I want to study but I'm not sure if I'm smart enough, I would say my IQ is average but I'm terrible at math
How intelligent do you have to be to study paleontology?
I want to study but I'm not sure if I'm smart enough, I would say my IQ is average but I'm terrible at math
If you are really worried, like gods honest worried about being too dumb and have supportive parents, take your hard classes one at a time before you go full time in college. Take Calc, just calc and get a 4.0. Do the same for chem 1 and 2. There you go you have the frame work for biology and geology
Shop your professors too, pick good ones from rate my professor or word of mouth.
Community college is fine for math, Math is math until you hit the upper levels, they all use mathlab now. you just want a good lecturer who has a good grading policy.
Vertebrate paleontology is probably one of the hardest job to get in the biology field, everyone and their mother wants to study dinosaurs and iconic prehistoric animals. You needs high IQ because you will study plants and microfossils in a lab if you are lucky enough to become a paleontologist.
extremely low IQ. Fossils are fake, it's just a satan worshipping cult. You have to be fucking dumb to dedicate your life to following a complete fabrication pushed by pedophiles like ~~*Spielberg*~~
Unironically you need to be pretty stupid to be a paleontologist.
You don't have to be a super smart person to be a paleontologist. You only need a passion and ledgable spelling.
That being said it's a competitive field to get into and doesn't pay well. When it comes to it you have to be able to try to come up with a new theory and evidence to support your findings to get published. Most people never get published because of high standards.
That being said your going to want to be able to rebuke creationist which isn't going to be fun or even get them to say your correct.
>your going to want to be able to rebuke creationist
in a thread full of absolute bullshit, this is the funniest post
Smart enough to dig up bones ya
Depends what you mean. Any mindless NPC can go pay $60k for the piece of paper that declares "you're smart now" so yeah you can be a "paleontologist" but if you actually want to make strides in the field of discovery and fact and not well-poisoning political bullshit then you might have to be kinda smart. Science/knowledge has completely backslid the last few decades, we're decisively less advanced as a society/culture than we used to be. We had better space tech in the '70s than we do now FFS.
You need hyper-focus and good memory, intelligence isn't required.
You can skate through the biology parts with a 90 IQ. Hell some of the people itt have retard level IQ's and know a lot of biology
the math, chem, and geology parts are going to destroy you.
luckily you won't even get into a paleo program with an average IQ, the math requirements filter most of the dumb ones out at the very start.
Most of modern "paleontologists" are absolutely moronic braindead basedjaks. So, you in any case have good chances, no matter how high/low your iq is. Just avoid the "forbidden" topics like the absence of feathers/lips (even if you have some really strong evidences), and you'll make a good career. Oh, and don't forget to regularly post on Reddit - this is DEADLY important.
I have family that owns a land in one of the best fossil bearing areas on the planet(green river formation). I've spent a lot of time out there, and I've dug up thousands of fish fossils with my own hands, some pretty large.
all of the guys that operate the sites out there are hicks with no college education, and they will walk you through the area as good as any scientist, or better. once we found a huge round structure around five feet in diameter with a ton of material and scattered bones at the very center. the geologist that ran the museum wasn't sure what it was. we thought it was an unusually large coprolite of some sort or nest, he said probably not but was still stumped. the fatass greaseball hick with a cowboy hat running one of the sites told us exactly what it was, gasses from decomposing fish corpses forming a pressurized chamber underneath the mud flow that probably buried them eventually forced a rupture through the mud and there was a mini eruption of sediments and fish parts at the bottom of whatever body of water was effected. was pretty obvious once he pointed it out. this was a guy that definitely listened to the gayest country music and ate primarily fast food.
>was pretty obvious once he pointed it out.
this is the stupidest thing I've read today, and you're stupid for believing it.
cope, certificate of debt holder. there's not a doubt in my mind that he's right and I'm the one digging up thousands of fossils while you just study some slideshows in a classroom.
>there's not a doubt in my mind that he's right
because you're an idiot
how is that bubble under the mud going to gather fish parts together?
how are those fish parts not going to be completely dissolved in the time it takes to form a bubble?
how are those fish parts going to float in the bubble so they get squirted out of the mud?
why would the concentration of fish parts from the bubble be any more than the fish in the layers buried in the mud below?
why would those fish fossilize but not the fish in the layers below?
the questions you're asking sound like things a confused five year old would ask, especially all of the non-sequitur stuff about bubbles. it's pretty obvious that mud was forced upward from beneath by the shape of the mud pile.
not really possible with the formation, which you haven't seen and me and both professionals have. your conjecture on something you haven't seen isn't worth anything and your need that you feel to do it is pitiful.
>but you dumb hicks undoubtedly destroyed that information digging it up.
they know everything about the sediment layers there because that's how they find fish. we knew exactly where we were digging in the 18 inch layer where we found it and could easily point it out. your debt certificate doesn't mean as much as you think it does, even less so in the age of the internet.
