It is abhorrent that potentially scientifically valuable fossils can be sold readily on the Internet and at Rock and Fossil shows. Just the other day I saw a ceratosaur brain case for sale on Ebay. On a site that it is often possible to link to from this site there are many psittacosaur skeletons for sale for thousands of dollars. Not a single one of these excellent specimens have been examined by university train paleontologists. Not only were there skeletons of dinosaurs, but dinosaur eggs and skeletons of other ancient reptiles and amphibians as well. Most if not all of the specimens that I have seen for sale were smuggled illegally out of china. China claims all fossils as its own historical resource and property of the people of that nation. By buying these fossils, people only support an illegal trade in fossils. Not that long ago a psittacosaur skull and part of the skeleton was actually stolen from the Russian National Museum. I have no idea if that person was ever caught. If people were to stop buying these fossils to display in their homes and offices, then the middle men would find themselves without retailers to sell to. It would trickle down the line to the poor Chinese farmer who gets maybe a dollar for his priceless specimen that happened to be on his land. If the Beijing museum could pay these farmers equivalent amounts of money for their specimens that they might have gotten from smugglers, then the fossils would make their way to museum collections instead of fossil dealers snatching up these finds. The reason that it is important that the museum have the fossil is that they are essentially there to allow everybody to appreciate the fossil. Also, about 90% of the information that can be gleamed from a fossil is collected before its even out of the ground. Poachers don't collect this information and its therefor lost forever.
I propose a solution to this problem that I only think fossil dealers would find unamacable. The museums accross the world have unique specimens which they make copies of for the purpose of trading with other museums so that they can display more specimens than they have in their collections. The molds that they use to make the copies are kept in a warehouse. The museums could copywrite the mold as an artistic creation then have exclusive writes to make copies of the fossil (people who make a copy of a copy are penalized under copywrite law). By taking orders for skeletons from people interested in buying copies, they could satiate the croud just looking for something to have in their home or office. Also, making the copies much more affordable than real fossils would also curb desire to own the real thing. A couple of staff members could even be hired on for the sole purpose of filling orders. Profits from the sale of these replicas could then be used to compensate land owners competitively for their fossil finds.
I've heard it argued that eliminating the sale of fossils or widely distributing copies of bones would reduse interest in fossils (kids become interested with a childhood fossil collection) or in going to the museum. It would be naive to believe that reducing the sale of scientifically valuable specimens will totally eliminate the fossil dealing industry. Scores of invertebrates such as ammonites, brachiopods, polycopods, trilobites, corals, bryozoans, etc. would still be widely available. Kids don't start their collection with a 10 thousand dollar dinosaur skeleton. Oligocene mammals are also in abundant (but not infinite) supply. Then again I'm a little biased towards the preservation of reptile and amphibian skeletons. As an added measure, enforcement agents should be able to seive illegally collected fossils and return them to their appropriate institutions. In Alberta, Dan Spivak is known as the fossil cop. He regualarly checks the internet an fossil shops for the sale of fossils that were collected in Alberta. For example, Burgess Shale fossils are strictly prohibited from sale. So he alerts law enforcement and testifies in court against people who illegally have Alberta fossils. As part of the Sino Canadian Dinosaur Project, an enforcement agent could force the return of stolen fossils to china. China in turn could grant north american museums (particularly those who the enforcer is associated with) the right to prep the fossils and publish on them first or jointly with Chinese paleontologists.
Monday, December 08, 2003
Friday, December 05, 2003
today's Laws
"In any heirarchy an individual rises to his or her own level of incompetance and then remains there."
"Everything east of the San Andreas Fault will evenually plunge into the Atlantic Ocean"
"Nature always sides with the hidden law"
"Everything east of the San Andreas Fault will evenually plunge into the Atlantic Ocean"
"Nature always sides with the hidden law"
Bristled psittacosaur
Well, it looks like somebody beat me to it. The bristled psittacosaur as been described. Now that I've seen the photos, it isn't really all that surprising that it was found. An integumentary structure on any dinosaur is great, but it isn't that odd for there to be long fibrous structures coming off of the psittacosaur's tail. It would take a lot of work to demonstrate that these were not evolved independantly from the feathers that exist on birds. It would take alot more specimens of basal ornithopods with the same kind of integumentary structures and a few very basal theropods and probably even some prosauropods with the structures to say that fibrous integumentary protrusions were ubiquitous in dinosaurs. I for one am doubtful that any such assemblage of "feathered" or "bristled" dinosaurs will ever be found.
The grainy photos do thankfully nullify a couple of my initial hypothesies. There is no way that those structures in their observed density or configuration could have served in thermoregulation (weather for keeping warm or keeping cool). Of course some people may argue that there may be a difference in summer and winter coats (sounds like something that Bob Bakker may propose) but there is no evience to support or refute that hypothesis. Then again a couple of eaqually unprovable hypothesies come to mind. For example, if the psittacosaur had enough flexability in its tail, the bristles may have served to fend off flying insects. The other possibility is that they serve no partucularly useful function. The dorsal spines on a green iguana arent partucularly strong and could not be used to defend against attacking predators. They may look spiny an unpalatable, but the predators such as hawks or cats or other large reptiles would quickly learn that these large spines weren't so bad. That is unless there is a factor in their environment that constantly reinforces the view that all spines are effective (such as a particularly spiny plant). There is little evidence to support a sexually selective role, they're just there. There was nothing in particular stopping them from evolving. The first iguanas possibly had a use for them that is not not as evident. The same may be true of the psittacosaur. There may be no particulatly good function fro those bristles but their ancestors may have had a use for them.
This is not the first time that an integumentary structure has been found in an ornithischian. The Ankylosaurs with their dermal armour aside, hadrosaurs have been found frequently with skin impressions. Many of those hadrosaurs have a row of dorsal spines that seem similar in pattern to those of an iguana. Not nearly so tall relative to the whole animal as the iguana's spines or the psittacosaur's bristels, but definately restricted to a dorsal crest. These discoveries have prompted illustrations such as this one by Bob Bakker.
The grainy photos do thankfully nullify a couple of my initial hypothesies. There is no way that those structures in their observed density or configuration could have served in thermoregulation (weather for keeping warm or keeping cool). Of course some people may argue that there may be a difference in summer and winter coats (sounds like something that Bob Bakker may propose) but there is no evience to support or refute that hypothesis. Then again a couple of eaqually unprovable hypothesies come to mind. For example, if the psittacosaur had enough flexability in its tail, the bristles may have served to fend off flying insects. The other possibility is that they serve no partucularly useful function. The dorsal spines on a green iguana arent partucularly strong and could not be used to defend against attacking predators. They may look spiny an unpalatable, but the predators such as hawks or cats or other large reptiles would quickly learn that these large spines weren't so bad. That is unless there is a factor in their environment that constantly reinforces the view that all spines are effective (such as a particularly spiny plant). There is little evidence to support a sexually selective role, they're just there. There was nothing in particular stopping them from evolving. The first iguanas possibly had a use for them that is not not as evident. The same may be true of the psittacosaur. There may be no particulatly good function fro those bristles but their ancestors may have had a use for them.
