New Yorker Article About Tarbosaurus Smuggler Eric Prokopi

[Wrangellian]

Thank you Cris and Scylla!

I have had dissatisfying experiences with the Paleo Soc. in my area who lost their trust in me and lambasted me just for daring to suggest I should be able to sell common fossils. I had no ulterior motives other than to make back some of the expenses of collecting and make some room for more fossils. The stated goal of this soc. is for amateurs and pros to collaborate. I have trust issues with pros as a result of my experience with the Soc. and from reading the book Sidetracked, but I believe there are pros out there who are not so anal and I am trying to figure out who they are and build relationships with them. There don't seem to be any in this province at least, though, as all the ones I know about are tight with the Paleo Soc. (Alliance) and presumably agree with their policy against the sale of any BC fossil (the policy doesn't include fossils from elsewhere, interestingly enough).

I was not planning to become a dealer, I can see how the unfettered pursuit of money tends to affect things. Maybe the field should be regulated somehow. Apparently certain political factions want to deregulate everything (in favor of the amateur collector/dealer) while the opposite faction wants to overregulate or just ban outright (favoring the pro), but there must be some middle ground that can be reached.

Edited January 27, 2013 by Wrangellian

[donckey]

Steelhead9

I read your reaction and I don't think you got my points!

First I'll ask you to read the comments of FossilDAWG about respecting laws outside the US. He says exactly how I think about it, but I am not so good with words.

Another thing I noticed, is that you are reading things which are not written down, and you make assumptions which make me wonder!

You tell me that I said: that US-people have the nerve to.........etc

I really said: some (US)people (on this forum) have the nerve to state...... etc.

And that is exactly what you are doing in your reaction. So where you think I say "US-people" please keep in mind I mean you. (just look what you are saying man)

Then there is your assumption "that Americans are not well-liked in other countries"

I can not recall saying that. But apparently you have the opinion that the rest of the world dislikes Americans.I am sorry you do.

I also tell you that you are wrong there, and for me, I ask you not to tell me how I think about Americans, because you really don't know.

Another assumption you make is that my person (and others?) have a stigma attached to fossil-dealers.

Wrong again. As a matter of fact I am very glad that there are fossil-dealers. I know many of them and I think they are important giving others, including amateurs and professionals to obtain species which they can not obtain otherwise. Fossil-dealers who also do there own prepping or get prepping organised add a tremendous value on certain species. And last but not least many off them provide with there websides a lot of (scientific) knowlegde.

So do not tell me that I have something against fossil-dealers.

Still I do think that some fossil-dealers / fossilhunters do a lot of damage on fossil locations for commercial reasons and also for asking a lot of money for some finds and therefore they are accountable for shutting down fossil locations for amateurs.

You can decide for yourself which category of fossil-dealers you belong to.

At the other hand I want to tell you that I think it is a nobel thing that somebody like you tries to protect Eric but please do this in the right perspective.

Peter

Edited January 27, 2013 by donckey

[jpc]

The irony here is that institutional paleontology is mostly operated on our tax dollars . . . federal and state tax dollars. In effect, we pay the pro-pals to keep us from adding more richness and texture to our lives.

Harry -

I find this line of reasoning to be pretty offensive. I am both a pro-pal and a private collector. No... you don't pay me to keep you from adding more richness and texture to your life What a load of huey.... And neither do the citizens of Wyoming. the State of Wyoming pays me to be part of a team whose mission is to teach our citizens and visitors about the rich history of the earth, and its economic benefits. Quite to the contrary of your assault, we at our museum enrich many lives with not only our displays and our teaching programs, but also by helping out many people who come in and say...."hey, what is this rock I found?" Yeah, man, I just kept from adding to that citizen's richness and texture and whatever,. NONONO.. I just ADDED to their richness and texture. And yes, I am proud that the state pays me to fulfill peoples' lives in whatever small way.

Edited January 27, 2013 by jpc

[steelhead9]

Steelhead9

I read your reaction and I don't think you got my points!

First I'll ask you to read the comments of FossilDAWG about respecting laws outside the US. He says exactly how I think about it, but I am not so good with words.

