Reposted for Scott Hartman:
____
Hmm...this didn't go through on my end, so I'll send it again to see
if it
works. Strange, there is no html or anything in it...
I know this is a touchy subject...so let me just leap right in:
I have personally met Kirby, and I can say that he was very pleasant
to me.
That being said, I do not know much about his personal life and/or
finances,
so I will forgo any conclusions at this time about his ethics, except
to
concur with Dan Varner than Big Al was indeed confiscated from his
team by the
BLM.
I would, however, like to comment on the issue of being a
"paleontologist."
At our small museum in Wyoming I routinely hear people with no
qualifications refer to themselves as "paleontologists" simply because
they dig up
dinosaurs and are more knowledgeable than the tourists they are
working with. This
grates on me constantly, as I expect the word to hold some value. I
think a
literal examination of the word makes it pretty obvious who a
paleontologist
is and isn't. -ology is defined as: a suffix; a branch of learning;
science,
study of...; from Greek word logos. So...it seems fair to me that a
paleontologist is someone who studies and contributes to the science
of
paleontology. In much the same way that people who look at nudie
magazines are not
dermatologists, I don't think people who collect fossils as a hobby
(or even a
profession, no matter how valuable that service may be) are
paleontologists,
regardless of how ethical they are, or how wonderful of human beings.!
This
isn't an insult to them; I just think that a person must participate
in the
science to refer to themselves as a scientist. To me this means
contributing
to the peer-reviewed literature, regardless of educational standing
(although it is most common for those with Ph D's to do this
contributing).
Now, some private collectors do indeed publish papers, or at least
make
presentations at SVP; while I may not think too highly of all the
research these
people produce, they are at least participating in the science, so I
don't
have any real objection to them referring to themselves as
paleontologists. On
the other hand, someone who simply digs them up (whether for vacation
or
vocation) does not automatically become a paleontologist, no matter
how
personally satisfying it may be to do so.
Again, I am not applying this claim to anyone in particular, but I do
think
it's important to attach meanings to words, and it seems reasonable to
me
that a person must actually do science before she or he can call
themselves a
scientist.
Scott Hartman
Zoology & Physiology
University of Wyoming
Laramie, WY 82070
(307) 742-3799