This is not the first time that an integumentary structure has been found in an ornithischian. The Ankylosaurs with their dermal armour aside, hadrosaurs have been found frequently with skin impressions. Many of those hadrosaurs have a row of dorsal spines that seem similar in pattern to those of an iguana. Not nearly so tall relative to the whole animal as the iguana's spines or the psittacosaur's bristels, but definately restricted to a dorsal crest. These discoveries have prompted illustrations such as this one by Bob Bakker.
Thursday, December 04, 2003
A psittacosaur with Feathers?
Can feathers be considered a synapomorphy of any group of animals at all? It used to be thought that birds alone possessed feathers. This was until a number of chinese dinosaurs were found to bear filamenous structures and even long true feathers in some other forms. So ok, a synapomorphy of the higher coelurosaurs? Maybe not even a synapomorphy of theropods or even saurischians. Dr. Michael Caldwell revealed to his Paleo 318 class today that a well renouned fossil dealer had approached both him and Phil Currie with a psittacosaur which he had purchased at the world famous Tucson Rock, Mineral and Fossil Expo, which appeared to bear featherrs. Dr. Caldwell is scepticle that the structure are in fact true feathers and instead called them epidermal extensions. I imagine that Dr. Currie is rather sceptical because of his recent encounter with a forged fossil. He had supported a fellow paleontologist who purchased a fossil at the same infamous show purporting that it was an even mix of dinosauriand and bird features. the fossil turned out to be an actual mix of bird and dinosaur fossils from separate animals, thereby causing alot of academic grief for Currie. Kevin Aulenback who preped the fossil had been quick to point out the error and unfortunetly also received much grief and has since transitioned to paleobotony so that he wouldn't have to deal with the politics of Vertebrate paleo. I for one am willing to believe that any scenario could be true at this time since I haven't actually seen the specimen. In fact, all that Caldwell has is a photo. Hopefully i'll be able to procure a copy of the photo for this site and I will try to provide as full a description as I can on the basis of what is visible. However, this means that if I can argue that it is a new species, then I will be able to name it without ever actually seeing the real specimen. Since I will be the first to publish on it. However I will refrain from committing this academic suicide as nobody will be willig to share anything with me since they'll only see that I steal their research.
The issue of the feather also begs the question, could this fibrous epidermal covering be ancestral to all the dinosaurs and their immediate relatives. At least one pterosaur has been found to have some kind of "fury" covering. So if the outgroup to dinosaur even has this covering, how far back might it go. This is of course wild conjecture. There is a pretty good chance that the covering evolved multiple times in order serve in thermo regulation. Keep in mind that an animal in the deserts of mongolia might have used feathers to stay cool, not just keep in body heat.
The issue of the feather also begs the question, could this fibrous epidermal covering be ancestral to all the dinosaurs and their immediate relatives. At least one pterosaur has been found to have some kind of "fury" covering. So if the outgroup to dinosaur even has this covering, how far back might it go. This is of course wild conjecture. There is a pretty good chance that the covering evolved multiple times in order serve in thermo regulation. Keep in mind that an animal in the deserts of mongolia might have used feathers to stay cool, not just keep in body heat.
Procrastination Nation
Well, its down to the wire. I have 5 final exams in 12 days ending on Dec 15. Am I worried. Of course I am. Except for paleo, seem to have learned didly squat this semester. Sure I now know how a glacier works and the names of countless parts of the human skeleton, but frankly, unless I keep using this stuff, the details will go the way of much of my American and European history knowledge. It will be forcefully pushed from my short term memory such that I will only know where to look it up if ever I need to know this information again. This is a common occurance among University students. Many attribute their immediate loss of information due the amount of binge drinking that they do immediately after an exam, but i don't have that excuse. Rather I attibute the ubiquitous loss of minute detail with time to the fact that we aren't actually learning this stuff. We procrastinate to the last minute, wasting enormous amounts of time on things like blogs and social lives resulting in a mad panic when exams come around. Right after a round of bad exams, a student will swear that they'll start to study more, but it's only marginally effective. Tomarrow I'll sing a sweeter song. The procrastinators motto pronounced by Colleridge on being unable to finish a poem due to the fact that he was coming out of an opium trip. When we cram everything at the last minute its true that we have it in the forefront of our mind, but that doesn't mean that we'll remember it beyond the exam. A good measure of how well something is learned is if it can be recalled a year after the exam. So what do I remember from Ecology which I was finishing up this time last year, or from Mechanisms of Evolution or even general zoology of the vertebrates or paleontology of the Invertebrates or one other class which seems to have been entirely blocked from my memory. Well I don't seem to remember very much about the differences between the varieties of brachiopods, but I could recite the entire history of amniote evolution if you wanted me to tell you all about the evolution of various vertebrates or their physiological mechanisms only because that was covered and expanded upon in Paleo 318. As for ecology, I remember the basics and could look it up in a heartbeat. And until now, I couldn't even remember that I only took 4 classes my first semester and five the second.
As for the classes that I will be tested in very shortly. I will definately continue to use Paleo (as that's my major) and I think that I'd be interested in writing a book on the history of Paleontology, so that incorporates my history of science class (though that sect of biology and geology was barely covered, even in passing). As for physiology. I think that I'll chalk that one up as a mulligan. Nothing that was covered had any bearing on anything even remotely identifiable in the fossil record. As for Human Osteology... Yech!!! Now there's a class that seemed like it would be useful for future studies. Now I suppose that if the Prof was able to teach or if the TA's had any interest in inparting the information to the students rather than collecting their meager pay checks it might have been useful. However, human beings are so minutely described that no phylogenetic study would ever include the thousands of characters seen on the bones of human beings. Also, humans are so drastically different from reptiles that any studies that I would conduct in my chosen field would include only the broadest similarities to one an anthropologist might conduct. And to think that I had the option to take Evolution of the homonids.
As for the classes that I will be tested in very shortly. I will definately continue to use Paleo (as that's my major) and I think that I'd be interested in writing a book on the history of Paleontology, so that incorporates my history of science class (though that sect of biology and geology was barely covered, even in passing). As for physiology. I think that I'll chalk that one up as a mulligan. Nothing that was covered had any bearing on anything even remotely identifiable in the fossil record. As for Human Osteology... Yech!!! Now there's a class that seemed like it would be useful for future studies. Now I suppose that if the Prof was able to teach or if the TA's had any interest in inparting the information to the students rather than collecting their meager pay checks it might have been useful. However, human beings are so minutely described that no phylogenetic study would ever include the thousands of characters seen on the bones of human beings. Also, humans are so drastically different from reptiles that any studies that I would conduct in my chosen field would include only the broadest similarities to one an anthropologist might conduct. And to think that I had the option to take Evolution of the homonids.
