Re: Paleo21 - Avocational paleontologists

From
Date
At 07:06 PM 8/20/97 -0700, Mike Everhart wrote:
>At the risk of drawing a lot of hype and flame, may I make the humble
>suggestion that we are all drawn to a common subject; paleontology.....
>
>Why can't we all just consider ourselves to be paleontologists and let
>it go at that?
>

If I am interested in Civil War history, am I a historian?  If I am
interested in medicine am I a physician?  Terminology is used to
categorize, and if we expand the meaning beyond the intended purpose, it
fails to provide meaning at all.

If one practices the craft and science of paleontology, including
publication and scrutiny by peer review, then using the term paleontologist
is legitimate, IMHO.  As I wrote earlier, I personally won't use the term
paleontologist without qualifiers when I refer to *myself* because I am not
published, and have not yet made a meaningful contribution to the science.
All that is subject to change when I do finish work on fossil flora of the
northwest.

I guess my whole point in all of this is that cavalier use of terms, such
as paleontologist, can have an unexpected effect of diminishing the
distinction between science and hobby.

Regards,
Michael

       ---====  Michael Sternberg  ====---
 Avocational Paleontologist and Natural Curiousitarian 
           "I never Metasequoia I didn't like"
                  Quod erat inveniendum
Member: Northwest Paleontological Association   
               Vancouver Paleontological Society 
               Botanical Society of America
               Geological Society of America
       ---=============================---     
Pacific Northwest Geology and Paleontology at:  Cascadia - A Paleo Homepage
http://www.cnw.com/~mstern/                          Last Rev date: 11.24.96