Re: Paleonet concept

[oneal1@xxxxxxxx (David W ONeal)]

On Tue, 2 Sep 1997 16:19:16 -0700 (PDT) d2794pn1@ozemail.com.au (Gary
Holloway) writes:
... >text deleted<...  The numbers of children who are keen on
>dinosaurs, pretty rocks etc at this age group is rarely capitalized on 
>by
>the education system. Many of the kids here regularly come to me with 
>a
>rock in their hot little paw asking for an ID.  I see this as an
>opportunity to spark a deeper interest in geology / paleontology (and, 
>of
>course, related fields) and do my best to help the wondering kid.
...>text deleted<

>Regards,
>Gary Holloway
>Oakville Public School

Applause..   A refreshing concept to see, Gary.

Here, in America, we seem to be doing our best to stifle inherent
curiosity.  It would be easy to merely blame the "thumpers"..  but in
fact "professional science" shares  the blame.  At the rate we are going
in our public schools (with the occasional exception of course) we will
someday be sending our children to some third-world country to learn how
to put batteries in a flashlight.

We have recently been treated (here) to a discourse on "avocational
paleontology", where the occasional professional begrudges the amateur
for hording away snippets of knowledge that rightfully belongs to them. 
Or the occasional amateur that begrudges the professional for denying
access to libraries of data.

Lest we all forget...  that in the not to distant past all of
paleontology (and all of natural history for that matter) was the realm
of the avocational naturalist pursuing intellectual curiosity.   

One can be employed (at) paleontology and therefore be called 
"professional", but I fail to see where that gives one any special
quality in interpreting the evidence that is available to anyone with the
interest to pursue it.

In paleontology today, as a discipline, what person exists  who knows, or
has knowledge of, all of the subject?   In fact, when one pursues one
small subset within the subject, their specialty, wouldn't they be less
likely to have a broader knowledge of the subject than a reasonably
intelligent, well read person?

I applaud those professionals who realize that the bulk of our knowledge
has (and will be) wrought by the hands, and minds, of those chasing
inherent curiosity, rather than fame or fortune.. or perhaps, the next
grant.

When "Science" brings science to everyone, people feel involved.  When
they feel a part of the endeavor... they are more likely to contribute
their effort and resources to support it.

Those who fail to realize this will "dig their own hole"... so to speak.

Perhaps we should all learn from the parable:  "There is no 'I' in
'Team'."

Dave ONeal
Avocational Naturalist.