[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

nomenclature



Bob Myers gave a very nice discussion on the whys and wherefores of the
naming, renaming, and re renaming of many of our nicest dinos. All of hwat he
said I think hit the mark of what he was trying to discuss. However I think
he missed the point that Norm King was trying to make.

Norm teaches a dino course (I think) and he has to sort of decide what he
want to get accross to his students in a fairly short period of time. He
probably has just about enough time to teach names and NOTHING ELSE. Or maybe
teach some evolutionary trend or maybe some ecology of a couple given times.
But he can't teach all of them in this one course that he has. So how to get
around all the latin and greek and sort of get to the meat is his real
problem.

There are two things that make his task praticularly difficult. One is the
various name and their drift as we get more and more insight into who's who.
The other is that many authors and all tv presentations present their views
as fact, when its really conjectjure. Where, Norm might ask, does he go to
find the truth as seen today by the mainstream scientists. I don't know and I
think he doesn't know either.

So maybe you could think about his problem and how you might fix it or how
you might teach this very complicated subject, as we all know that it is. His
job, as it were, is to start some light of interest in these new students of
our love of life (dino life that is). This also applies to all the elementary
and seconday teachers today. The textbooks are not the answer, just think how
many things have changed in 1995. Textbooks are generally around 8 to 10
years behind current thought.

paul sparks