Leigh is quite correct in pointing out that "consensus" does not
mean (nor imply) understanding. I think we are, however, perhaps, a bit
past the limit Leigh suggests.
Jack has, has usual, quite corrected pointed out at least one area
of interest based on a supportable geomagnetic model. In addition to the
geomagnetic dynamo model first advanced by W.M. Elsasser and Sir Edward
Bullard nearly a half century ago, I think we have at least three other
supportable models-- of which only the Parker-Levy dynamo springs to mind.
On a lighter note...
This summer I am filling in for a suddenly ill friend who teaches high
school mathematics. Teaching calculus and geometry to inner city youth has
turned out to be a very stimulating experience. The start was a bit
rocky -- when thrown to the lions without any time to prepare -- I decided
to teach rotational vectors via plate tectonics.
Never having taught high school students, I assumed most had at least
some exposure to earth structure and/or plate tectonics. After giving a
brief overview, I reached for some friendly Socratic refinements on my
lecture. My first question: "Now what's at the center of the earth?"
After a very pregnant pause one young man earnestly called out, "Hell?"