Jump to content

New Yorker Article About Tarbosaurus Smuggler Eric Prokopi


Boesse

Recommended Posts

Thanks Agrilus for these data .

Most interesting .

I'm somewhat astounded by the curve coming from Web of science with its exponential increase starting in the nineties .

Any explanation for this phenomenon ? I doubt very much it could be related to a corresponding increase in fundings or in paleo finds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if I sounded short with you. No matter how many times you say it, you are describing the personal, ideosyncratic response to paleontology. Here's the distinction I drew in an earlier post:

But this is all very personal - ideosyncratic - for amateurs and professionals alike. Paleontology is currently making no significant impact on humanity; paleontology is not finding an immunization against HIV, it is not discovering the Higgs boson, it is not finding planets around other stars. Paleontology is backwater science. Paleontology currently diverts us, broadens our horizons, and disciplines minds . . . for just a few of us.

Interesting discussion but I disagree on what is significant. I like discussing fossils here. How are we doing this with electrons, networks, computers all realted to our electrical power system to run, 50 plus percent generated still by coal, and much more by petroleum and gas, and some wind/solar. So til we find an affordable -- in this economy the luxury of exotic power if probably not coming soon. Nuclear who knows. So to find those resources you need geology and stratigraphy, you need biostratigraphy to find and help correlate the layers of mostly paleozoic and mesozoic rock with the hydrocarbon and coal resources.

So paleontology is making a significant contribution to my life and yours, you would not have power if some geologist had not helped his company find oil, gas or coal and continues to do so -- I did coal for e34 years at the Illinois Geological Survey a state where coal and oil and gas are important. They are now saying we may actually go back to an exporter of petroleum and gas resources soon so even more important for our economy. It is basic life it puts bread on my table -- they have to bake it -- needs energy and we are back to that, grain needs energy in farm equipment to grow, harvest and so on.

We take too darn much for granted folks, if you cannot grow it (and you need energy to grow) or mine it we are in trouble, and geology underpins alot of our economy whether you like it or not. And paleontology in form of biostratigraphy is very important. We not not have all stratigraphy solved, even in the Illinois Basin where I worked for many years. Lots to still do and paleontology will be important. My problem is that our managers and politicians do not get this, the schools responding to this put money elsewhere and paleo training to provide new researchers to do the biostratigraphy is being poorly supported. When the current generations of geologists and biostratigraphers retire and lots of us have and are the companies and our society will find out just how important.

No paleontology is still very important whether you know it or not to the underpinnings of our energy and mining industry in sedimentary strata!

nuff said :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a point that I should have made earlier, but Paleontology represents one of the best ways to test the predictions of Evolutionary Biology theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Agrilus for these data .

Most interesting .

I'm somewhat astounded by the curve coming from Web of science with its exponential increase starting in the nineties .

Any explanation for this phenomenon ? I doubt very much it could be related to a corresponding increasing in fundings or in paleo finds

Hi taj,

Most likely that represents an increase in scientific publications in general, across the board. I imagine if you examined the publication record in any number of active areas of research they would show the same trend. Still, it seems paleontologists have kept pace with the times and are publishing at an increased rate. I also don't know if a bias in the actual database data could have effected the end results, i.e. less documented publications before a certain date. A more thorough bibliometric analysis could probably tell for sure, but I'd rather be opening fossils. :) The citation rate tables have greater import for this debate any way as they address Harry's claim that paleontology is not considered important science.

"They ... savoured the strange warm glow of being much more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant of ordinary things."

-- Terry Pratchett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Russ and THobern,

Great points and well said! Russ I especailly like your response. You make a strong case for biostratigraphy impacting our daily lives.

"They ... savoured the strange warm glow of being much more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant of ordinary things."

-- Terry Pratchett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Russ and THobern,

Great points and well said! Russ I especailly like your response. You make a strong case for biostratigraphy impacting our daily lives.

Thanks, well I used to have long discussions with my dad why (beside I am a collector) did I get into paleontology and stratigraphy and how did that put bread on his table.