Wednesday, December 03, 2003
Common man policies
This is a continuation of my "Achademiarchy" blog from a couple of days ago. When one considers the potential power that a politically unified academic community would have, one wonders what this group should do besides promote lower tuition costs and increased funding for the sciences and arts. Since the 1950s is been generally assumed that science itself has no place in making moral judgments. However, it'll be a cold day in hell before I let some arts students call the shots. Ok, so science can't make moral judgments, but there is nothing saying that scientists can't. After all, the statement that science shouldn't make moral judgments is itself a moral statement.
The first and most natural policy for this political group to make would be to support primary and secondary education as a tool to prepare students for University. But not everybody is university bound. Unfortunately, a lot of schools make the assumption that they should prepare everybody for university and therefore leave a lot of less academically inclined people without a skill set. I really think that technical schools should be supported by the academic group. Another reason why a lot of attention should be paid to non academics is that unfortunately, stupid people seem to comprise the majority demographic. It would be shortsighted for the acamemiarchy to seem elitist by ignoring the common man. I'm not saying that this group wouldn't be elitist. It's just not a very politically friendly appearance to keep up. Another measure to reach the common man would definitely involve measures to improve the economy. Frankly, a lot of money gets spent on totally useless things. For example five congressmen agreed to spend 86 billion dollars of taxpayer money to fund the war in Iraq. Independent auditors and efficiency experts could have been called in and a large portion of that could have been saved. For example, instead of Americans bringing in truck loads of bottled water, what they should have done was set up and water purification system that the Iraqi people could also use. This would go a long way to fostering peace and saving money. The Canadians in Afghanistan did that and only two Canadians have been killed by enemy forces (the other 4 were killed by friendly fire).
Another way to improve the economy is to instigate measures to lower the unemployment rate. The distribution of people in North America is not even with the distribution of jobs. In Canada, one often sees images of the shanty towns built in Vancouver and Toronto; monuments of poverty. These people have very little in the way of skilled training. That's Perfect! In Alberta and Saskatchewan unskilled labor is really needed. It doesn't take a genius to work on the Oil Patch or on a farm or ranch. People just flock to cities because they think that it's the place to be an that they will get hand outs. For the cost of feeding and sheltering the enormous homeless population, the federal or provincial governments could bus these people to sites of primary production and set them up with jobs and possibly even low income housing. Granted, this year the ranching community took a big hit from the closing of the US border to Canadian beef, but that won't last forever. The academic party could even start an advertising campain; a "go west young man" sort of thing. If this sort of thing were instituted in the US, unemployment rates would drop and other economic indicators such as consumer spending and the construction industry would rise. Hopefully this would stimulate a stronger US dollar.
The first and most natural policy for this political group to make would be to support primary and secondary education as a tool to prepare students for University. But not everybody is university bound. Unfortunately, a lot of schools make the assumption that they should prepare everybody for university and therefore leave a lot of less academically inclined people without a skill set. I really think that technical schools should be supported by the academic group. Another reason why a lot of attention should be paid to non academics is that unfortunately, stupid people seem to comprise the majority demographic. It would be shortsighted for the acamemiarchy to seem elitist by ignoring the common man. I'm not saying that this group wouldn't be elitist. It's just not a very politically friendly appearance to keep up. Another measure to reach the common man would definitely involve measures to improve the economy. Frankly, a lot of money gets spent on totally useless things. For example five congressmen agreed to spend 86 billion dollars of taxpayer money to fund the war in Iraq. Independent auditors and efficiency experts could have been called in and a large portion of that could have been saved. For example, instead of Americans bringing in truck loads of bottled water, what they should have done was set up and water purification system that the Iraqi people could also use. This would go a long way to fostering peace and saving money. The Canadians in Afghanistan did that and only two Canadians have been killed by enemy forces (the other 4 were killed by friendly fire).
Another way to improve the economy is to instigate measures to lower the unemployment rate. The distribution of people in North America is not even with the distribution of jobs. In Canada, one often sees images of the shanty towns built in Vancouver and Toronto; monuments of poverty. These people have very little in the way of skilled training. That's Perfect! In Alberta and Saskatchewan unskilled labor is really needed. It doesn't take a genius to work on the Oil Patch or on a farm or ranch. People just flock to cities because they think that it's the place to be an that they will get hand outs. For the cost of feeding and sheltering the enormous homeless population, the federal or provincial governments could bus these people to sites of primary production and set them up with jobs and possibly even low income housing. Granted, this year the ranching community took a big hit from the closing of the US border to Canadian beef, but that won't last forever. The academic party could even start an advertising campain; a "go west young man" sort of thing. If this sort of thing were instituted in the US, unemployment rates would drop and other economic indicators such as consumer spending and the construction industry would rise. Hopefully this would stimulate a stronger US dollar.
Tuesday, December 02, 2003
Sunday, November 30, 2003
Those of you who lived on 9 Mac last year may possible remember the brick that I painted. I modified it in photoshop and here it is. I think I may use it as my logo.
It's just an allosaur in front of my site name and a depiction of my move from California to Alberta
Oh yeah, the Murphy-ism for this blog is: "Everybody should believe in something. I believe I'll have another drink."
It's just an allosaur in front of my site name and a depiction of my move from California to Alberta
Oh yeah, the Murphy-ism for this blog is: "Everybody should believe in something. I believe I'll have another drink."
Murphy's Laws
I'm going to start incorporating 1 or 2 of Murphy's laws into my blogs on a regular basis. For those of you who don't know, Murphy's most famous law is that "Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong, at the worst possible time."
And in the spirit of the comments that I always get, the other law for today is: "Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate."
And in the spirit of the comments that I always get, the other law for today is: "Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate."
Saturday, November 29, 2003
Academiarchy
Are you a College or University student? Do you reside in Canada or the United states? Are you apathetic about political issues because they have little or no bearing on your life? Tired of the Province/ State or Country being run by idiots? If you are, you're not alone, and although this may sound like the tag line for a new support group, I think that it describes a large swath of the population. There is no reason why high school drop outs should make decisions for University Students. There is no reason why the freedoms of individuals should be impeded by the closed-mindedness of biased individuals (on the right or left). There is no reason why social programs should go to extremes only to fail and why people seeking a sustainable balance between a pre-industrial like environment and the economy should be regarded as inconsiquential hippies.
So what tools does the educated population of North America have to combat idiocy? That's simple: perswasive logical thinking, the scientific method and money. There is a reason why technoscience networks have done so well in recent years. It's because the people making the decisions would benifit from an increase in total knowledge and power throughout the network. For example, big companies benefit if scientific research conducted at universities produces technological advances which make them a profit. The University benefits from getting reserch funding for its students and professors. If someone who holds a position at a university also holds a position on the corporate board of a large company, then that person can direct the way money is distributed to the various universities and may influence how much is given. If somebody from the university or the large company is also an advisor to the government, then he or she can direct the way budget decisions affect the universities and the amount of freedom given to the companies. If the companies make higher profits, then economy will be doing better, and the government will prosper. But lets take this a step further, what if instead of only a few people contributing to the decision making process, many did.