Another thing I noticed, is that you are reading things which are not written down, and you make assumptions which make me wonder!

You tell me that I said: that US-people have the nerve to.........etc

I really said: some (US)people (on this forum) have the nerve to state...... etc.

And that is exactly what you are doing in your reaction. So where you think I say "US-people" please keep in mind I mean you. (just look what you are saying man)

Then there is your assumption "that Americans are not well-liked in other countries"

I can not recall saying that. But apparently you have the opinion that the rest of the world dislikes Americans.I am sorry you do.

I also tell you that you are wrong there, and for me, I ask you not to tell me how I think about Americans, because you really don't know.

Another assumption you make is that my person (and others?) have a stigma attached to fossil-dealers.

Wrong again. As a matter of fact I am very glad that there are fossil-dealers. I know many of them and I think they are important giving others, including amateurs and professionals to obtain species which they can not obtain otherwise. Fossil-dealers who also do there own prepping or get prepping organised add a tremendous value on certain species. And last but not least many off them provide with there websides a lot of (scientific) knowlegde.

So do not tell me that I have something against fossil-dealers.

Still I do think that some fossil-dealers / fossilhunters do a lot of damage on fossil locations for commercial reasons and also for asking a lot of money for some finds and therefore they are accountable for shutting down fossil locations for amateurs.

You can decide for yourself which category of fossil-dealers you belong to.

At the other hand I want to tell you that I think it is a nobel thing that somebody like you tries to protect Eric but please do this in the right perspective.

Peter

Hi Peter: I wasn't trying to attack you personally, just offer my opinion on your observations. What you said exactly in your first post is "What really concerns me is that there are (US) people who even have the nerve to state that non-US-laws are not valid for them." Since I am a "US person" I understood you meant me, just not me personally. The point I was trying to make is that in fact some non- US -laws are not valid here. Specifically, in this case, Mongolian fossil laws. It is not arrogance, just fact.

I never stated that you personally don't like Americans, but I think many people would agree that there often is an underlying dislike of Americans, sometimes deservedly and sometimes not.

Also, my observations about fossil dealers was not directed at you. Just my opinions about a subject you brought up.

I actually completely agree with you about money and self-interest. The whole point of my post was to show that everyone involved in this situation is motivated by money and self-interest, not just Eric.

[Harry Pristis]

Harry -

I find this line of reasoning to be pretty offensive. I am both a pro-pal and a private collector. No... you don't pay me to keep you from adding more richness and texture to your life What a load of huey.... And neither do the citizens of Wyoming. the State of Wyoming pays me to be part of a team whose mission is to teach our citizens and visitors about the rich history of the earth, and its economic benefits. Quite to the contrary of your assault, we at our museum enrich many lives with not only our displays and our teaching programs, but also by helping out many people who come in and say...."hey, what is this rock I found?" Yeah, man, I just kept from adding to that citizen's richness and texture and whatever,. NONONO.. I just ADDED to their richness and texture. And yes, I am proud that the state pays me to fulfill peoples' lives in whatever small way.

The things I'm saying shouldn't be offensive to individuals; I am describing the structural relationship between professional paleontologists and amateur collectors in present-day society. I am pointing out motivations, reward and cost -- the drivers within the structure.

I am sure that you, 'jpc', do good things for amateurs on a one-to-one basis, just as some pro-pals have done things to help me (and Cris, and others). I am not writing about day-to-day interactions; I am writing about the larger power structure that links pro-pals and amateurs.

So, try to expand your thinking beyond your personal role in that larger structure. This is not about you or your tax-payer-funded job in Wyoming; this is a much more expansive question I am trying to explore. I'd guess that relatively few pro-pals and very few amateurs have given this much thought; maybe that's why there is a squirmy and defensive reaction from a few here.

[AgrilusHunter]

Hi Harry,

Frankly, jpc is likely not the only forum member offended by that post. This situation was precisely the point of my earlier post and could have been easily avoided by a higher level of conversation.