Probably the biggest thing is that geoscience in general is a foundational endeavor for society. For us to function we need energy and minerals for many of our raw resources to make the things we want and use, and energy to do it. Same goes with all the stuff we grow, energy is involved. And Paleo is sure one component.

The bigger problem is so many people just plug their computer, TV, toaster into the outlet, or turn on the gas in their stove and cook with little or no thought how that all got there.

We are so out of touch with the daily necessities and conveniences that paleontology and geology in general do contribute to our lives. But without it would be a lot tougher he he

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fossil forum is probably slightly (understatement of the week) biased towards the importance of Paleontology. There is probably little of more importance to most of us here. The question I assume Eric was posing (again, we will never know the true context) is how important it is to the rest of the world. WE may think it is important for everyone else, but I doubt many of them do. In fact, if you took a poll on the street of this "supposedly" educated country, I would wager most could not even define the word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that could be said about the farmers who produce our food, do we even think much about them and their importance, or the miners who get our coal, our metals our heavy earth and such for the stuff in our tech -- computers and smart phones. As a species we often tend to focus on our own little world and are clueless how we got all we have and do not think much about it unless someone threatens to take it away...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fossil forum is probably slightly (understatement of the week) biased towards the importance of Paleontology. There is probably little of more importance to most of us here. The question I assume Eric was posing (again, we will never know the true context) is how important it is to the rest of the world. WE may think it is important for everyone else, but I doubt many of them do. In fact, if you took a poll on the street of this "supposedly" educated country, I would wager most could not even define the word.

Hi steelhead9,

Public opinion polls, or knowledge polls, would still be within the realm of idiosyncratic response. Same as a poll here in the forum. No doubt Harry would jump on both of those right away for just that reason. On the other hand, an analysis of citation rates normalized by publication counts, the Article Influence Score, is an unbiased measure of how important the scientific community feels those particular journals are. Not the paleontology community, the scientific community. It is very much a measure of how important paleontology research is. Besides, lack of public knowledge about something does not decrease its importance. Asking people on the street to define electricity might produce the same results but I doubt anyone would argue against its importance.

I too feel for Eric and his family, especially his family. The end result will not be good for him or them. I imagine that you are correct in thinking that Eric does value paleontology and fossils as more than simple 'rocks.' THobern probably came the closest so far in saying that Eric is just upset right now, I'm sure anyone would be, and so is making comments that don't really reflect his lifelong passion for fossils. Still, his comments are being viewed by the world and as such they unfortunately reflect upon everyone who sells, imports, buys, even collects unique and wonderful fossils. Given that, I see good reason to refute them.

"They ... savoured the strange warm glow of being much more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant of ordinary things."

-- Terry Pratchett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, the article. Quite frankly, I have no real problems with what the man did. Most of the arguments the "protestors" had were the same class warfare based [stuff] the occupy morons spew. Fossils shouldn't be owned by wealthy people they should be the property of the people. *barf* The fossils he sells would mostly end up in the back room of the museum as research material. A few might make it to the floor, but that's it. The arguments against his selling these fossils are based in what amounts to jealousy and are the same ones often used against amateurs.

As for the ongoing debate, place me with Harry here. I LOVE paleontology. I love the collecting aspect. I love the research and science aspect. Top to bottom it is my favorite science and hobby. Having said that....

Without going to the extreme of nothing really matters in the end, paleontology has a minimal impact on humanity and that is the simple truth of the matter. We can look to paleontology to tell us that global warming is a farce. But aside from upsetting Al, what real impact is that?

We can use it to guide us to oil and natural gas. OK, but that is a small part of the process and not a necessity. They could actually do fine finding the stuff without that info.

Knowing the history of species and the like is nice, but it does absolutely nothing tangible for us. All of that is solely an exercise in knowledge for the sake of knowledge. It is NOT a case of if we don't know history we are doomed to repeat it. How and why dinos croaked has NOTHING to do us or anything we do. Nor does the evolution of a clam. Or anything else we study. All the arguments and graphs in the world can't erase that simple reality.