What I'm proposing is an academic political party. One that serves academia and its other supporters. Bill 43 here in Alberta will allow the government to raise student tuition substantially from year to year dispite the fact that the province is one of the richest in the country. The Studen Union's efforts to combat the bill were abismal. They threw a bbq to raise awareness but didn't acutally discuss any of the details of the bill or really educate the student body. There was simply no motivation amongst the students. But this bill doesn't only affect the U of Alberta, it also affects the U of Calgary, and U of Lethbridge, not to mention smaller institutions. Each of the universities has a student body of thousands. The U of A alone has over 25,000 students, and although I'm not sure of the numbers, I'm pretty sure that the U of C and U of L combined have at least that many and probably more. At each of the Universities, nearly every body is a member of the student union and dues are paid to this union. But what if the unions unified and became the Alberta student Union. There would probably be 60,000 members. Now suppose that $2 of each of these student's dues were used to support sympathetic political candidates; those with ties to the Universities and would be looking out for student interests. Fliers and posters would be distributed about campus encouraging the vote and mentioning specific candidates' pros and cons. It is difficult to change the minds of people in office, but not that hard to replace them at the next election.
But what if this was done at the National level? In canada, there are 6 provinces that would have significant student populations. If each contributes 60,000 students, at $2 per student, then roughly $720,000 or even $1million dollars in campaign influence, and 360,000 potential voters. In many states, the affects would be even greater. California alone has over 20 public universities and many private ones, all with enormous student populations. Consider also all of the parents of these students, many of them fitting the bill and paying the taxes that directly fund the universities. At $2 per year, don't you think that they would be willing to help institute money saving practices that might also better educate their children. Consider also the parents of many university bound 11th and 12th graders. Share holders in companies affected by the university research will also be deeply interested. Of course, a candidate needs more of a platform than just education reform. A few of my suggestions will appear in future blogs.
So what tools does the educated population of North America have to combat idiocy? That's simple: perswasive logical thinking, the scientific method and money. There is a reason why technoscience networks have done so well in recent years. It's because the people making the decisions would benifit from an increase in total knowledge and power throughout the network. For example, big companies benefit if scientific research conducted at universities produces technological advances which make them a profit. The University benefits from getting reserch funding for its students and professors. If someone who holds a position at a university also holds a position on the corporate board of a large company, then that person can direct the way money is distributed to the various universities and may influence how much is given. If somebody from the university or the large company is also an advisor to the government, then he or she can direct the way budget decisions affect the universities and the amount of freedom given to the companies. If the companies make higher profits, then economy will be doing better, and the government will prosper. But lets take this a step further, what if instead of only a few people contributing to the decision making process, many did.
What I'm proposing is an academic political party. One that serves academia and its other supporters. Bill 43 here in Alberta will allow the government to raise student tuition substantially from year to year dispite the fact that the province is one of the richest in the country. The Studen Union's efforts to combat the bill were abismal. They threw a bbq to raise awareness but didn't acutally discuss any of the details of the bill or really educate the student body. There was simply no motivation amongst the students. But this bill doesn't only affect the U of Alberta, it also affects the U of Calgary, and U of Lethbridge, not to mention smaller institutions. Each of the universities has a student body of thousands. The U of A alone has over 25,000 students, and although I'm not sure of the numbers, I'm pretty sure that the U of C and U of L combined have at least that many and probably more. At each of the Universities, nearly every body is a member of the student union and dues are paid to this union. But what if the unions unified and became the Alberta student Union. There would probably be 60,000 members. Now suppose that $2 of each of these student's dues were used to support sympathetic political candidates; those with ties to the Universities and would be looking out for student interests. Fliers and posters would be distributed about campus encouraging the vote and mentioning specific candidates' pros and cons. It is difficult to change the minds of people in office, but not that hard to replace them at the next election.
But what if this was done at the National level? In canada, there are 6 provinces that would have significant student populations. If each contributes 60,000 students, at $2 per student, then roughly $720,000 or even $1million dollars in campaign influence, and 360,000 potential voters. In many states, the affects would be even greater. California alone has over 20 public universities and many private ones, all with enormous student populations. Consider also all of the parents of these students, many of them fitting the bill and paying the taxes that directly fund the universities. At $2 per year, don't you think that they would be willing to help institute money saving practices that might also better educate their children. Consider also the parents of many university bound 11th and 12th graders. Share holders in companies affected by the university research will also be deeply interested. Of course, a candidate needs more of a platform than just education reform. A few of my suggestions will appear in future blogs.
Wednesday, November 26, 2003
Professions of a Dangerous Mind
What would you do if you met a chemist? Kill it, run from it, feed it warm cookies and milk? Whatever you do don't get into a philosophical argument with it. Chemists deal with scales and numbers of things that are entirely outside the realm of normal human existence. When the number of something becomes extraordinarily large, the probability of seemingly impossible things goes up. This makes it rather possible for chemists to observe phenomena that are quite strange. For instance, the probability of any molecule to accumulate enough kinetic energy to burst its way out of the system is tiny. However, when you have 602,200,000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules, or one Mole as chemists call it, then there will be molecules escaping all over the place. If you have a rock on a beach, there is a probability that it will somehow accumulate enough energy among all of its molecules to shoot into outer space completely at random, defying gravity. However gravity and the friction of air and many other factor such as other obstacles get in its way, and the rocks on the beach tend to sort such that the largest rocks are in the area of greatest wave energy and the smaller ones will accumulate in areas right at the border where the waves can no longer affect them. Now, there is no particular reason why one rock comes incontact with one particular region of water, it is acting in a random way. But not totally random, it is controlled randomness. It seems silly to assume that any rock will ever spontaneously jump into space, but a chemist argues that it is thermodynamically possible.
So what about life? It seems astronomically improbable that anything as complex as a human being, or even an amoeba could randomly assemble itself. But then there's that issue of a system again. In this case, the system actually helps create the complex organism. If the building blocks of life are created, then one might think that it would be random for them to assemble themselves. Initially it would be. But some compounds would be able to affect the probability that more of that compound would be made. Bingo! Reproduction: Life. Random variation generated in these compounds would result in differential reproductive success, the very essence of evolution by natural selection. It is by this method that a complex organism can be created.
Just so you know, this little lesson was spawned by a discussion with a chemist about a Japanese toy robotic cat. The chemist claimed that it would be possible for that cat to spontaneously Asimov somewhere in the universe. Okay, in a universe that is infinite in time and space and matter, this might be possible. Of course the chemist points out that the universe is only infinite in space. The chemist argues his points so ardently that he even compares the formation of the cat to that of life. The probability of that cat assembling is far smaller than that of life. Its possible but not probable. Of course, robot cats exist, so one might also argue that it was by the sum of naturally selective processes acting on random chance that the cat was in fact assembled. Hmmm, if he weren't dead, I wonder what Douglas Adams would have to say on the matter.
So just remember, if you happen to meet a chemist, don't argue with it. It does not bear a pragmatic view of the universe. It will use its knowledge of semantics to its advantage and nothing will actually be accomplished by arguing with it.
So what about life? It seems astronomically improbable that anything as complex as a human being, or even an amoeba could randomly assemble itself. But then there's that issue of a system again. In this case, the system actually helps create the complex organism. If the building blocks of life are created, then one might think that it would be random for them to assemble themselves. Initially it would be. But some compounds would be able to affect the probability that more of that compound would be made. Bingo! Reproduction: Life. Random variation generated in these compounds would result in differential reproductive success, the very essence of evolution by natural selection. It is by this method that a complex organism can be created.
Just so you know, this little lesson was spawned by a discussion with a chemist about a Japanese toy robotic cat. The chemist claimed that it would be possible for that cat to spontaneously Asimov somewhere in the universe. Okay, in a universe that is infinite in time and space and matter, this might be possible. Of course the chemist points out that the universe is only infinite in space. The chemist argues his points so ardently that he even compares the formation of the cat to that of life. The probability of that cat assembling is far smaller than that of life. Its possible but not probable. Of course, robot cats exist, so one might also argue that it was by the sum of naturally selective processes acting on random chance that the cat was in fact assembled. Hmmm, if he weren't dead, I wonder what Douglas Adams would have to say on the matter.
So just remember, if you happen to meet a chemist, don't argue with it. It does not bear a pragmatic view of the universe. It will use its knowledge of semantics to its advantage and nothing will actually be accomplished by arguing with it.
Tuesday, November 25, 2003
Violent Toys?
Once again the Lion and Lamb project, a group of concerned parents have put out their "Dirty Dozen" list of toys and games that they think promote violence among children by teaching them that violence is fun. Well guess what the top three are: Ninja turtles, Transformers and Power Rangers. When did we get transported back to the early 90's? I remember having Ninja turtle toys as a kid. My brother had them too, and power rangers. One of my good friends still loves the transformers genra. To say that these toys and games make children violent is abserd. If that were true then kids our age would be alot more violent than they are today.
But what about Columbine and all the other school shootings. Those were kids our age. People have tried to blame that on so many things that it should be a crime. Marylin Manson, rap, lax gun laws, Movies, TV, American History, black people, white people, South Park, etc. So why not throw in the toys that we grew up with? What difference could it make. None. Kids who don't understand that they're playing make believe or who's parent's don't teach them that are going to end up messed up anyway. Freud may not have been right about alot of the specifics of his theories, but he was right about the fact that sex and violence are huge pre-obsessions in the human mind. He should have gone into marketing instead of psychology, he would have made a killing. In fact, if you want to know what companies to invest in every year, invest in those which are getting this free publicity. How violent they are is only an indication of how successful they'll be.
People view this action group as playing a vital role in alerting parents to the hidden future risks that these play things pose. After all, as GI Joe used to say "knowing is half the battle." Informed parents won't want to buy these dangerous toys. Give me a break. Only an irresponsible parent who wouldn't care what this group would have to say would buy their kid a toy without understanding all of its potentially violent implications. If the kid says "buy me ..." and the parent does, what kind of parent is that.
So where does this leave Leonardo, Optimus Prime and the gang? These characters have been favorites for nearly 20 years. I know an engaged couple who is actually intentionally buying Ninja turtle toys so that their kids will be able to play with them in the future in the event that they are no longer sold. Heck, at least its better than the pacifying, mind numbing drivel that's on Canadian television.
But what about Columbine and all the other school shootings. Those were kids our age. People have tried to blame that on so many things that it should be a crime. Marylin Manson, rap, lax gun laws, Movies, TV, American History, black people, white people, South Park, etc. So why not throw in the toys that we grew up with? What difference could it make. None. Kids who don't understand that they're playing make believe or who's parent's don't teach them that are going to end up messed up anyway. Freud may not have been right about alot of the specifics of his theories, but he was right about the fact that sex and violence are huge pre-obsessions in the human mind. He should have gone into marketing instead of psychology, he would have made a killing. In fact, if you want to know what companies to invest in every year, invest in those which are getting this free publicity. How violent they are is only an indication of how successful they'll be.
People view this action group as playing a vital role in alerting parents to the hidden future risks that these play things pose. After all, as GI Joe used to say "knowing is half the battle." Informed parents won't want to buy these dangerous toys. Give me a break. Only an irresponsible parent who wouldn't care what this group would have to say would buy their kid a toy without understanding all of its potentially violent implications. If the kid says "buy me ..." and the parent does, what kind of parent is that.
So where does this leave Leonardo, Optimus Prime and the gang? These characters have been favorites for nearly 20 years. I know an engaged couple who is actually intentionally buying Ninja turtle toys so that their kids will be able to play with them in the future in the event that they are no longer sold. Heck, at least its better than the pacifying, mind numbing drivel that's on Canadian television.
Tuesday, November 18, 2003
Props.
A while ago I wrote a letter to Gregory S. Paul, noted reconstruction artist for dinosaur skulls, asking if he'd help out my research by sending me larger virsions of his works so that I could measure them. After a couple of weeks I had received no reply and had determined to ask him about it when I would see him at SVP. He told me there that he haden't even given my letter a second look but that it wouldn't be a problem to send me some copies of the drawings. After SVP I continued to wait. About a month later an envelope arive containing a number of copies of skull reconstructions and my original letter with ceterain requests crossed out and notes with some of them explaining why the drawings weren't reliable for analysis. If for some reason he happens to search his own name on google and happens to find this website. Thanks man. Of course, I have quite the long list of people to acknowledge if or when I ever get published. hmmm, I wonder if the review board will look at it as original research or synthesis from a survey of the literature.
Friday, November 14, 2003
are you pondering what I'm pondering?
Still cleaning out my computer, here's some more stuff I found:
1. Did you ever wonder about those people who spend $2.00 apiece
on those little bottles of Evian water? Try spelling Evian backwards.
NAÏVE
2. Isn't making a smoking section in a restaurant like making a
peeing section in a swimming pool?
3. OK...so if the Jacksonville Jaguars are known as the "Jags"
and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers are known as the "Bucs", what does that make
the Tennessee Titans ?
4. If 4 out of 5 people SUFFER from diarrhea ... does that mean
that one enjoys it?
5. There are three religious truths:
1. Jews do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.
2. Protestants do not recognize the Pope as the leader of the
Christian faith.
3. Baptists do not recognize each other in the liquor store or at Hooters.
6.If you take an Oriental person and spin him around several
times, does he become disoriented?
7. If people from Poland are called Poles, why aren't people from Holland
called Holes?
8. Why do we say something is out of whack? What's a whack?
9. Do infants enjoy infancy as much as adults enjoy adultery?
10. If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?
11. If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
12. When someone asks you, "A penny for your thoughts" and you
put your two cents in . . . what happens to the other penny?
13. Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker?
14. Why do croutons come in airtight packages? Aren't they just
stale bread to begin with?
15. Why is a person who plays the piano called a pianist but a
person who drives a race car not called a racist?