Are your questions of merit? Yes! I believe they are. As such, by themselves they should not be inherently offensive. However, your particular brand of rhetoric does not promote a healthy conversation around those questions. There is no deep philosophical thought within your posts, only rhetoric masquerading as such. Your posts are carefully designed to not be directly offensive to any one person; instead you use a fisherman's approach and simply bait the hook and wait. The age old 'Us vs. Them' rhetorical device that you employed in the post jpc took offense to was one such baited hook. When a member here is offended by a post, and responds, you tend to employ an additional rhetorical device, the supremacy defense. This is a logical fallacy where you state the other person simply failed to 'understand' your comment or 'had not given it much thought.' Thereby placing you in a position of false superiority. None of these rhetorical tools/devices are particularly complex, I learned about them as a freshman in college. That said, I did not expect to see them used here against other members of the forum.

Discussing the larger linkage structure between the professional and amateur realms of paleontology sounds beneficial and interesting. However, unless we can do so civilly all we will achieve is the widening of any pre-existing gaps. I expect you knew this already though.

Edited January 28, 2013 by AgrilusHunter

[jpevahouse]

There are many unanswered basic questions in paleontology which need to be answered. Why did dinosaurs become extinct? What caused the extinction of most species of animals which lived on the earth?

These are fundamental questions about the past which if answered may tell us the future of human beings.

Very few specimens of many fossil animals have been found. They can be very, very rare. There are a host of reasons why preserving fossil sites is important. People exploiting fossil sites for economic gain can do a lot of damage. I saw ancient Indian village sites in Tennessee during my youth completely destroyed by pot hunters. I've seen the destruction of many historic sites without some kind of protection.

It's much more important for scientist to answer those unanswered questions about our past than for some quy to make a quick buck selling dinosaur bones. Often money wins out but hopefully people will develop a better appreciation of the importance of science.

Edited January 28, 2013 by jpevahouse

[Harry Pristis]

To keep the data separate from my personal discussion I'm using two posts.

Since the early nineties there has been a clear increase in the number of paleontology publications. However, this could simply represent an increase in the number of publications in general, i.e. an increase in the number of scientific journals. Instead let's look at how and how much paleontology was referenced. There is a broad usage of the terms 'fossil' and 'paleontology' within a number of important fields of modern science, everything from ecology to astronomy. Unfortunately, this does not provide much information about how those terms are used and context can be everything. A more appropriate way to examine the impact of paleontology research is with a metric that takes into account citation rate and can be compared between journals. The Article Influence Score is one such metric. The top five paleontology journals listed above all score above 1 in this metric, meaning that articles published within those journals had an above average influence. Note the top paleontology journal would rank 11th on the list of applied physics journals. Based on these citation rates it seems a number of modern paleontology journals have as much value to the scientific community as many modern physics journals. If this belief is idiosyncratic then the group holding it is the whole of the scientific community, not just professional paleontologists and amatuer fossil collectors.

.... Since we are concerned here with substantive matters ("impact on humanity"), it is impossible to compare with any usefulness paleontology journals with physics journals. They are apples and oranges.

The tables you presented are useful only in comparing named journal against other named journals within the same field.

Certainly, the number of citations of journal articles may indicate significance within the field to which a journal is dedicated, but it is NOT a measure of significance to the entire scientific committee. The increase in number of dinosaur-related articles starting in the 1990s is of little consequence to physicists, even though lots of paleontologists who ride the "dinosaur wave" of popularity might cite many of these papers.

....

Edited January 29, 2013 by JohnJ

[AgrilusHunter]

.... Since we are concerned here with substantive matters ("impact on humanity"), it is impossible to compare with any usefulness paleontology journals with physics journals. They are apples and oranges.

The tables you presented are useful only in comparing named journal against other named journals within the same field.

Certainly, the number of citations of journal articles may indicate significance within the field to which a journal is dedicated, but it is NOT a measure of significance to the entire scientific committee. The increase in number of dinosaur-related articles starting in the 1990s is of little consequence to physicists, even though lots of paleontologists who ride the "dinosaur wave" of popularity might cite many of these papers.

....

Harry,

This is the post I was looking for many days ago. If only ...

