[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: T rex feathers
From: "Dora Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I checked the discoveries page too, and it listed stuff found by Paul
Sereno, but that didn't make it clear that the entity named Paul Sereno was
a person. It also didn't include T rex.
Well, I would imagine Paul Sereno has helped to uncover many more fossils
than just the ones listed there (http://paulsereno.org/discoveries.htm).
The names listed there are just the ones he's both discovered, described,
and named. (T. rex was originally described back in 1905 by H. F. Osborn,
which is perhaps why, if Sereno was indeed in on a T. rex dig recently, it
isn't listed there. Or it might be due to the fact that the site hasn't
been updated in 2 years.)
He is a contract whatever with National Geographic, I'm not clear what sort
of contract, but he is very involved with their articles on paleontological
exploration, and I got the idea that some of his work is directly for them.
What do you mean "for them"? National Geographic does fund a lot of his
field work and research, but his results are published in publically
accessible journals... yes, with the occassional summary article written for
Nat Geo. Nothing wrong with that. They give him money for research; his
research, in turn, benefits them.
This supports the notion that if he had found feathers on a T rex, he might
sell them the information, or consider them as owning it - and not tell
anyone for a year until this piece of news can be sold in a popular
I doubt it. National Geographic is not considered a scientific journal in
which these sort of discoveries are first described, and I have to think
Sereno knows this. I don't know why you're interpreting him to be such a
The report that was posted to this list was that he was going
to publish the discovery a year from now in National Geographic.
Sure, he might. Who's to say that's the first place the information will be
released, though? Maybe it will be published in National Geographic
Research - a recognized scientific journal. In any case, until this news
can be heard from a more reputable source than just an internet message
board, it's all hogwash anyway.
is closely linked with National Geographic and he does sell them scientific
knowledge for profit,
How do you know that?
turned out to be the case, I would be disgusted enough not to exactly be
waiting with baited breath for the information, which more than likley is a
vague feather imprint in a rock.
I hate to burst your bubble, but this happens all the time in science. New
discoveries are kept under wraps until they can be properly studied,
discussed amongst fellow colleagues, and written about. There are a number
of fossils we've been waiting years to hear more about, but until they've
been properly "processed", there's no point in getting upset about it.
That's just the name of the game.
He has also written in such places as Nature and Science, though+ADs- so if
had made such a discovery it would be reasonable to expect him to report it
Again, these discoveries are almost never reported immediately. The time
span between making an initial discovery and going to print can last several
months and usually last on the order of years.
The BHI web site pretty much appears to be in the business of
selling fossils. Their web site doesn't even claim they have research
staff+ACE- And their only contacts are sales contacts.
Have you tried reading this page?
Or this one?
Undergraduate Student, Carleton University
Vertebrate Paleontology & Paleoecology
Paleoart website: http://www.geocities.com/paleoportfolio/
MSN Messenger: email@example.com
Add photos to your messages with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE*