[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Fossil reptiles mired in controversy
No need to be an apologist for Nature, Mike. When an article in a
science magazine uses lines like, "Lucas is known in the palaeontology
community for his desire to publish a high volume of papers", it reduces
the article to tabloid journalism. This statement is unsubstantiated
gossip or anecdotal, if you prefer.
From: Mike Taylor [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 4:28 PM
To: Ken Carpenter
Cc: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: RE: Fossil reptiles mired in controversy
> > Name-calling sparks dispute over aetosaurs.
> > http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080130/full/451510a.html
> Just goes to show that even Nature will publish tabloid stories as
> long as there is a "science" bent to them.
Hang on, Ken, how is this a "tabloid story"? Do you think it's a
trivial matter if scientists' original work is published out from
under their feet?
If the facts in the cases described by this story are as they appear,
then I think they are _very_ serious, and deserving of a lot more
concern than is being shown here. If, on the other hand, things are
_not_ as they seem, then proper investigation is required to vindicate
Lucas et al. Either way, I don't see the slightest justification for
seeing this matter as on a par with Britney's new tatoo.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <email@example.com>
)_v__/\ "Sorry if that makes some people feel bad, but I'm not in the
"make people feel good business"; I'm a scientist" -- Thomas
R. Holtz, Jr.