Is lesser geological changes considered ASB?
- Thread starter Oddball
- Start date
As far as I'm concerned, any natural event which is possible given known geology in an area and is equivalent to one known to have happened in the history of the earth is not ASB. It is a legitimate PoD. Thus, the comet strikes which created the alternate history in Stirling's Peshwar Lancers is legitimate AH, while the events creating the ISOT story in his Islands on the Sea of Time are ASB. The key to me is if the PoD is one which is possible and reasonable according to current scientific and historic theory, it is just as legitimate as one based on a WI if certain people weren't born or made different decisions. A PoD which has parts of the earth inexplicably flood, switch places, or changes the earth's basic structure, rotation rate, attittude, or distance from the sun is ASB. If natural events are reasonable or possible in the area under consideration, it is entirely legitimate to change history based on creating or removing volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, hurricanes, etc.. At least that's my take.
Given these limitations, I would consider an PoD which creates an entirely new land mass like Tarrantry ASB, while one which postulates the essential destruction of a real one like Britain or Japan by a meteor strike (Britain), or massive earthquake/series of volcanic eruptions (Japan) can be legitimate AH. I have an AH predicated on an alternate WW2 with several PoD's, the basic one being a masive 1940 earthquake in Japan resulting in the Japanese needing to devote almost all their energy to reconstruction of the home islands, hence a disengagement in China and no Pearl Harbor attack. I consider this a legitimate AH.
Given these limitations, I would consider an PoD which creates an entirely new land mass like Tarrantry ASB, while one which postulates the essential destruction of a real one like Britain or Japan by a meteor strike (Britain), or massive earthquake/series of volcanic eruptions (Japan) can be legitimate AH. I have an AH predicated on an alternate WW2 with several PoD's, the basic one being a masive 1940 earthquake in Japan resulting in the Japanese needing to devote almost all their energy to reconstruction of the home islands, hence a disengagement in China and no Pearl Harbor attack. I consider this a legitimate AH.
zoomar said:
I generally disagree. Geological events that 'might have happened' are ASB territory, while human reaction to real geological events isn't. Thus in the example above, Japanese reactions to a massive earthquake (big or small) are fair game, while reactions to an earthquake that didn't actually happen are ASB.
The idea of ASBs is that some unknown force makes massive changes in something out of the general realm of our ability.
Thus, the Mongol reaction to the cooling of the northern hemisphere (little ice age) is not ASB, hypothesizing that the world warmed instead because the sun got hotter rather than cooled probably is.
Of course, I just could be full of it, in fact I probably am.
Geological changes as ASB
To me, a geological change that's legitimately possible is not ASB--Krakatoa or Veseuvias (sp?) blowing earlier or later, no earthquake in the 1920's damaging the Amagi, along with the rest of Japan's economy, or some such. Adding something is also legitimate, if it's scientificly reasonable.
Significant geological changes in the distant past aren't ASB, either. What seems to me to be ASB is when islands or continents change, and other things don't. For exapmple, if there was another island nation off the coast of Europe, the changes would likely multiply to result in political divisions we do not recognise, no analogs of familiar faces...the butterfly effect is simply huge with such a large butterfly.
A missing continent, and I'd begin to doubt if we'd see humanity as we know it.
To me, a geological change that's legitimately possible is not ASB--Krakatoa or Veseuvias (sp?) blowing earlier or later, no earthquake in the 1920's damaging the Amagi, along with the rest of Japan's economy, or some such. Adding something is also legitimate, if it's scientificly reasonable.
Significant geological changes in the distant past aren't ASB, either. What seems to me to be ASB is when islands or continents change, and other things don't. For exapmple, if there was another island nation off the coast of Europe, the changes would likely multiply to result in political divisions we do not recognise, no analogs of familiar faces...the butterfly effect is simply huge with such a large butterfly.
A missing continent, and I'd begin to doubt if we'd see humanity as we know it.