Now, when a paleontological study figures the cure for breast cancer, it will have an impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Don,

I'd be interested to know how we can look to paleontology to tell us global warming is a farce. You mention 'truth' and 'fact' a number of times yet you provide no real evidence to support your claims. Can you please tell us where you are getting your facts?

As for Eric, you not having a problem with what he did is meaningless. A number of national governments took issue with what he did, and frankly Eric himself has acknowledged that he willfully broke the law.

"They ... savoured the strange warm glow of being much more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant of ordinary things."

-- Terry Pratchett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that could be said about the farmers who produce our food, do we even think much about them and their importance, or the miners who get our coal, our metals our heavy earth and such for the stuff in our tech -- computers and smart phones. As a species we often tend to focus on our own little world and are clueless how we got all we have and do not think much about it unless someone threatens to take it away...

I'm pretty sure most people would consider farming and coal mining far more important than paleontology, and probably be somewhat more knowledgeable about it. Reality is, as much as we who are interested in paleontology would argue esoteric scientific values, it does not contribute a whole lot to the masses of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The temperature and CO2 levels on earth have never been the same all the way through. They fluctuate. It is a natural occurence that is shown i the fossil record. We are, geologically speaking, just coming out of an ice age. Temperatures rising would be expected. Never mind that most of the figures have been shown to have been manipulated. But that is a different argument.

I say the truth is that paleontology has no real impact on humanity. The evidence is simple. I can find not a single instance of anything from paleontology doing anything major to further human existence. As I said, paleontology is basically a science of knowledge for the sake of knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Don,

I'd be interested to know how we can look to paleontology to tell us global warming is a farce. You mention 'truth' and 'fact' a number of times yet you provide no real evidence to support your claims. Can you please tell us where you are getting your facts?

As for Eric, you not having a problem with what he did is meaningless. A number of national governments took issue with what he did, and frankly Eric himself has acknowledged that he willfully broke the law.

I think only two national governments took issue with what Eric did. Us because we are very interested in the natural resources of Mongloia, and Mongolia because the skeleton sold for a million bucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi steelhead9,

Public opinion polls, or knowledge polls, would still be within the realm of idiosyncratic response. Same as a poll here in the forum. No doubt Harry would jump on both of those right away for just that reason. On the other hand, an analysis of citation rates normalized by publication counts, the Article Influence Score, is an unbiased measure of how important the scientific community feels those particular journals are. Not the paleontology community, the scientific community. It is very much a measure of how important paleontology research is. Besides, lack of public knowledge about something does not decrease its importance. Asking people on the street to define electricity might produce the same results but I doubt anyone would argue against its importance.

I too feel for Eric and his family, especially his family. The end result will not be good for him or them. I imagine that you are correct in thinking that Eric does value paleontology and fossils as more than simple 'rocks.' THobern probably came the closest so far in saying that Eric is just upset right now, I'm sure anyone would be, and so is making comments that don't really reflect his lifelong passion for fossils. Still, his comments are being viewed by the world and as such they unfortunately reflect upon everyone who sells, imports, buys, even collects unique and wonderful fossils. Given that, I see good reason to refute them.

I agree lack of public knowledge does not increase or decrease the importance of something, but it defines it's importance. I know you don't honestly think as many people are as ignorant about electricity as they are about paleontology. Why? Because it is so much more important to people's lives

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... I can find not a single instance of anything from paleontology doing anything major to further human existence...

Oil and gas are paleontology. Have they not furthered human existence?

I think only two national governments took issue with what Eric did. Us because we are very interested in the natural resources of Mongloia, and Mongolia because the skeleton sold for a million bucks.

From what I understand Mongolia became involved before the specimen was sold. But perhaps I have that wrong. I have been honest with everything I've said here. Go and do a street poll and ask people to define electricity, let's see what happens.

"They ... savoured the strange warm glow of being much more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant of ordinary things."

-- Terry Pratchett

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oil and gas are paleontology. Have they not furthered human existence?

