible… but is the movie entertaining? Does it make you laugh because of its sheer ridiculousness? Often, the worst of the bad geology flicks are actually the most entertaining.

For all of the bad geology movies I review, I encourage you to watch them and reply in the comments with your own reviews. Perhaps you can help me catch more of the scientific inaccuracies as well as help me praise those rare times when Hollywood is accurate in its geology.

Without further ado, on to this month’s movie review….

******************************

Magma: Volcanic Disaster

Year Released: 2006

Release Format: Television movie by Sci Fi Pictures

Quality of Movie Production: 1 out of 5 Stars

Quality of Acting: 2 out of 5 Stars

Accuracy of Geology: 1 out of 5 Stars

Entertainment Value: 5 out of 5 Stars

Movie Quotation:

“Our survival as a species is dependent upon our ability to understand and adapt to the planet’s ongoing evolution. Hence, volcanology– despite Mr. Taylor’s earlier assertion to the contrary– has nothing to do with Mr. Spock or the Starship Enterprise. Rather, it is the study of the Earth’s blood pressure.” — Dr. Peter Shepherd, “Magma: Volcanic Disaster”

Note: I am going to ruin any movie surprises below… but don’t worry: even if you know the entire plot, you will still find this movie hilariously entertaining!

Movie Description:

Dr. Peter Shepherd (played by Xander Berkeley of 24 fame), a volcanologist and professor of geology at Mount Raven University, takes a group of graduate students to Iceland on a winter break field trip. The purpose of the research trip is to test Shepherd’s theory that the Grimsvotn Volcano (an actual volcano in Iceland… well, actually a series of lakes above a volcanic fissure) is millions of years older than previously thought. Shortly before the trip, the Trollsvotn Volcano (as far as I can tell, not a real volcano) erupted “suddenly” after lying dormant for 700 years. So, a secondary purpose of Shepherd’s trip is to understand why there is “suddenly” an increase in volcanic activity in Iceland.

The day before the research trip is scheduled to leave, a cute, bubbly, high heel-wearing female graduate student named Brianna “Bree” Chapman (played by Amy Jo Johnson, the Pink Power Ranger!) enters Shepherd’s classroom and inquires if she can join the research expedition. Shepherd tries to wave her off with sexist remarks, implying that the field work will be too difficult for her and that his male graduate student (CJ) only told her about the expedition because he was hitting on her. Bree persists, saying that she is a geochemist and that she heard that the expedition geochemist dropped out last minute. Finally, Shepherd agrees to take her as long as she doesn’t expect a recommendation letter or college credit and also if she buys her own plane ticket.*

The next morning, Bree meets the rest of the expedition team at the airport (well, a field… but presumably an airport field). Before she arrives, we are introduced to Shepherd’s other graduate students: two male graduate students who- seriously- look and sound more like those guys from Jersey Shore or- to be a little nicer- members of a boy band such as ‘N Sync than they do geology graduate students. The names of the ‘N Sync graduate students are CJ and Kai. The third male graduate student is a guy named Jacques who- from his name and slight English accent- I presume is supposed to be French. Upon seeing the attractive Bree approach, Jacques says to CJ: “It’s a good thing to see you’re still doing your part in putting the T & A back into being a TA.”All I can say about that line is: AWESOME. Awesomely sexist, that is.

On the plane to Iceland, the graduate students start revealing some of their geologic knowledge (or lack thereof). They are all idiots- except, perhaps, for the English/French one. The Pink Power Ranger says something along the line of, “So why are we going to this Iceland place, anyway…” One of the ‘N Sync grad students says, “Yeah.. all I know about Iceland is… Ice.” Another ‘N Sync graduate student says, “No- that’s Greenland.” The smartie French graduate student then explains that they are going to Iceland because 1/3 of all lava that’s ever flowed upon the Earth has come from Iceland. Okay, I’ve changed my mind. The French grad student is an idiot, too. Iceland has produced significant amounts of lavas over the years, but nowhere near 1/3 of the total amount of lava ever produced. I’d like to point out that Iceland is one of the most famous volcanic locations on Earth… any self-respecting geology graduate student should know at least something about Iceland.

