Kambiz Kamrani of Anthropology, normally a rather staid blogger, has posted something titled Science Suffers From The Idiots At Scientific American. It's in reference to this widely circulated editorial, Fossils for All: Science Suffers by Hoarding. I can't really summarize it, and I think the title certainly does invite you to read the whole post at Anthropology.net
- Log in to post comments
More like this
You've probably heard about this story. Check out Afarensis and Anthropology.net for a summary of the science. But Kambiz also has some juicy gossip about the back-story here....
Four Stone Hearth #70, the migrating anthropology blog carnival, has been posted today at the new site of Afarensis. I hosted the carnival earlier at the original home of The Primate Diaries, and I hope to again soon.
There's a lot of great posts in this edition and I encourage everyone to check…
Kambiz has a post over at Anthropology.net, On Human Genetic Variation and Human Identity, where he riffs on the discussion that Martin & I just had about the intersection of genes and culture. More broadly it is a rumination upon the methods and paradigms which might be brought to bear on the…
Dear Reader, welcome to the Four Stone Hearth blog carnival -- in science land! 4SH is about anthropology in the widest (American) sense: nothing human is alien to us, from Homo habilis bones via Early Medieval metalworking debris to on-line gaming subcultures.
Aardvarchaeology is my new blog,…
Sounds like any political feud about anything anywhere. I certainly know which side of the feud Kamrini is on. Fifteen years still seems like a long time to restrict access to a fossil. It reminds me of the Dead Sea scrolls, which were kept secret for decades.
John Emerson said it. I skimmed Kamrini: so there's a partisan engagement going, and some of it's kind of underhanded, at least according to Kamrini's side. Cry me a river. Bottom line: is there some arcane technical reason for taking fifteen years to "prepare" a fossil? I really doubt it, and if there isn't, why should I care about the partisan drama.
In other words, if one party is quite right about the whole issue, then a daub of mud on their hem is not interesting.