ATBIs

[Peter Rauch]

On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Bill Shear wrote:
> The PEET model works, the ATBI model doesn't ....

What are each models of? (Do they have different goals?)

I don't mind comparisons, but it would be nice to understand
whether you are referring to two ways to skin the same cat, and
if so what is that cat?

E.g., PEET trains taxonomists/systematists, ATBI only infers
that need; ATBI asks "What's here, right here?"; PEET doesn't,
except very indirectly and incompletely; ATBI suggests a way to
deeply understand the biodiversity of a local area, possibly as
object lessons related to a mission of conservation (of all
places, not just those select ATBI locations), PEET trains for
deep understanding of relatively few taxa, spread far and wide.

Apples and meatballs.

So, in comparing the two, and stating that one works, one
doesn't, you may be right. But, perhaps the common denominator
of the two is "$$$$", whether each was/is successful in
acquiring it, and whether having acquired some amount of it
whether that amount was sufficient to actually perform the task
as intended.

Apples all, but if funding is the issue, not objectives, then we
are only making a statement about what works, and not what (all)
is needed. Certainly the training which PEET is accomplishing is
valuable and must be worth the expense. Is that to argue that
ATBI's have no role in our world? (It is certainly true that no
society seems willing to pay for them, but is that wise?)

 Peter