You are absolutely correct that the impact factor metric (simply based on number of citations) is best used only to make comparisons between journals in the same field. I agree completely it is not the best metric to use when making comparison between journals of different fields. Fortunately, impact factor is not the only metric used to compare journals, nor is it the metric I used to sort those tables or to make my comparisons.

I used the Article Influence Score, which is a normalized version of the Eigenfactor metric. These metrics take into account the vast interconnected network of journal citations across the entire scientific community. The algorithms are based on network theory and utilize the entire structure of that network, not simply the localized count of citations. Incomings citations are rated for quality based on their source. Journals with a high Article Influence Score are cited not just more times, but also by more important journals within the network. You are wrong that comparisons cannot be made between journals of different fields using this method, by definition the metric is a comparison of a single node (a single journal) to all others in the network.

Edited January 29, 2013 by AgrilusHunter

[JohnJ]

If this thread is going to continue, then personal criticisms should not be a part of it. I've removed some posts and personal remarks for that reason. An enthusiastic debate can be instructive and I hope this one continues in that manner.

[mikeymig]

If this thread is going to continue, then personal criticisms should not be a part of it. I've removed some posts and personal remarks for that reason. An enthusiastic debate can be instructive and I hope this one continues in that manner.

It was starting to feel like (for me anyway) that this thread was from a Victorian Era publication. I have many books from this time period about Paleontology discussing the recent finds of the time. Slings and arrows were launched from one scientist to another and it was amusing for me to read it. I guess if I were there in the middle it wouldnt be so amusing.

mikey

[Harry Pristis]

.... You are wrong that comparisons cannot be made between journals of different fields using this method, by definition the metric is a comparison of a single node (a single journal) to all others in the network.

This off-topic. The metrics you are touting are not measures of impact on humankind. They are measures of the significance of one journal over another to discrete scientific communities.

"[T]he vast interconnected network of journal citations across the entire scientific community" . . . . Even if there were such a thing, it wouldn't give us a measure of impact on humankind. The next big breakthrough may appear in a small, obscure journal.

These measures assume importance of articles within a journal based on the ranking of that journal, which in turn is based on the number of citations (adjusted for the size of the journal). ....

The Eigenfactor score, developed by Jevin West and Carl Bergstrom at the University of Washington, is a rating of the total importance of a scientific journal. Journals are rated according to the number of incoming citations, with citations from highly ranked journals weighted to make a larger contribution to the eigenfactor than those from poorly ranked journals.^[1] As a measure of importance, the Eigenfactor score scales with the total impact of a journal. All else equal, journals generating higher impact to the field have larger Eigenfactor scores.

Edited January 30, 2013 by JohnJ

[jwcounts]

Wow, there are some kinda crazy arguments being made here. I can't believe that people are really saying that paleontology is just "knowledge for the sake of knowledge". Thobern, Cris, Agrilus, and others have made some excellent points. My random thoughts:

1. "every human decision is predicated on the perception of what is best at the moment for the actor" Well, this is demonstrably not true.
   
2. You can't judge the impact of an entire scientific discipline based on whether somebody's using it directly, right now, to make money off of or to cure a disease or something. Thobern is absolutely right that paleontology doesn't exist in a vacuum. Our view of diseases in particular is influenced by evolution and natural selection, as is how we treat them. You have no idea how paleontology and the concepts we derive from it will be used in the future.
   
3. There seems to be a perception that paleontology is all about finding dinosaurs and squirreling them away in drawers. Most modern paleo work looks at the response of ecosystems to climate or environmental change, or reconstructs past ecosystems and environments using a combination of paleontology, sedimentology, geochemistry, etc. This is absolutely relevant to our current situation, as even climate change deniers should acknowledge. Go read Lethaia or Palaios.
   
4. Why all the hating on professionals? They really aren't here to stop you from collecting fossils. They aren't all trying to get famous, or get money, or get on top. Most professionals I know (and I know a few) just really love science and research. You can't blame them for thinking that scientifically important specimens should be in a museum where other researchers can freely access them instead of being sold for profit and put in somebody's house. This is a reasonable view to have.
   