Grey Wolf
Donor
Personally I think it doesn't matter
I view ASBs as being primarily alien or magic related
When you get into the grey area you can put it where you want. Geology is just history on the VERRRRRRRRRY long scale
Tarantry works as AH in the normal sense, just as much as creating a Kingdom of Luxembourg would be - i.e. a non-historical state on the borders of France. The difference is that where Tarrantry is formed there is in OTL nothing but sea. But in actual essence it doesn't really matter
So, if your geological POD creates a viable difference then post it in the main AH forum, you get a different readership here. Or post it in both, and see what differences you experience
Grey Wolf
I view ASBs as being primarily alien or magic related
When you get into the grey area you can put it where you want. Geology is just history on the VERRRRRRRRRY long scale
Tarantry works as AH in the normal sense, just as much as creating a Kingdom of Luxembourg would be - i.e. a non-historical state on the borders of France. The difference is that where Tarrantry is formed there is in OTL nothing but sea. But in actual essence it doesn't really matter
So, if your geological POD creates a viable difference then post it in the main AH forum, you get a different readership here. Or post it in both, and see what differences you experience
Grey Wolf
One seldom considers that geological POD effects many, many things. E.g. put a big (in 2000 m range) ridge on OTLs Franco-German border. Most people will say "Well, that will require modification of 1940 invasion route." ut how many will say "That is bound to alter climate with rainfall radically different and one side getting more rain and other less than in OTL. Which will affect agriculture, which will have drastic effects alter." Or "Such a ridge will form big natural barrier between these aprts and will lead to vastly different cultures in OTLs France and Germany."
Fact is you can't just alter geography and expect historical movements and trends to happen as in OTL. That's why you can't just park an island off Europe and expect Europe to develop as in OTL. There is Gulf current for one. It will be altered which will affect British Isles which will in turn affect British history and hence have radical consequences to whole world.
Fact is you can't just alter geography and expect historical movements and trends to happen as in OTL. That's why you can't just park an island off Europe and expect Europe to develop as in OTL. There is Gulf current for one. It will be altered which will affect British Isles which will in turn affect British history and hence have radical consequences to whole world.
As someone most interested in geological changes (at least reasonable ones), I enjoy postulations regarding geological changes. To claim that geological events "that might have happened" are ASB is odd because all AH is about what might have happened. Why should a volcanic eruption, earthquake, etc. be excluded? However, I agree that these changes need to be reasonable. Granted, a north-south trending mountain chain between France and Germany may be isnteresting, but it should have some basis, not just "Let's channel the German attack".
From an admittedly brief glance, Tarrantry might be ASB because it doesn't appear to have a basis for existance based on what we know about plate tectonics. Further glancing could change that view though.
From an admittedly brief glance, Tarrantry might be ASB because it doesn't appear to have a basis for existance based on what we know about plate tectonics. Further glancing could change that view though.
This is a major reason why there should be another category other then asb and regular AH.
IMO-
Vanilla AH- Standard 'what if the arrow missed King Harold'
Outright ASB- 'What if a army of frost giants appeared and started smashing the norman army to pieces'
However this leaves a lot of room in between for things that are unlikely however not totally stupid and out of this world. Different geography would fall into this.
Or maybe different geography would fall into its own category- Fantasy Alternate History.
IMO-
Vanilla AH- Standard 'what if the arrow missed King Harold'
Outright ASB- 'What if a army of frost giants appeared and started smashing the norman army to pieces'
However this leaves a lot of room in between for things that are unlikely however not totally stupid and out of this world. Different geography would fall into this.
Or maybe different geography would fall into its own category- Fantasy Alternate History.
Grey Wolf
Donor
Regarding Tarrantry you can say that plate tectonics etc does not account for its existence, but as I understand it you are dealing with Pangea and if the proto-continent had a bit more land on it in the right place, might over the eons that spin off to become an island off France, like the British Isles became over the same time period ?
Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf