Science Magazine... And More Trophy Hunting - Part 1

I don't know quite what to tackle here, because this touches on a lot of my pet issues. It's half recommendation, half "high entropy thought". More than anything, it's a piece of the puzzle that I just stumbled over which intersects so well a few different topics that it seems pointless to discuss them until I address this.

I've heard my notion of "high-entropy thoughts" critiqued as being somewhere between hubris and delusion, the stab being that most of my opinions are neither odd nor contradictory. I'll admit, a less glamorous description would just be "centrist views that aren't popular in specific circles", or something like that. Obviously I want all of my views to be logically coherent and scientifically consistent. I've been a little gun-shy about sharing many more candidates for this category for fear that I'm missing the mark, but I do plan to continue.

First, though, I'm going somewhere completely different. I have to read a lot of scientific papers for Grad School, and lord knows I could read a lot more. As a rule, these are all long, boring scripts written with various command of the English language. There's a shining exception, though. Science Magazine is one of the premier journals in the world, and also one of the most broad in scope. Admittedly, it's rare enough that it ever publishes a paper in my field, but I love to peruse it when a new issue comes out on Fridays anyway. I would happily become a member after grad school to maintain a subscription, and if you are attending University right now, I heartily recommend taking advantage of the paid for entertainment.

In August, five authors and 128 signatories sent in a letter titled "Trophy Hunting Bans Imperil Biodiversity", and a minor shitstorm ensued. I didn't pick up on it until today, but the October issue contained six letters in retort tearing apart the argument from six different angles. The authors were given a chance to respond, but I want to get two cents in.