Totally. What several now just do not get -- was a coal geologist for 34 years -- is that physical stratigraphy that correlates the rock layers containing the coal cannot be done accuately without fossil biostratigraphy. Sure you can drill a few holes across the basin, take some geophysical logs from oil tests and make a framework to try and figure out where coals are. But today still we need palynology of the spores in the coal, the marine fossils in overlying marine beds to make certain the coal of interest we want to exploit from outcrop A to subsurface B, C, and D and so on is same. Paleontology is important much so to the energy resource geology. You take too much for granted when some here say that we could do ok without. And that attitude with some of my managers and politicians is short-sighted, we do not know it all, there still is much correlation work needed that relies heavily on biostratigraphy, not just because you assume we could do the work without it is not true. Try working in the field 30 plus years before you judge folks, you know not what you talk about.

Paleontology is important and the science loses and mistakes build in correlations without good precise up todate biostratigraphic analysis by competent paleontologists they no longer want to employ. Believe me I had this argument with geologists who were managers where I worked but not stratigraphers, biostratigraphers or any way shape or form understanding of mineral and energy exploration tools needed for a good analysis.

Regarding electricity I am amazed that many people are clueless as to how we get it. They only know anything when prices go up because of the tightness of energy resources we need to explore for. Most people just plug into the wall and assume.. and you know what they say about that word :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When paleontology was in its infancy, it was proving the world we lived in was so much bigger than we thought. It opened new doors that lead to paths other than religion. You could say when that door opened, it paved the way for more sciences, further advances in chemistry, physics, etc. It built curiosity. One could assume that the scientific revolution started by such curiosity is why we ever discovered the Higgs Boson or extraterrestrial planets. That curiosity has put us on the moon, put machines on other planets, is constantly on the verge of finding out if we are alone in the universe...

Paleontology, in particular, showed us where we came from and who we are...at least to the extent possible. It did such a good job, that the realm of "where are we from" has been handed over to physicits and astronomers. Regardless of what paleontology has, or hasn't, done for us recently, it deserves the greatest respect. As I recently said on another forum, make your money, dig your fossils, build your collection, build your business...but do it responsibly.

Do I think the Tarbosaurus would have stood the paleontological world on end? Heck no. But the whole system of legalities is set in place so paleontology can keep doing what it's done for over 200 years. I am a huge advocate of private fossil sales and collecting, but when you start walking the tight-rope, it's disrespect for what paleontology has done for us and disrespect for those who paved the way.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don's characterization (below) of my question is apt.

Well, this discussion has certainly taken an interesting turn. Harry brings up an uncormfortable question, one certain to make people squirm and get defensive, but in this day of tight research budgets it's probably good to try think of an articulate and convincing response. ...

Don

I invited Cris (or anyone) to explain why he thought current paleontology is important to humanity. I stipulated that paleontology was important to some (me included) for personal, subjective reasons; but, that sort of importance is different from significance to humankind. I endorsed Brent Ashcraft's idea that, We study paleontology because it adds richness and texture to our lives.

I also stipulated that I was talking about current paleontology, not the breakthroughs of the past.

I posted, This is a philosophical argument, an effort to get subscribers to think about unexamined values. What's important and why? And some good insights have appeared. ('Smokeriderdon' seems to have a good grasp of the invitation to air out those unexamined values.)

Unhappily, as predicted by 'FossilDAWG,' some subscribers here have gotten squirmy and defensive, taking churlish potshots at me and at (here defenseless) Eric Prokopi. Oh, well! Some chaff with the wheat is inevitable, I suppose.

Poor Eric! Eric was never verbal, and you can see in the New Yorker article that his wife was protecting him from the reporter. But, that's history now. Eric is getting due process in court; and, that's is all that I have advocated.

http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page

 

What seest thou else

In the dark backward and abysm of time?

---Shakespeare, The Tempest

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oil and gas are paleontology. Have they not furthered human existence?

From what I understand Mongolia became involved before the specimen was sold. But perhaps I have that wrong. I have been honest with everything I've said here. Go and do a street poll and ask people to define electricity, let's see what happens.