16. Why are a wise man and a wise guy opposites?
17. Why do overlook and oversee mean opposite things?
18. If lawyers are disbarred and clergymen defrocked, doesn't it
follow that electricians can be delighted, musicians denoted, cowboys
deranged, models deposed, tree surgeons debarked, and dry cleaners
depressed?
19. If Fed Ex and UPS were to merge, would they call it Fed UP?
20. Do Lipton Tea employees take coffee breaks?
21. What hair color do they put on the driver's licenses of bald men?
22. I thought about how mothers feed their babies with tiny
little spoons and forks so I wondered what do Chinese mothers use?
Toothpicks?
23. Why do they put pictures of criminals up in the Post Office?
What are we supposed to do, write to them? Why don't they just put their
pictures on the postage stamps so the mailmen can look for them while they
deliver the mail?
24 If it's true that we are here to help others, then what exactly are the
others here for?
25You never really learn to swear until you learn to drive
26. Is it good if a vacuum really sucks?
27. Why is the third hand on the watch called the second hand?
28. If a word is misspelled in the dictionary, how would we ever know?
29. If Webster wrote the first dictionary, where did he find the words?
30. Why does "slow down" and "slow up" mean the same thing?
31. Why does "fat chance" and "slim chance" mean the same thing?
32. Why do "tug" boats push their barges?
33. Why do we sing "Take me out to the ball game" when we are
already there?
35. Why are they called "stands" when they are made for sitting?
36. Why is it called "after dark" when it really is "after light"?
37. Doesn't "expecting the unexpected" make the unexpected
expected?
38. Why is "phonics" not spelled the way it sounds?
39. If work is so terrific, why do they have to pay you to do it?
40. If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?
41. If you are cross-eyed and have dyslexia, can you read all right?
42. Why is bra singular and panties plural?
43. Why do you press harder on the buttons of a remote control when
you know the batteries are dead?
44. Why do we put suits in garment bags and garments in a suitcase?
45. How come abbreviated is such a long word?
46. Why do we wash bath towels? Aren't we clean when we use
them?
47. Why doesn't glue stick to the inside of the bottle?
48. Why do they call it a TV set when you only have one?
49. Christmas is weird. What other time of the year do you sit in
front of a dead tree and eat candy out of your socks?
1. Did you ever wonder about those people who spend $2.00 apiece
on those little bottles of Evian water? Try spelling Evian backwards.
NAÏVE
2. Isn't making a smoking section in a restaurant like making a
peeing section in a swimming pool?
3. OK...so if the Jacksonville Jaguars are known as the "Jags"
and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers are known as the "Bucs", what does that make
the Tennessee Titans ?
4. If 4 out of 5 people SUFFER from diarrhea ... does that mean
that one enjoys it?
5. There are three religious truths:
1. Jews do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.
2. Protestants do not recognize the Pope as the leader of the
Christian faith.
3. Baptists do not recognize each other in the liquor store or at Hooters.
6.If you take an Oriental person and spin him around several
times, does he become disoriented?
7. If people from Poland are called Poles, why aren't people from Holland
called Holes?
8. Why do we say something is out of whack? What's a whack?
9. Do infants enjoy infancy as much as adults enjoy adultery?
10. If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?
11. If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
12. When someone asks you, "A penny for your thoughts" and you
put your two cents in . . . what happens to the other penny?
13. Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker?
14. Why do croutons come in airtight packages? Aren't they just
stale bread to begin with?
15. Why is a person who plays the piano called a pianist but a
person who drives a race car not called a racist?
16. Why are a wise man and a wise guy opposites?
17. Why do overlook and oversee mean opposite things?
18. If lawyers are disbarred and clergymen defrocked, doesn't it
follow that electricians can be delighted, musicians denoted, cowboys
deranged, models deposed, tree surgeons debarked, and dry cleaners
depressed?
19. If Fed Ex and UPS were to merge, would they call it Fed UP?
20. Do Lipton Tea employees take coffee breaks?
21. What hair color do they put on the driver's licenses of bald men?
22. I thought about how mothers feed their babies with tiny
little spoons and forks so I wondered what do Chinese mothers use?
Toothpicks?
23. Why do they put pictures of criminals up in the Post Office?
What are we supposed to do, write to them? Why don't they just put their
pictures on the postage stamps so the mailmen can look for them while they
deliver the mail?
24 If it's true that we are here to help others, then what exactly are the
others here for?
25You never really learn to swear until you learn to drive
26. Is it good if a vacuum really sucks?
27. Why is the third hand on the watch called the second hand?
28. If a word is misspelled in the dictionary, how would we ever know?
29. If Webster wrote the first dictionary, where did he find the words?
30. Why does "slow down" and "slow up" mean the same thing?
31. Why does "fat chance" and "slim chance" mean the same thing?
32. Why do "tug" boats push their barges?
33. Why do we sing "Take me out to the ball game" when we are
already there?
35. Why are they called "stands" when they are made for sitting?
36. Why is it called "after dark" when it really is "after light"?
37. Doesn't "expecting the unexpected" make the unexpected
expected?
38. Why is "phonics" not spelled the way it sounds?
39. If work is so terrific, why do they have to pay you to do it?
40. If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?
41. If you are cross-eyed and have dyslexia, can you read all right?
42. Why is bra singular and panties plural?
43. Why do you press harder on the buttons of a remote control when
you know the batteries are dead?
44. Why do we put suits in garment bags and garments in a suitcase?
45. How come abbreviated is such a long word?
46. Why do we wash bath towels? Aren't we clean when we use
them?
47. Why doesn't glue stick to the inside of the bottle?
48. Why do they call it a TV set when you only have one?
49. Christmas is weird. What other time of the year do you sit in
front of a dead tree and eat candy out of your socks?
still true
I was going through some old word files, deleting as I went when I found a rant that I wrote tow years ago. Just because its out of date doesn't mean that it isn't true. It is as follows:
I am sick and tired of the hypocrisy and subjectivity of the English teachers across North America. Students are encouraged to be free thinkers and to write what they feel is true, while at the same time, nearly every honors level student in High School knows that good grades are generated by telling the teacher exactly what it wants to hear, which means regurgitating the prof?s lectures back to them. If a student writes a scalding critique of one of the teacher?s favorite books as an assignment, then that student will receive poor marks, nearly regardless of how well written that critique was. A prof will mask his or her subjectivity with arguments that the student made unfounded claims, or that the student had missed essential parts of the literature. Nobody gives a damn about what a person has to say on a subject until they can add five letters to their name: Dr. and Ph. D. A title which is given almost too liberally to literature majors.
A Science major must contribute genuinely new information, or scientifically valid theory to the world of science before they can be given their doctorate. A literature major rehashes what somebody more eloquent than themselves once wrote and claims that merely having an elevated understanding of how to bolster syntax or B.S. gives them the right to that esteemed title. Yet I don?t quite blame the system itself entirely. I also blame interpretive literature. Authors of the works that English majors analyze almost never, ever come out and tell people what they mean by their works. Instead they beat around the bush and pass the responsibility of deciphering their incomprehensible drivel to poor English students who often don?t give a damn that Coleridge?s opium addiction is particularly symbolic of the Romantic movement. The guy was a drug addict, the fact that he chose to write while stoned shouldn't make him any more significant than the guy on the corner who mumbles to himself.
