Paleo21 response

From
Date

1. Does paleontology need to become better integrated into the Earth
Systems research program.  

YES, Relevance to our geoscience colleagues is important.

2. Do we communicate enough with non-paleontological geologists/biologists? 

YES, Relevance to these colleagues is important.

3. Have we communicated enough with the general scientific community?

NO. Are they likely to think of paleontological contributions when asked to 
justify science expenditures to the public?

4. Is paleontology changing (if so how)?

YES. More opportunities to contribute because more integrated into 
multidisciplinary programs, more communicative amongst specialists, more 
effective because of digital techniques. Also more poorly supported. 
Public/political perception of Relevance is lower.

5. Should we strive to maintain paleontology's diversity of expertise or
should we refocus on a few core specialities?

Sorry, I only answer easy questions. More seriously, lets remember Bob 
Ginsburg's admonition: Relevance, Relevance, Relevance. It is very important 
to make contributions in as many areas as we can, ie support diversity, but 
it is more important to survive and thrive, so perhaps we should try to 
identify those areas where we can truly demonstrate our relevance to the 
community at large, and focus on them.

6. Should paleontology concentrate more on public outreach in the 21st
Century?

Yes, but in a different way, demonstrating Relevance. By this I mean breaking 
away from the dinosaurs-are-everything approach.

7. Are there ethical issues to be considered in the acquisition of specimens
by museums and individuals?

Fossils are a part of our global heritage and should be carefully preserved 
and publicly available. Some are so abundant and well known to science that 
there is not problem with acquisition by individuals.

8. Are there special issues to be considered in the training of new
generations of paleontologists?

Head them into areas of Relevance.

9. Are the resources supporting paleontology increasing, stable, or
decreasing? 

Decreasing from my perspective.

10. Should more paleontological funding go to interdisciplinary research,
and less to lone paleontologists? 

Depends on significance/relevance of each individual case. My guess is that 
the former, almost by definition, implies relevance. The recent submission to 
Paleonet by Bryan Levman gives proper acknowledgement to the value of 
knowledge for its own sake, but this won't help us win support these days. So 
many people are benefitting from the global neoconservative free market 
system that it will be with us for a long time, and altruism towards funding 
knowledge is not an obvious part of that system, although it is not 
specifically excluded either.

11. Should paleontological students be better trained to market themselves
at the beginning of their careers?

I believe all science and engineering students should receive basic training 
in communications skills and overall science/society issues. Marketing is 
becoming so great a part of a scientist's life in all areas that it is 
probably a good idea too.

12. Is there a lack of respect/understanding of what paleontologists do?

Yes. For everything except (perhaps) dinosaurs.