RE: Paleoart vs Fantasy (what's the problem?)

["no go" <honkietong@hotmail.com>]

Putting this entire thing in prespective, since when was this kind of 
fantasy a new problem? If any lesson is to be learned from the history of 
paleontological public-relations, it can be observed that the general public 
almost always fails to get the accucrate picture on the issue, no matter how 
well meaning the paleo-buffs informing them can be. To be honest, most 
laymen sees paleontology without ambiguity, just taking in whatever an 
expert say wholesole, most of the time failing to listen to any opposing 
views (Prehaps the reason why Mr.Horner is precieved to be the worlds' 
"leading" Tyrannosaurid expert in any place at all). In which case it's not 
the matter of the most "scientific" paleontologist/paleoartist/paleo-buff 
shaping the public view, but rather the one with the biggest mouth, 
irregardless of how valid or credible their ideas may be. The general public 
is a fickle, media driven thing and the only way for anybody to really get 
an good idea of paleontology is to really go deep into such stuff.

If BBC Horizions can't even get their report on the feathered hoax 
armageddon in the right prespective, assuming one hoax disproves all the 
other valid fossil finds and the entire bird-dinosaur link, I won't really 
count on a largely superfical exibit to help shape public opinion any 
better.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com