To make English 101 a prerequisite for degrees in the sciences, business, engineering, and many other majors is absurd. Students are forced to pay to take classes that they would much rather not take, and has no bearing on their future carriers. To pay dozens of English Profs to lecture to students who memorize the material long enough to pass the exams, is a waste of student dollars and time. I, as an English student will not take anything from this class that was not taught to me in High School.
I propose a major restructuring of how language arts are taught. Instead of English 101, students should be required to take courses which will be beneficial to them in the pursuit of their particular fields. Science students should take courses on how to write stand up research reports and grant proposals, and read about scientific philosophy and ethics. Business majors should read books like the five rings, and interesting books about how to succeed in business, or the biography of Andrew Carnegie. I?m not even sure if Engineers should even have to take an English course.
The idea of the University which deliberately tries to put out a well rounded person is one which was never truly practiced and is an ideal which seems to be preserved only by the English department. Every other department sets students on a course of grater and grater specialization. This is a pragmatic course of action. It is not practical for a sedimentologist to also have an understanding of seventeenth century French poetry unless it is his hobby. Second year English courses are not even a requirement for Science students, so why force first year students into a course which makes some of them bitter enough to write one page rants in their free time?
I am sick and tired of the hypocrisy and subjectivity of the English teachers across North America. Students are encouraged to be free thinkers and to write what they feel is true, while at the same time, nearly every honors level student in High School knows that good grades are generated by telling the teacher exactly what it wants to hear, which means regurgitating the prof?s lectures back to them. If a student writes a scalding critique of one of the teacher?s favorite books as an assignment, then that student will receive poor marks, nearly regardless of how well written that critique was. A prof will mask his or her subjectivity with arguments that the student made unfounded claims, or that the student had missed essential parts of the literature. Nobody gives a damn about what a person has to say on a subject until they can add five letters to their name: Dr. and Ph. D. A title which is given almost too liberally to literature majors.
A Science major must contribute genuinely new information, or scientifically valid theory to the world of science before they can be given their doctorate. A literature major rehashes what somebody more eloquent than themselves once wrote and claims that merely having an elevated understanding of how to bolster syntax or B.S. gives them the right to that esteemed title. Yet I don?t quite blame the system itself entirely. I also blame interpretive literature. Authors of the works that English majors analyze almost never, ever come out and tell people what they mean by their works. Instead they beat around the bush and pass the responsibility of deciphering their incomprehensible drivel to poor English students who often don?t give a damn that Coleridge?s opium addiction is particularly symbolic of the Romantic movement. The guy was a drug addict, the fact that he chose to write while stoned shouldn't make him any more significant than the guy on the corner who mumbles to himself.
To make English 101 a prerequisite for degrees in the sciences, business, engineering, and many other majors is absurd. Students are forced to pay to take classes that they would much rather not take, and has no bearing on their future carriers. To pay dozens of English Profs to lecture to students who memorize the material long enough to pass the exams, is a waste of student dollars and time. I, as an English student will not take anything from this class that was not taught to me in High School.
I propose a major restructuring of how language arts are taught. Instead of English 101, students should be required to take courses which will be beneficial to them in the pursuit of their particular fields. Science students should take courses on how to write stand up research reports and grant proposals, and read about scientific philosophy and ethics. Business majors should read books like the five rings, and interesting books about how to succeed in business, or the biography of Andrew Carnegie. I?m not even sure if Engineers should even have to take an English course.
The idea of the University which deliberately tries to put out a well rounded person is one which was never truly practiced and is an ideal which seems to be preserved only by the English department. Every other department sets students on a course of grater and grater specialization. This is a pragmatic course of action. It is not practical for a sedimentologist to also have an understanding of seventeenth century French poetry unless it is his hobby. Second year English courses are not even a requirement for Science students, so why force first year students into a course which makes some of them bitter enough to write one page rants in their free time?
Thursday, November 06, 2003
Midas Touch
Allan has on several occasions remarked that as a great super villain, one would plunge the world into insufficient lighting. This would not be a horible blight on humanity, this would merely be an inconvenience. Sure things would be a little more dangerous for some people but the general effect would be that it is merely annoying. My life for the last while seems to be characterized by this sort of long string of irritating inconvieniences. I suppose that it all started when I tried to move from Edmonton to Drumheller. I'm sure that if one wanted to hear about my agrivating fight with U-haul or my infuriating dealings with my various landlords and the canadian human resources dept and immegrations, the easiest way would be to comment and ask. The most recent string of vexations appears to revolve around my uncanny ability to cause things to break. As far back as I can remember, things spontaneously break when I touch them. Chalk it up to clumsyness if you will, but consider the following. When I was younger, getting onto my bike one day the welding that held the brake apparatus to the handle bars suddenly broke. This summer I had the distinct pleasure of being alowed to examine some of the fine fossils in the collections of the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Paleontology. I was working specifically on Tyrranosaur skull material. One of the great fossils personally worked on by the famous Dr. Phillip Currie is the partial skull of Gorgosaurus Libratus. While puting the support jacket back on after taking photos (unfortunately without the label in the picture), the lacrymal (large bone in front of the eye) fell off. The base broke away cleanly merely under the force of gravity. In another instance I was working on the finest maxilla of the best and biggest Daspletosaurus torosus at the museum. Moments after taking a picure of the maxilla with the premaxilla in place in order to give an idea of the proper articulation between the two bones, the longest tooth (quite possibly the finest tooth I've ever seen on a non T. rex) fell off. Unlike the lacrymal that fell off, the base of the tooth turned to powder. I'm not quite sure that Jim Gardener won't kill me the next time I see him. On a day camp in which the children are allowed to dig at a moch dig site where there happens to be real amber, a child found a particularly large pice of cretaceous amber. I told him to give it to me to put into the vile that we kept amber in. The force of the stone hitting my hand from two inches above was enough to reduce it to dust.
Recently, i have noticed that the quality of TV reception decreases dramatically when I enter the room.
Recently, i have noticed that the quality of TV reception decreases dramatically when I enter the room.
Sunday, October 26, 2003
SVP
Well, now that exams are over, I have time to update my site. Last week was the infamous meeting for the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. In addition to much frivolity there were some very interesting talks and posters presented. Several come to mind right off the bat. One of the more interesting talks was given by Nick Longrich, a fellow that I was privilaged enough to discuss problems in paleontology with over the summer while both of us were at the Royal Tyrrell Museum. His talk "Archaeopteryx: two wings or four?" discussed his observations that archaeoptery posessed a set of flight aiding feathers on its hind limbs. Much of his observations came from the berlin specimen and its counterblock which also preserved many excellent feather impressions. While these leg feathers were not as extensive as those of the forelimb which have been classically recognised, it does show that the four wing design is basal to all birds, even if not as expressed as in microraptor. Other observations on hip structure have also shown that it was infact more possible for birds to glide with the limbs in a splayed position than previously thought.