5. "But paleontology was NOT at all responsible for oil exploration. It is simply one tool of many used to make the finding of the oil more efficient. Hardly a resounding argument for the importance of paleontology." This is like saying you don't need well logs or seismic data because they are "one tool of many". Paleontology is definitely still used in oil and gas. I'm a professional geologist working natural gas exploration in East Texas and I use foram and palynology data. It's not just used in correlation, but also in understanding depositional environments, sediment source directions, sequence stratigraphic boundaries, etc. You can't say "show me an application of paleontology where it actually makes a tangible difference to humanity" and then when one clear example is pointed out out, just dismiss it by essentially saying "that doesn't count!' If you don't know how petroleum geology works, you're not qualified to comment on the utility of paleontology in oil and gas exploration. Paleontology is a fundamental part of geology, and geology undeniably has A LOT of applications.
   

OK, I'll go back to looking at fossil pictures now.

Edited January 29, 2013 by jwcounts

[Scylla]

Why all the hating on professionals? They really aren't here to stop you from collecting fossils. They aren't all trying to get famous, or get money, or get on top. Most professionals I know (and I know a few) just really love science and research. You can't blame them for thinking that scientifically important specimens should be in a museum where other researchers can freely access them instead of being sold for profit and put in somebody's house. This is a reasonable view to have.

OK, I'll go back to looking at fossil pictures now.

I think a few professionals have given the rest a bad name by trying to prevent all fossil collecting in some areas, trying to esentially steal fossils/land/mineral rights/and or credit from amatures. These sad few probably would do the same to other pros as well. Just as a few bad apples in the collecting or commercial communities give us amatures a bad name as well. Actually most amatures I know love the pro's, just not all the pro's. My 2 cents.

[Wrangellian]

I'm with you Scylla. Well said. I don't hate "all the pros" but from what I've read and experienced first hand I don't think I can trust all of them either (or their amateur supporters).

Edited January 30, 2013 by Wrangellian

[trilobiteruss]

Wow, there are some kinda crazy arguments being made here. I can't believe that people are really saying that paleontology is just "knowledge for the sake of knowledge". Thobern, Cris, Agrilus, and others have made some excellent points. My random thoughts:

1. 
   
2. "But paleontology was NOT at all responsible for oil exploration. It is simply one tool of many used to make the finding of the oil more efficient. Hardly a resounding argument for the importance of paleontology." This is like saying you don't need well logs or seismic data because they are "one tool of many". Paleontology is definitely still used in oil and gas. I'm a professional geologist working natural gas exploration in East Texas and I use foram and palynology data. It's not just used in correlation, but also in understanding depositional environments, sediment source directions, sequence stratigraphic boundaries, etc. You can't say "show me an application of paleontology where it actually makes a tangible difference to humanity" and then when one clear example is pointed out out, just dismiss it by essentially saying "that doesn't count!' If you don't know how petroleum geology works, you're not qualified to comment on the utility of paleontology in oil and gas exploration. Paleontology is a fundamental part of geology, and geology undeniably has A LOT of applications.
   

OK, I'll go back to looking at fossil pictures now.

I totally agree, I like having my plastics from petroleum, that I can still fill my car up (even if price went up 30 cents this week.. , I prefer not freezing in the dark. all those energy resources ustilize the combined and useful knowledge of biostratigraphy as you point out. those things are as important to me as the next cure for cancer, without them we would be freezing, not being able to grow food in quantities we enjoy, sitting in dark, and have no electrons to run these computers that allow us to discuss this. If that is not important I do not know what is.

[Cris]

jwcounts,

Excellent post! I completely agree with you on all the points made.

Nobody should view paleontologists in general in a negative light because of some of them having strong opinions when it comes to amateurs collecting. If we, as amateurs, adopt that kind of thinking, how should we expect professionals to view us with situations like the one with Prokopi going on? I'd love nothing more than to see more sites opened up to the public and paleontologists and amateurs working closer together, sharing ideas and working on mutually beneficial relationships...But "bashing" paleontology and anybody engaged in the study of it is almost certainly a step in the wrong direction.

