Dear Jacquelyn and Forum: (While Jacquelyn's email did stimulate these comments, they are not intended as a critique of her--they are about the phenomena, not the person.)
The questioning of elders is a time-honored and essential, indispensable ingredient in the advancement of knowledge, the careful consideration of the thoughts of those who have spent almost a lifetime doing just that is likewise an important part of the mix of intellectual exploration of which "science" and any "discipline" are parts. It is sad in a sense, but also a bit ironic, that those at the beginning of their careers in ecology, should feel cheated when the continuing in the footsteps of their elders, mistakes and all, seems threatened. Ecologists, among, thankfully, a fairly large minority of the world's population, are beginning to see their predictions validated--and they don't like it. It appears to be a distinct possibility that major changes in human behavior will be forced upon, not only the innocent future generations, but upon the present generation just beginning to hold the earth's destiny in its hands. It seems unfair that, just as greater and greater efficiencies in energy use are within their grasp, that the consequences of past generations' profligacy are increasingly borne by the emerging generations. It is a frightening prospect to see Malthusian hunches about the consequences of population increases seeming to pale into comparative insignificance before harder and harder data about the spinoff effects like Anthropogenic Global Warming, Water Scarcity, and Peak Oil, for example, http://www.peakoil.nl/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/oilwatch_monthly_may_2007.pdf being poised to levy some unstoppable "Armageddon" upon the world just as its finest heroes are rising to the occasion. E. O. Wilson is a prophet with honor, but his prophesies may not be having sufficient effect upon the masses--nay, upon his own colleagues. It is as if Nero were sounding the alarm while the citizens of Rome were fiddling as it burned. But perhaps Wilson is hypocritical, having jetted his way to countless meetings in the past, while he now counsels restraint. Perhaps he regrets having "used up" too much energy so fast that now his followers must conserve? Perhaps we are lucky that he did jet around as much as he did, and perhaps we will be luckier still because some emerging scientist will put him in the shade, and the tradeoff of the jetting around for hisher accomplishments will be so great that future generations will be grateful? Could be. It also could be that some are more concerned with career advancement than "The Mission" (though why they chose ecology rather than, say, economics, is puzzling). There were times when scientists wrote letters on scraps of paper to each other, sent by sailing ship and horseback across continents and oceans. If we are unlucky (or lucky?), those times, or something akin to them, will come again--by choice or, most likely, as the oscillations from planting that first seed 12,000 years ago come home to roost (aka "Chaos Theory," "Tipping Point" and "Blowback?"). There were times when lifetimes were spent before well-deserved honors were recognized by one's peers--and times when peers denied and ignored solid accomplishments of prophetic scientists. Yea, there were times when derision by peers, disrespect by the powerful, and ignorance by one's citizenry were so extreme that burning at the stake was a real, not merely virtual, risk. In those times, even great accomplishments did not provide a Ph.D., even after a lifetime of devotion. Why does the song, "Abraham, Martin, and John" come to mind? Where are our emerging Charley Darwins, Al Wallaces, Ros Franklins, Barb McClintocks, and Al Wegeners? Oh, how I would like to have a beer with y'all . . . but if we can't, I'll settle for an email, even a code-cracking formula scratched on a stone. WT At 05:10 PM 8/6/2007, JACQUELYN GILL wrote: >More importanly, anyone ever spend a week sitting in front of a >computer during an online meeting, without the added benefit of >getting to chat informally with presenters and attendees from all >over the world (or meet for beers afterwards)? If we don't have time >to read all the journal articles in every issue of Ecology, what >more effective way is there to serendipitously discover the research >of our colleagues? I understand the need to make alternatives >available, but the work that is inspired and generated by spending a >week with fellow researchers more than makes up for any >environmental impact (especially with features like carbon offsets) >in my opinion. As a young graduate student, I'm pretty techno-savvy, >but I would never want ESA to replace flesh-and-blood meetings with >impersonal and inconvenient electronic alternatives. It's one thing >for eminent scientists like Dr. Wilson to call for a reduction in >world travel at the height of a distinguished career (filled with l >ots of world travel), but for a young and relatively un-traveled >ecologist-in-training like myself, I am saddened to think of what >might happen to our field if the human element were taken away from >meetings. The level of discourse in "real life" will never be >matched by electronic and/or tele-conference settings. > >And a practical consideration: From where I stand (at ESA) I can see >people from several different countries and dozens of states. Which >time zone should we broadcast our teleconference from? > >Respectfully, > >Jacquelyn Gill > >************************ >Jacquelyn Gill >Graduate Research Assistant >Jack Williams Lab > >University of Wisconsin - Madison >Department of Geography >550 North Park St. >Madison, WI 53706 > >608.890.1188 (phone) >608.265.9331 (fax) > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Malcolm McCallum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Monday, August 6, 2007 6:01 pm >Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Skipping meetings vs. teleconferencing >To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU > > > > Anyone ever participated in an online scientific meeting? > > > > > > On Mon, August 6, 2007 8:27 am, Kelly Stettner wrote: > > > I got the impression from Wayne's post that he was not discouraging > > > physical attendance at meetings, but rather that he was encouraging > > the > > > use of other methods of participation. I have neither the time nor > > the > > > money to "travel extensively, jetting about" to and from meetings and > > > conferences and gatherings. I must pick and choose, carpool when I > > can, > > > and (MUCH more often) seek out conference calls, on-line courses and > > > meetings, and notes and presentations posted online after said conference > > > or symposium. I have taught myself perseverance in researching and > > have > > > gained the self-confidence to realize my questions are pertient and > > valid. > > > > > > Another important tool I use is e-mail -- I seek out the > > researcher or > > > presenter, find their e-mail address, and ask them questions, sparking > > > conversations and discussions, getting answers and furthering my > > > understanding. I am a full-time college student, mother of two, > > > full-time secretary, and part-time voluntary director of a > > > community-based watershed team in Vermont, so my time is limited as > > is > > > my budget. I think it is extremely important for me to "meet" > > > colleagues any way I can, and e-mail is a fantastic "first contact" > > > method. > > > > > > So Wayne is not recommeding skipping meetings or discussion-time, > > he is > > > promoting finding alternative avenues of interacting as a means of time > > > and fuel economy. Or at least, that is what I am understanding from > > his > > > comments. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > Kelly Stettner, Director > > > Black River Action Team > > > Springfield, VT > > > www.blackriveractionteam.org > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's > > > on, when. > > > > > > > > > Malcolm L. McCallum > > Assistant Professor of Biology > > Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