I would not argue one bit with your honesty. Problem is we live in a world of grays, not black and white. Mongolia became involved two days before the sale, but the tarbosaurus was actually estimated to go for more than it actually sold for. Not really the point though. Here is a real world postulation. Go on the street and ask people if they would rather have their tax dollars spent on research and development of electricity or on the study of dinosaurs. Also, it is a stretch to call oil and gas paleontology. You and I know it really isn't, but it falls far more under the category of geology (yes, I am aware paleontology is part of geology). So here is another thought. If gas and oil companies are allowed to exploit public lands for profit, why not commercial fossil hunters. Not really that unreasonable if it is all paleontology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When paleontology was in its infancy, it was proving the world we lived in was so much bigger than we thought. It opened new doors that lead to paths other than religion. You could say when that door opened, it paved the way for more sciences, further advances in chemistry, physics, etc. It built curiosity. One could assume that the scientific revolution started by such curiosity is why we ever discovered the Higgs Boson or extraterrestrial planets. That curiosity has put us on the moon, put machines on other planets, is constantly on the verge of finding out if we are alone in the universe...

Paleontology, in particular, showed us where we came from and who we are...at least to the extent possible. It did such a good job, that the realm of "where are we from" has been handed over to physicits and astronomers. Regardless of what paleontology has, or hasn't, done for us recently, it deserves the greatest respect. As I recently said on another forum, make your money, dig your fossils, build your collection, build your business...but do it responsibly.

Do I think the Tarbosaurus would have stood the paleontological world on end? Heck no. But the whole system of legalities is set in place so paleontology can keep doing what it's done for over 200 years. I am a huge advocate of private fossil sales and collecting, but when you start walking the tight-rope, it's disrespect for what paleontology has done for us and disrespect for those who paved the way.

Nick

Hi Nick: I mean no disrespect here, but putting people on the moon, exploring other planets, etc does nothing to feed the starving and disenfranchised masses. Because we here on the forum love paleontology we are narrow minded in our view. Do you think the diggers in Mongolia, who probably fed their families for years from Eric's tarbosaurus, gave a hoot about paleontology? And, please, again no disrespect intended as I, like you, are all for the digging and sale of fossils, but did I not see a chilotherium for sale on your website?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I say the truth is that paleontology has no real impact on humanity. The evidence is simple. I can find not a single instance of anything from paleontology doing anything major to further human existence. As I said, paleontology is basically a science of knowledge for the sake of knowledge.

You're saying that showing us the origins of life, confirming Evolution, refuting the Creationist worldview, shifting Religious debates and revolutionising the way we think about our place in the Universe is just knowledge for the sake of knowledge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ability to investigate our own origins, and our planet's, is one of the things that makes us "human". Paleontology isn't any more or less important than music, poetry, literature.....but the world would be a much sadder place without them. No, they don't cure disease or make a ton of money, but the humanities, and the quest of knowledge for knowledge's sake are the things that make us different from the other animals on our planet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should add that another pragmatic reason to study the subject is that we all have a vested interest in knowing what happens to biodiversity when entering into sudden climate shifts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ability to investigate our own origins, and our planet's, is one of the things that makes us "human". Paleontology isn't any more or less important than music, poetry, literature.....but the world would be a much sadder place without them. No, they don't cure disease or make a ton of money, but the humanities, and the quest of knowledge for knowledge's sake are the things that make us different from the other animals on our planet.

:fistbump: This is very similar to what I was thinking earlier today when reading this topic.

I should add that another pragmatic reason to study the subject is that we all have a vested interest in knowing what happens to biodiversity when entering into sudden climate shifts.

Not just what happens to biodiversity from climate shifts, but anything we have done "unnatural" to the planet. Lowering water quality, over fishing, destruction of environments, global warming, etc. The only way to fully understand what we've done (and hopefully reverse it) is to understand how the planet was before we started messing with it.

LINK

youtube-logo-png-46031.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...