RE: paleonet AGI Report

From
Date
Reply-To
Dear Michael,
"One way in which we can alter perceptions of our science is by helping 
others to see the value, but that necessitates understanding that ourselves. 
I hope I'm not being to harsh when I say that I have encountered too many 
palaeontologists who think their research should be funded simply because 
they think it should be."

I completely agree palaeontologists are kept so away from society that they 
think that others know about it. Therefore, get funding automatically!
I think we should inform other people that palaeontology is an important 
area of science and can dramarically contribute to our progress in our 
areas, this is my point of view. However, they may palaeontologists that do 
not think the same! They may consider palaeontology just a classical science 
reduce to certain layers of society

The first thing must do is re-define what is palaeontology, its important to 
science, etc. Most of people palaeontology to Dinosaurs, and black and white 
pictures of Darwin et al.! To define certain common rules (for example there 
is not any common rule to define the place where a fossil was found. I think 
using long. and Lat would be the most appropiate )

I think we must get in touch with society instead of expecting society to 
our work on its own and get grants!

Even though, I am powerless, I offer myself to start giving ideas about an 
international report in different languages to hand to governements to make 
palaeontology known to society.
The first point is define palaeontology!


I hope this would work

Xavier Panades I Blas, Ms

Please, send letters to:

55, Marksbury Road
Bedminster
Bristol BS3 5JY
England
European Community
cogombra@hotmail.com















From: "Michael Simmons" <mike.simmons@neftex.com>
Reply-To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
To: <paleonet@nhm.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: paleonet AGI Report
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:05:13 -0000

Prof Hottinger raises important issues in his note, an important one
being that Palaeontology is not alone in suffering from crises in
funding/staffing/appreciation.These are issues generally faced in the
whole of Earth Science and I do not think palaeontologists should
consider themselves a special case.

Both academia and industry, as businesses, suffer from short-termism at
the moment. University Earth Science departments (at least in the UK)
have to obtain large ($100,000+) research grants to be seen to be
competitive. A few thousand pounds for field work or museum-based
research is seen as insignificant in terms of university income when at
the same time computing or biochemistry departments are receiving much
larger grants for complex pieces of kit and the staff to run them.
Industry rarely (but with occasional honorable exceptions)  funds
fundamental geoscience research - if funding is given at all it is
usually for help in solving a short-term -specific issue. All of this
has led to a real crisis in funding basic earth science research such as
outcrop-based biostratigraphy or taxonomy. Often these only get
supported because they are hidden within projects with more grandiose
aims.

Palaeontologists and earth scientists have to be able to answer the
questions "hasn't this been done already" and "do we need to know this".
These are the questions posed by both academic and industrial funding
bodies. The answer to this, even if it only results in obtaining a grant
that your University Chancellor regards as derisory, then it is
important to appreciate how your new findings will be incorporated into
broader geoscience. One way in which we can alter perceptions of our
science is by helping others to see the value, but that necessitates
understanding that ourselves. I hope I'm not being to harsh when I say
that I have encountered too many palaeontologists who think their
research should be funded simply because they think it should be.

Mike Simmons

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself with cool emoticons - download MSN Messenger today! 
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger