I recently promised a group of colleagues that I would be able to quickly generate a kml file of all compiled geochronological data for the Grand Canyon and Colorado Plateau region using just a spreadsheet. Luckily, several of them had compiled such a spreadsheet following a symposium on the river back in 2000 (check out the symposium volume at this LINK--you may have to look around a bit). Why did I make such a promise? Well, I have actually had some experience using Google's neato spreadsheet mapper in Google Docs. I used it while experimenting with 'Virtual Unit Descriptions' for some favorite areas, and recently reposted them at Fresh Geologic Froth. One limitation of the spreadsheet mapper...ok, two limitations...are: 1. It is a bit cumbersome to work with; and 2. There is a limit of 400 places. At the Google Outreach site they mention that if that limitation is a problem, check out Google Fusion Tables (a Google Labs product). When I first got there I was baffled by it, but soon figured out just how simple it is to use. You start with an adequately formatted spreadsheet, indicate which columns contain data you would like to report and which ones contain values that represent 'geolocational' data and, voila!, a freaking map appears! (Note: Must use WGS84 lat and long in decimal degrees for coordinate data).

From this step it takes one click to generate a kml file of the dataset, which was my ultimate goal. With that file (obviously) it is possible to evaluate the data in Google Earth or Google Maps. Click on a point and get a selected list of attributes to learn about the data. This is huge, right? Sure it is. Check it out:

Here it is in Google Maps showing the data that can be viewed at any point:

Please note that Google Fusion Tables have potential to perform much more complicated tasks and create some interesting data mashups, but this is what I needed and it was simple. I also found that it was possible to invoke fancier balloon templates to show your data, but stayed simple for this application. Even with these screenshots, I suspect you can see what a useful application this is for evaluating geochron data.

Currently, we are organizing a follow-up symposium and will be populating the dataset with 10 years of new stuff. Ideally, these types of datasets are open and accessible to geoscientists who continue to generate geochron data. We shouldn't wait a decade to add a decade's worth of data anymore, right? That would be downright nutty.

Related blast from the past: http://geofroth.posterous.com/geochron-kmlpublished-k-ar-and-ar-ar-dates-fo