Miss Pink Power Ranger tries to show her geological expertise when she comments that Grimsvotn Volcano hasn’t blown its top in 700 years… so why did it just erupt if it was dormant? Well, for a volcano 700 years isn’t a long time… barely any time at all! But no one answered her that way. Instead, Dr. Shepherd sort of shakes his head ominously.

Finally, the team arrives at the volcano. They leave one ‘N Sync graduate student at the top to monitor the volcano using magical “Thermal Activity” monitors (and I guess some seismics) that have impressive colorful, wavy lines whenever a volcano is just about to erupt. Cool- I want one of those monitors! Dr. Shepherd and the other graduate students descend into the volcanic crater to do research. Dr. Shepherd notices something that will help him date this volcano… an ammonite fossil!** This is exciting because it dates the volcano to the Mesozoic, if not the Devonian.*** Just as Jacques begins to chip the ammonite out of the volcano, one of the ‘N Sync grad students (I really can’t tell these guys apart… oh well…) warns the other three to evacuate the volcano as the “Thermal Activity” monitor has begun to go crazy. The horrible CGI lava effects begin… these are a recurring feature throughout the movie. In the opening sequence (which follows the early team at Trollsvotn), the scientists die by slipping and falling into the CGI lava. Pure awesomeness.

The group evacuates at the last minute by calling “Iceland Transport,” which consists of a few guys with distinctly American accents. The group flies back to America and watches the news about the Iceland eruptions on the way back. Shepherd is convinced that the eruption of *two* volcanoes in Iceland so close together cannot be a coincidence.

Back in America, Shepherd visits his friend and former advisor Dr. Oskar Valenteen. Valenteen informs Shepherd that he quit his job at the USGS (where the boss is jerk scientist Dr. Kincaid, also a former student of Valenteen). The reason he quit his job is thatValenteen was told by Kincaid that his “Exodus” theory was bogus. Shepherd expresses concern that the recent Iceland eruptions are evidence that “Exodus” has begun… but Valenteen points out that there have been other eruptions, starting weeks earlier… he ominously says that “This cannot be the start of Exodus… because Exodus already started.” Cue: ominous music!

So, what is the Exodus theory? Let me summarize it briefly: Because of radioactive pollution which has seeped (somehow, not exactly sure how) into Earth’s core, the core is expanding. This expansion of the core is putting extra pressure on the planet, causing every one of Earth’s 1500 volcanoes to erupt.**** Yes, that’s right… Pollution on Earth’s Surface –> Core Expansion –> Eruption of Every Volcano on Earth. AWESOME.

Concerned, Shepherd calls the government (The Bureau of Disaster Relief and Awareness) and explains his Exodus concerns to some FBI-looking guys. When asked what the worst case scenario is if the Exodus theory is right, Shepherd explains that it would mean the extinction of every living thing on the planet… in a matter of months. Kincaid, Shepherd’s nemesis at the USGS, is brought in to evaluate the Exodus theory.

Kincaid dismisses the theory at first, and meanwhile Shepherd and his graduate student boy band, power ranger, and Frenchie travel to a mine in Colombia/Ecuador (they say they’re going to Ecuador, but then the caption says they’re in Colombia… whatever, they’re in a generic Latin American country) to collect “proof” for the government. They go into some mine tunnels which have been closed due to “poisonous magma.” Deciding things have gotten too hot, CJ and Jacques stay to get some samples while Kai, Bree, and Shepherd evacuate. As they are sampling, Jacques and CJ realize that they’re not in a tunnel (it’s not on the map! gasp!) but rather in a lava tunnel… with lights… and beam supports…. and more lights… but a lava tunnel nonetheless! Jacques dies when he falls into the magma chamber. CJ’s leg is burned, but he is rescued by the others and left in a hospital in Colombia/Ecuador. Bree kisses CJ for some unknown reason, then she, Shepherd, and Kai return to the US to convince the government about Exodus with their new data. Kai analyzes the samples in Colombia/Ecuador (in the hospital, apparently?) and concludes that THE MAGMAS IN THE MINE CAME FROM THE CORE!

Meanwhile, Valenteen and his beautiful assistant travel to Japan because he believes Mt. Fuji will erupt very soon. Sure enough, Mt. Fuji erupts and Valenteen (and his assistant and many Japanese people) die in the eruption and ensuing Tsunamis. Also, Shepherd calls his estranged wife, who is a park ranger in Yellowstone. He warns her about Exodus and encourages her to evacuate Yellowstone because it will erupt.***** More volcanoes erupt, including Mt. Kilimanjaro in Africa.

