Talk:Paleontology
From Academic Kids
I reorganized this page a bit, and realized there were two paragraphs talking about the major subdivisions of the field. Of course, they are completely different. Are both accurate characterizations? If they are both reasonable but lie along different dimensions, it would be nice if they text explained that.
Thanks. My work can always use editing (and spell checking). I didn't intend to present alternate characterizations of the field, and would never have read what I wrote that way although now that it's been pointed out ... Let me think some on it.
Subfields
"The work done in paleontology can be divided into field work, collections management, fossil preparation and systematic description of new species."
- Are these the actual names of each subfield, or do they have more "official-sounding" names? :-) Can we start writing articles about each? I'm interested in the details of how fossils are prepared and how the shape, diet, morphology etc. of a creature is determined from its remains, especially minimal remains. - Omegatron 17:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
- I've just added to these and so far they are rather arbitary. 'Work done' varies according to what kind of fossil(s) you are studying, why and how. There's no standard, although field-work, lab work (preparing / processing samples), analysis and data collection, writing up / publication, conservation / management, would be a fair framework. NickW 12:16, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
Thomas Jefferson
He should not be called a paleontologist like in this article. Someone who just takes an intrest in Paleontology should be refered to as a Paleoenthusiast, not an actual Paleontologist.
