[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
FW: New Fossil Protection Regulations in China
WhOOOAA ....... David. I meant what I said. I'm talking about
Natural Selection. It's in everything we do. Currently our science is being
against acquiring massive funding. Why?? We have been fairly unsuccessful
for [$$$$$$] and are being "weeded out/ ignored". Damn right it's Natural
You either play the game for everything it's worth or lose the competitive
the competitive edge and you better start tightening your belt. The soviet
to mind. Natural Selection is very much a part of Darwinism and has been used
instances other than biological. I probably shouldn't have been so liberal in
And yes. We "ought" to practise it ..... better than we have.
Now. As for being short sighted ..... hmmmmmmm ......
Working on the "political will????" Lobbyists and politicians??? Working on
that what we have been doing for 100 years?? They have no interest in our
field. What we
really need David is to stop looking in all the wrong places. This is what I
mean by changing
strategy. Why would you keep approaching the same type of people for funding??
If I were Jewish
and it was traditional for my people to keep lobbying for funding for Israel by
convince Mosques to support us, and getting a drivel of $$$$$ from them [along
with a lot of
laughter], it would probably dawn on me too, after 50 years, that I did not
think my strategy
out very well. But. To keep doing it. Then it becomes pathological.
Before you can even begin to use politics David, you have to understand
politics. And you don't.
Our field does not have "political value". You can attain it. Yes. And it only
takes a very small
number of individuals to do so. They have to be gifted or have spent a
reasonable amount of time
working in this arena AND have a fairly fanatical drive towards papaeontology.
That small number,
even one individual is ALL it takes to pull the rest of us through.
Don't believe me?? I'll demonstrate it to you.
If we continue taking your approach to funding, we certainly WILL leave even
MORE people "in the
dust" as it were.
As a side note. This is what science is all about. You and me. Throwing ideas
around. Then testing
them out in the real world. Uuuh. You first. dale
> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 01:48:26 +0200
> From: email@example.com
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: FW: New Fossil Protection Regulations in China
>> The world IS a tough place. We have to be TOUGHER!! We have to be
>> strongly motivated to do things we at 1st may not enjoy. If we are
>> successful, the rewards will only encourage us to change strategies
>> and beat the world at it's own game. There is no free lunch. It's not
>> good enough to preach darwinism. One has to practise it as well.
>> We're not here as observers David.
> You have misunderstood science itself. The theory of evolution is not an
> "ought", it's an "is". To say "one has to practise" "darwinism" is wrong
> at so many levels...
> One of them is the fact that the theory of evolution _is not a
> metaphor_. Your Darwinian fitness is measured by how many fertile
> children you have, _not_ by how much money you have raised.
> What we should do, in my opinion, is to work on the political will to
> fund science in general. The money is there, in spades; it's just being
> spent on other stuff (I'd rather not start a discussion on what
> exactly). That's what we should change, as voters, as lobbyists, as
> politicians. In other words, we should change the unfortunate fact that
> the world is a tough place.
> The short-sighted approach you suggest will moderately benefit a tiny
> number of good fundraisers, will leave lots of people with all their
> great ideas in the dust, and will do very, very little to advance
> science in the long run.