|
|
Post by zopteryx on Mar 31, 2011 23:59:56 GMT
A school project of mine requires me to get an interview with some one who works in the profession of my choice (paleontology of course  ). I don't know if anyone here is a true paleontologist, but if your not, maybe some of you know one. Technically speaking, the interviewee doesn't have to be a paleontologist, they could also be a lab technician or someone else that works with paleontologists. If you or someone you know is interested, just answer the following 10 questions honestly in a few sentences or less. Feel free to skip any questions you dislike. Thanks for the help!  Here are the questions: 1.How long have you been a paleontologist? 2.What type of education did you receive to become a paleontologist? 3.What is the general salary range for a paleontologist? 4.Where and how does a paleontologist usually get hired? 5.What is your favorite part about being a paleontologist? 6.What discoveries do you think have redefined the science of paleontology? 7.What great discovery do you think is coming up next? 8.Where do you think the field of paleontology is headed? 9.What is the worst part about being a paleontologist? 10.If you could travel back in time and see living prehistoric creatures, where and when would you go and what would you like to see? Thanks again! |
|
|
|
Post by Himmapaan on Apr 1, 2011 0:05:02 GMT
I don't know if anyone here is a true paleontologist... For shame, sir! ;D Know you not that the Administrator of this very forum is one?  |
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Apr 1, 2011 0:06:01 GMT
I've interviewed a palaeontologist before myself. His name was Dr Adam Smith, you might have heard of him. There are a handful on this board, but if you want to interview one, try e-mailing them! If you have any favourite palaeo-bloggers, I'd try them first. |
|
|
|
Post by zopteryx on Apr 1, 2011 0:20:22 GMT
I don't know if anyone here is a true paleontologist... For shame, sir! ;D Know you not that the Administrator of this very forum is one?  Oooooh...Well in that case he deserves an email then. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Apr 1, 2011 0:25:42 GMT
M: I was going to ask about the highlights of your career...
A: The highlights of my career? [Laughs]
M: Yeah, the high points, the bits you've really loved!
A: That's a difficult question...there are key moments. Completing the PhD was obviously a key moment. My first paper...my first scientific peer reviewed paper was really rewarding and exciting as well...
...Yeah, at least you're not interviewing them in person. I just sat there..."Durrr.."
I did 'interview' David Hone via e-mail once, and he said I could make it public...so this is how it went:
1) With regards to mainstream newspapers (what one might call 'Fleet Street'), do you feel that they (broadly) succeed in properly informing the public on palaeontology?
Nope, they fail badly. In general, it's pretty poor since even good science writers often have a very poor grasp of palaeo in general. Add to that the fact that most of them are not very good science writers then it all goes very badly wrong quite quickly.
2) In terms of palaeo coverage, which newspapers would you regard as the worst offenders - and which are more worthy of praise?
Hard to say since I don't read all of them with any regularity and in general don't read much popular science writing in general. The Guardian is generally the best that I have seen and the Mail the most conspicuous of the regular really bad offenders. In general though, it's down to the individual, not the publication. Fox news have a deserved reputation for terrible science coverage in general, almost by policy, but in Charles Q. Choi have one of the best writers going.
3) Are there any repeated simplifications or all-out falsehoods that really get your goat and are indicative of a lack of basic background knowledge (eg. pterosaurs-as-dinosaurs)?
Yeah, loads. And they keep coming back. The general 'X is the ancestor of Y' is a huge one, and the endless and meaningless 'missing link' another. There are endless simple errors like calling pterosaurs dinosaurs, mammoths dinosaurs, birds pterosaurs and more, confusing genera and species or families and species, not italicising species, and more. Most of these are obvious to a high school student with a vague interest in prehistory or are part of the basic syllabusfor schools in the UK. If you have a biology A-level you should know the difference between a genus and species yet this is rarely got right.
4) This might seem a daft, but - do you feel that palaeo coverage in the mainstream non-specialist press is even required? Would you consider it important for the average member of the public to have a basic knowledge of the history of life on Earth, and if so, why? (I know, I know, but I'm sure some people would argue that since it isn't immediately relevant to their daily lives, it's a just a curio - 'coo look at the funny dinosaur' sort of thing.) [Yes, I really send people questions worded like this. I hate playing devil's advocate.]
Well I think coverage of science in general is required and palaeontology is part of that. Not as big as say physics, but it should be there. And if it is there, it should be covered properly. Any reporter who confused America with Armenia or repeately made similar basic errors would be fired but it seems almost a requirement in a lot of science reporting. If you are going to bother to report on something you should make an effort to get it right. Certainly people are interested (how may people out there have science degrees? - tens or even hundreds of thousands) and want to know, and I don't see any reason not to report on science. It is as much a part of life and culture as the arts and its effect on daily lives (energy, technology, health etc.) is colossal. It should be reported and it should be done right.
5) Are things getting better...?
Probably not. It's hard to say though. Science coverage is getting more extensive certainly, but I don't think it's getting better (i.e. there is more of it, but it is still generally inaccurate/overhyped/wrong etc.). The fact that things are increasing does at least suggest that more emphasis is being placed on it however and we can hope that this will eventually lead into better material. The advent of the electronic era also means that it is at least easier to access good stuff. You can now read reports by people from dozens of newspapers and magazines which means both finding and then following good
writers is much easier.
|
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Apr 1, 2011 0:50:38 GMT
For shame, sir! ;D Know you not that the Administrator of this very forum is one? Oooooh...Well in that case he deserves an email then. ;D I have a Master's degree  ...but I don't work (directly) within the field.  |
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Apr 1, 2011 0:52:51 GMT
I have a Master's degree ...but I don't work (directly) within the field. I'll be lucky to get an undergraduate degree at this rate Pffft, we are OBVIOUSLY only impressed by people with PhDs here, sir! (Pssst, Sbell, what's it in?) |
|
|
|
Post by dyscrasia on Apr 2, 2011 23:19:04 GMT
Currently on the course of getting a PhD in paleontology but still a very long way to go...  |
|
). I don't know if anyone here is a true paleontologist, but if your not, maybe some of you know one. Technically speaking, the interviewee doesn't have to be a paleontologist, they could also be a lab technician or someone else that works with paleontologists. If you or someone you know is interested, just answer the following 10 questions honestly in a few sentences or less. Feel free to skip any questions you dislike.
Here are the questions:
Oooooh...Well in that case he deserves an email then. ;D
...but I don't work (directly) within the field. 