Another excellent talk was on the changing views on evolution and paleontology in the works of Mark Twain. There were also several excellent talks on ceratosaurs, and on new species of Allosaurs, as well as a jouvenille allosaur specimen preserving most of the skull. An intreguing poster demonstrated that the gorgosaur skull at the Childrens Museum of Pitsburg shows what appears to be a tumor within its brain case.
The theme of this years dinosaur talks however seemed to be CT scanning. Nearly everybody is trying to CT scan all of their fossils. While this is very interesting technology, I question the necessity of such expensive techniques. dozens of people made references to how they used extremely expensive software, normally reserved for the movie industry, to make their 3-D models. The set up costs alone are astronomical. A couple of guys made 3-D models of a dynonychus arm so that they could demonstrate how it moved. The didn't however have time to measure the accuracy of their techniques by reproducing the methods with other extant animals. Therefore, their results may be accurate, but we can't be sure. Despite all of this, dozens of people flocked to ask them questions simply because of the cool factor inherent in their work. While I commend dinosaur science for being the first to use such techniques, I think that hte paleontologyical comunity should realize that computing power should not limit the quality of research being done, particularly if the computing is done at the expence of more inclusive research methods.
Another excellent talk was on the changing views on evolution and paleontology in the works of Mark Twain. There were also several excellent talks on ceratosaurs, and on new species of Allosaurs, as well as a jouvenille allosaur specimen preserving most of the skull. An intreguing poster demonstrated that the gorgosaur skull at the Childrens Museum of Pitsburg shows what appears to be a tumor within its brain case.
The theme of this years dinosaur talks however seemed to be CT scanning. Nearly everybody is trying to CT scan all of their fossils. While this is very interesting technology, I question the necessity of such expensive techniques. dozens of people made references to how they used extremely expensive software, normally reserved for the movie industry, to make their 3-D models. The set up costs alone are astronomical. A couple of guys made 3-D models of a dynonychus arm so that they could demonstrate how it moved. The didn't however have time to measure the accuracy of their techniques by reproducing the methods with other extant animals. Therefore, their results may be accurate, but we can't be sure. Despite all of this, dozens of people flocked to ask them questions simply because of the cool factor inherent in their work. While I commend dinosaur science for being the first to use such techniques, I think that hte paleontologyical comunity should realize that computing power should not limit the quality of research being done, particularly if the computing is done at the expence of more inclusive research methods.
Sunday, October 12, 2003
Kill Bill
Quintin Tarantino's 4th movie, "Kill Bill" is absolutely spectacular. The Village Voice called it the most violent american movie ever made, and while I don't necessarily agree with that distinction, it is at least one of the most violent. Limbs, heads, scalps, eyes and massive quantities of squirting blood were all removed from bodies. I find this somewhat amusing because it's a Miramax movie which means that it was in fact made by the Disney corporation. As if Disney didn't have enough problems as it is. Noticably lacking from the movie however were numerous drug references (disney influence, i don't know?). But even without the heroin flowing as freely as the blood, Kill Bill is an incredible black comedy. Where other movies would have some kind of sharp quib towards an offender of a main character, Kill Bill had a sharp blade in the process of dismemberment. I highly recomend this movie to anyone with a morbid sense of humour. If you think death is funny, go see Kill Bill. Then go out immediately afterwards and buy the sound track. Allan did, I copied it and we both think that the sound track is awesome.
SVP
Beginning wednesday morning the this year's meeting for the society of vertebrate paleontology. This will be my second such conference. This year's meeting is in St. Paul Minisota. Unfortunately I'm not quite ready to present a talk or even a poster at the conference, unlike several of my peers who are a year ahead of me. A group of five undergrad students from the U of A are going. We're all flying from Edmonton International to some airport in Winnepeg, Manitoba. If all goes correctly, there will be a car waiting for us there and we'll drive through the night and arive in St. Paul hopefully by 7:30 so that we can register and get a good seat for some of the first talks. My Advisor, Dr. Caldwell, who I have never had any intention of stabbing, should be giving a talk that morning.
In all honesty, a conference is just an excuse for over a thousand scientists to spend practically a whole week getting drunk in the eavening, then shmoozing and dropping names all day. At least that's the plan. Mostly I'll be trying to get my name out there and try to get some friendly contacts who wouldn't mind sending me some reprints of theirs. I am particularly interested in talking to Gregory S. Paul, who has yet to respond to the letter that I sent him.
In all honesty, a conference is just an excuse for over a thousand scientists to spend practically a whole week getting drunk in the eavening, then shmoozing and dropping names all day. At least that's the plan. Mostly I'll be trying to get my name out there and try to get some friendly contacts who wouldn't mind sending me some reprints of theirs. I am particularly interested in talking to Gregory S. Paul, who has yet to respond to the letter that I sent him.
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
Help TV
A couple of weeks ago, Allan, Joel and I were quite bored and happened to be watching a program called Help TV, in which people call or write in for advice. Every once in a while, an e-mail address would come up for people to write in to. Well, Allan thought it would be funny to write in something along the lines of "I'm a chronic masterbater, what should I do?" and sent it in. I jokingly remarked "I think that my prof is steeling my research, should I just stab him?" which Allan, unbeknownst to me, wrote in with my e-mail address for reply. The following is the reply that I received just the other day:
From: "Lindsay Elleker"
Subject: Help!TV Reply to your Question
Urgent New
Will, Please don't "stab him"!
Instead, set an appointment time with him (that's good for both of you
with no distractions or interruptions). Rather than "confronting" him
maybe just ask him his thoughts: re: your research project and how
credit for the project's results is to work in the future. Do this in a
non-threatening yet collaborative way (Read "Getting to Yes" by Ury &
Fischer). Be sure to remain open-hearted, non-defensive and curious. DO NOT ACCUSE HIM AND NO THREATS! Explore all options - his and
yours!!
From, Nancy Hack
Chartered Mediator
Help!TV
Since this reply was several weeks after it was initially sent in, I was very tempted to reply:
Sorry, too late.
P.S. Once more for clarification, I did not acutally write the original e-mail, not have I ever or will I ever commit or conspire to commit murder.
From: "Lindsay Elleker"
Subject: Help!TV Reply to your Question
Urgent New
Will, Please don't "stab him"!
Instead, set an appointment time with him (that's good for both of you
with no distractions or interruptions). Rather than "confronting" him
maybe just ask him his thoughts: re: your research project and how
credit for the project's results is to work in the future. Do this in a
non-threatening yet collaborative way (Read "Getting to Yes" by Ury &
Fischer). Be sure to remain open-hearted, non-defensive and curious. DO NOT ACCUSE HIM AND NO THREATS! Explore all options - his and
yours!!
From, Nancy Hack
Chartered Mediator
Help!TV
Since this reply was several weeks after it was initially sent in, I was very tempted to reply:
Sorry, too late.
P.S. Once more for clarification, I did not acutally write the original e-mail, not have I ever or will I ever commit or conspire to commit murder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)