[Wrangellian]

I think the take-home point was that while there are amateurs/collectors/dealers who misbehave and taint us all in the eyes of the pros, there are also pro's who misbehave and have the same effect in the eyes of the amateurs. The difference is the pro's are more able to influence laws and regulations to their liking.

It's important for both sides to remember that not all of us are to blame and I think the majority would like to have constructive relationships between pros and amateurs.

[JimB88]

you guys are missing the point of Harry's argument. He was saying, to the average citizen paleontology really doesn't matter. They don't think about it, they don't care about it, its not part of their lives. The fact that petroleum products are are derived from fossils doesn't even cross their minds.

The same can be said of astronomy, or physics; the only people who care about it are those who are interested in it.

[Scylla]

you guys are missing the point of Harry's argument. He was saying, to the average citizen paleontology really doesn't matter. They don't think about it, they don't care about it, its not part of their lives. The fact that petroleum products are are derived from fossils doesn't even cross their minds.

The same can be said of astronomy, or physics; the only people who care about it are those who are interested in it.

Who here among us is average? Just because 6.99999 out of 7 billion people don't think about fossils, doesn't make them unimportant. For example: before the discovery of viruses no one on the planet thought viruses were important, but now we know they were and still are.

[squali]

I must admit that this thread makes me 'squirmy' not for the content but rather the tone.

As an amature paleo guy I rely on the pro's to share their hard gotten knowledge by writing papers and books and participate in open forums

. Most of the negative responses have very weak arguments.

Following the logic of the nay sayers I have composed a short list of worthless research endeavours to persue.

1. polar bears--can't eat em

2. plate techtonics- toooooo slowwww

3. any thing that has to do with space.- we are here, not there

4. archaeology-uhh they're dead

get the ^?

I do not think fossil dealers can accurately represent themselves as amatures.

They are professional sales people with their own motivations.

It seems they would like an unfettered ability to buy and sell anything they want

with no regard to the science community that they built their business on.

Ever heard the saying "to bite off your nose to spite your face?"

p.s. Hope Auspex gets back soon

[JimB88]

Who here among us is average? Just because 6.99999 out of 7 billion people don't think about fossils, doesn't make them unimportant. For example: before the discovery of viruses no one on the planet thought viruses were important, but now we know they were and still are.

again, the argument wasnt about whether fossils are or are not important, rather than most who are not interested dont really care.

[Wrangellian]

His argument sounded to me more like "What has Paleontology done for us lately?" I don't think anyone here doubts that the majority of the population are uninterested in it. Clearly Harry is interested in it but he doesn't seem to think it is of much consequence these days. If I have misconstrued it I know I'll be corrected..

Edited January 30, 2013 by Wrangellian

[mikeymig]

I must admit that this thread makes me 'squirmy' not for the content but rather the tone.

As an amature paleo guy I rely on the pro's to share their hard gotten knowledge by writing papers and books and participate in open forums

. Most of the negative responses have very weak arguments.

Following the logic of the nay sayers I have composed a short list of worthless research endeavours to persue.

1. polar bears--can't eat em

2. plate techtonics- toooooo slowwww

3. any thing that has to do with space.- we are here, not there

4. archaeology-uhh they're dead

get the ^?

I do not think fossil dealers can accurately represent themselves as amatures.

They are professional sales people with their own motivations.

It seems they would like an unfettered ability to buy and sell anything they want

with no regard to the science community that they built their business on.

Ever heard the saying "to bite off your nose to spite your face?"

p.s. Hope Auspex gets back soon

I like proverbs to but with a positive twist "you can have your cake and eat it". I collect and maintain a personal or private fossil collection as well as sell fossils to people around the world who cant personally find the fossils I find and I have a great relationship with proffesional paleontologist. My rare fossils that have or are scientifically important reside in a public museum with all pertinent information that I collected in the field with the specimen. High quality common fossils are offerd at reasonable prices to "amature" collectors. Paleontology is in 3Dcolor for me not 2 dimensional black & white.

mikey

[Scylla]

again, the argument wasnt about whether fossils are or are not important, rather than most who are not interested dont really care.

Well then I misunderstood the post.