Conservation literature

Jack Ogden <jack [at] striptwist__com> writes

>Academic journal articles are too plentiful, too widely disseminated
>in a myriad publications (too seldom in a library near you) and
>generally too long for the time-pressed researcher to take pleasure
>in reading in full (how many people actually read each article
>rather than just skim it and alight on the 'meaty' bits--other than
>the author!).
>
>Modern communication methods allow the ideal mid-way--articles
>produced not as fine prose to fill opulent volumes on Fellows'
>library shelves, but as succinct research notes available on the web
>(eg. as .pdf) or sent to non-internet Society members (perhaps
>loose-leaf with punched holes to file as they wish). The notes would
>be easily indexed on the web and cross-linked with (eventually)
>centralised references etc. And with 'articles' I would include
>conference proceedings and even some books.

I have to disagree with this opinion.  The history of scientific
communication began with letters from one researcher to another.
Letters would be copied with marginalia from one person to the next.
Thus evolved scientific journals.  The desire over time was for
fuller description, not less.  The great discoveries in science were
made upon the "shoulders of giants" based on the ability to have
authors share their discoveries with each other. Recent online
resources of abstracts are only useful if the entire articles can be
accessed.  The problem with the internet phenomenon is that it
encourages superficiality.  This is demonstrated in both papers
students write, news reports and the speeches of certain Presidents
of nations.

Niccolo Caldararo, Ph.D.
Dept. of Anthropology
San Francisco State University.


                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 15:72
                  Distributed: Tuesday, April 23, 2002
                       Message Id: cdl-15-72-006
                                  ***