Shepherd and the gang (minus Frenchie and CJ) return to the FBI-type guys and interrupt a meeting of Kincaid and his USGS team with the president. Kincaid now believes the Exodus theory, partly because of data he stole by hacking into Shepherd’s computer database. Shepherd argues that Kincaid does not have all the information. He then goes on to fully explain the Exodus theory. Shepherd starts out by explaining that the Earth’s core has expanded, creating fractures that are bringing core magma up to the crust and causing every volcano on Earth to erupt. Shepherd and his team can predict when every volcano will erupt because all volcanoes are linked by faults. At least, I think that’s the theory… I didn’t follow it very well. The President didn’t either, until the Pink Power Ranger piped up with another gem of a line, “Basically, it’s like the Earth is trying to get rid of a really bad case of double burrito indigestion.” The president says, “Now, her explanation I understand.” He agrees that Shepherd and his team need to figure out how to stop Exodus and save the world.

Don’t worry, though! Shepherd has a plan! His idea is that they select which volcanoes erupt to release the extra core pressure. Rather than have volcanoes erupt on land, he thinks it’s better to trigger underwater volcanoes to erupt. Obviously, the way to accomplish this is to fire nuclear missiles at the Mid-Atlantic and Mid-Pacific Ridges****** using submarines. The President and FBI-types think this plan is wonderful and the movie ends by Shepherd and Kai going on submarines while Bree coordinates things with the FBI guys. The missile launches are successful, but Kai dies when his submarine is hit (by an eruption, I think) and sinks to the bottom of the ocean.

The movie ends with the lava erupting, then subsiding, in Yellowstone (and presumably everywhere else on Earth). Shepherd and his wife get back together, and the movie ends by Shepherd explaining why he turned down Kincaid’s job at the USGS. He likes to teach, he says.

I presume the sequel (I propose the title: “Marine Magma: Climate Disaster”) will be about how the increased eruption of lava on the seafloor has caused the oceans to heat up and has interrupted the thermohaline circulation of the oceans. I really hope they cast the Pink Power Ranger again!

I highly recommend this movie. The bad lava special effects alone are worth it!

Here is a link to the movie trailer: “Magma: Volcanic Disaster” Trailer.

Footnotes:

*I have to say, the part about the plane ticket mystifies me because as far as I can tell they always take private planes everywhere in this movie… or at least a hallway decorated like a private plane….

**Volcanoes are not generally dated by fossils, which are mostly found in sedimentary rocks. Igneous fossils (I’ll blog about this another day) are actually very rare and usually involve people/animals/plants (such as the Pompeii fossils) that have been quickly covered by volcanic ash and preserved, sometimes only as impressions when they vaporize completely. Ammonites are certainly not found in volcanoes but rather in sedimentary deposits. To date volcanic rocks, scientists use radiogenic isotopes. K-Ar is useful one for volcanic rocks older than ~1 million years. Pb-Pb dating can also be used for older volcanic flows. For younger volcanic rocks, uranium-series isotopes can sometimes be used (up to ~350,000 years in age). Very young lava flows (less than 50,000 years old) can be dated by carbon dating of organic material trapped underneath lava flows and in volcanic ash. Isotope dating is complicated, but this is what is generally used to determine ages of volcanic flows, not fossil identification.

***The Devonian time period ranges from approximately 360 to 410 million years ago. Iceland isn’t this old… the oldest lavas are Tertiary in age (1.8 to 65 million years old).

****This number is actually pretty accurate, according to the Global Volcanism Program: Number of Active Volcanoes. Although I would point out that this estimate does not include submarine volcanoes.

*****If Yellowstone ever does erupt, don’t bother trying to evacuate. I’d recommend staying and watching the show. It’s a supervolcano! Last time it erupted, animals as far away as Kansas were covered in ash. If it ever erupts again, the whole world will be in trouble and many, many living things will die. So, if you do evacuate from Yellowstone, maybe go to the moon? Or another planet?

******There is no Mid-Pacific Ridge. Nope.