Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Unfortunately, a documentary film trumpeted the conclusion that
Australoven-
ator
'sfeet didfitthetracks, andbeforeyetanother scientific investigation hadbeen
completed. Imaginatively titled
Dinosaur Stampede
, the ABC (Australian Broad-
casting Corporation) broadcast this made-for-TV film in 2011, adding further con-
fusion and controversy to public perception of a fossil site that didn't need more
of either. This film, which used a combination of slick computer-generated graph-
ics, dramatic music, lots of footage of paleontologists reexamining the tracksite
withnewtechnologies(lasersandcomputersand3-Dmodels—ohmy!),andafully
fleshed-out recreation of an
Australovenator
leg and foot, culminated in one main
conclusion: Yes, “Banjo” could have indeed been the culprit for the large tracks.
Now there is a third possible solution to the mystery of Lark Quarry, and one that
honors the original story but with a slightly modernized and updated perspective.
But here's the problem. Before allowing preliminary results out into the public
realm, we scientists are supposed to do peer review. This means not just doing the
initial research, but also scrutinizing the results, summarizing these in a formal art-
icle, submitting the article to a journal, having that article scrutinized by experts in
the topic of your article, and in the end possibly being told, um, no, you got this
all wrong, do it over. Is peer review a perfect process? No, and if for no other reas-
on, because the scientists who review journal articles are doing it as unpaid volun-
teers, finding time to perform this important duty in between all of their other tasks
such as teaching, grading, research, walking the dog, or (most heinous of all) sleep-
ing.Still, moreoftenthannot,peerreview providesanoutside perspective thatulti-
matelyresultsinscientistshoningtheirargumentorevenrejectingitoutright.Inthe
lattercase,theresearchmaynevermakeitintoprint.Allofthatworkfornaught,so
to speak.
Because of this possibility of being wrong, paleontologists and other profes-
sional scientists are generally discouraged from announcing their preliminary res-
ults to the public, and especially through popular media. An exception would be if
thesescientistsdeliveratalkorpresentaposterataprofessionalmeetinginfrontof