I'm not even remotely a creationist. I actually attended college myself, I dropped out a little after two years when I became disillusioned with the debt machine. I make more money than the average bachelors holder my age, probably wouldn't if I kept at it and would be in debt too. your mental image of who you are talking to is warped by your need to feel superior to others.
>not really possible with the formation, which you haven't seen and me and both professionals have
are you talking about the GRF? I've done decades of work in that one and its analogs
if you mean the round patch of fish fossils, we've all seen those. It's funny you think death assemblages are rare or unheard of in the formation.
makes me think you're ljust ying.
You sound awfully confident for a person that has never studied a mud-bubbled fish volcano in a contolled environment.
>You sound awfully confident for a person that has never studied a mud-bubbled fish volcano in a contolled environment.
why would you assume I haven't?
also, why one big bubble instead of thousands of small ones?
seriously, we need answers to these questions. Ask your toothless buddy.
Presumably what actually happened is there was a low pit in the mud and water currents washed a bunch of dead stuff into that low pit.
we could look at the layers and see if the round batch of fish was in a low spot in the surface, but you dumb hicks undoubtedly destroyed that information digging it up.
So you get to tell all your creationist friends your just so stories about magic mud volcanoes or whatever. And talk about how stupid the "experts" are, as if you ever even asked them.
Mormons are ridiculous.
in fact there's still a huge negative up there in the shelf because of how large this formation is. the fact that you without a shred of irony think these people are pulling fossils out of the ground by digging randomly in the ground reflects your lack of critical thinking abilities. are you a woman by chance? would explain the obsession with debt paper.
You don't have to be intelligent at all to get a STEM degree. You just have to be able to do algebra and calculus. Everything else is reddit tier. Can you watch the news and repeat what you're told? Congratulations, you have the IQ god gave an orangutan and can now get a STEM degree. That's precisely why STEM is so utterly fucked up. They focus on the ability to obey, repeat information and NOT think critically while agreeing with your peers and donors.
you have to be able to tell the difference between a rock and a bone
Biology barely has any mathematics in it, so it is not surprise lol.
All you have is some very basic statistics.
Your actual IQ doesn’t matter, you just need to sound pretentious enough.
Being a chud is enough these days
This is true. Paleontology is full of queers and trannies.
Paleontology attracts *autists, not specifically trannies. It’s just that there’s a big overlap between autists and trannies, so you get the idea.
Based on some of the posts by people here who claim to be paleontologists...not very apparently.
IQ isn't important, you just need to be autistic enough about fossils
This
Or in other worlds you have to be able to spend a lot of time studying about the subject. People who have an experience in something are always better than people with raw intelligence if that is a thing.
Or in university level raw intelligence does not matter that much if they accepted you into the course.
Paleontology seem meticolous.
>Or in other worlds you have to be able to spend a lot of time studying about the subject.
Literally not even. I just watched a talk on someone describing a new species of Ceratopsian and they only knew the Ceratopsian assemblage of exactly one fucking state. This is someone writing a paper naming a new fucking dinosaur.
Lol I guess he knows the right people then who got him the job.
She.
Then she also sucks cock well. LoL
I mean how do you not know every single Ceratopsian that has ever lived in North America at bare minimum if you're naming a new Ceratopsian?? I know the vast majority off the top of my head and I'm not even considering naming a new dinosaur.
Since there is a lot of money in research and at universities a lot of it is stolen/washed. There is also nepotism.
Not saying all but i am sure it happens.
Honestly I think it's more just STEM has low standards for literally everything but math autism. I have NEVER in my life met an actually intelligent STEM major. Maybe ONE, but that one was from an older generation. All midwits with perfectly midwit opinions and "abilities" (none but repeating what they've heard).
Do you meet smart people in other majors then?
Stem pays the best so if you don't go there might as well not go to uni. Yeah there are a lot of (genuinely) autistic people here, but there are also smart ones. The diploma doesn't make you smart that's for sure tho.
The smartest man I ever met was an art major. He was very classically minded and was a professor at one point (not that that makes you smart, but he actually was). I actually work in a STEM field, but I hate my brainless "peers".
>STEM pays the best
Where the fuck did you get this insane misinformation? STEM is one of the worst paying paths you can take in college.
>everyone and their mother wants to study dinosaurs and iconic prehistoric animals
And they're not sending their best, folks. Let me tell you.
Most STEM fields pay badly. It's the business and faggy degree majors that are making all the money, and for the same reason - it literally doesn't matter what you do in college. All that matters is how rich the family you were raised in was and business and fag degrees are preferred by the failchildren of the upper classes so they end up making the most money. Remember, Bill Gates isn't a programmer and Elon Musk isn't an engineer.
Also most people do not mean paleontology when they talk about stem since it pays bad.
Sub-100 IQ is preferred if you want to be a paleontologist.