Should private buyers be allowed to own scientific specimens?
Scientists have long argued that allowing private buyers to own scientific specimens like fossils deprives paleontologists the opportunity to study them. And the extreme prices the fossils command mean most museums or academic institutions can’t compete in a bidding war. Do you think private buyers should be allowed to own important scientific specimens?
Reply to This Discussion
Have something to add? Sign in to join the discussion.
Sotheby's should set their standards higher in the interest of science in such matters as this by at least encouraging auction winners to donate important specimens as this one to institutional and public scientific interests. Shame on them.
No, private buyers should not be allowed to own scientific specimens, unless they commit to donating or lending them to museums, universities or other institutions where they can be kept in a proper environment and be available for the public to view and for scientific research. These unique specimens belong to all of humanity, not only to certain individuals.
No, no and no. Eat the rich.
No, absolutely. Ok, you buy the skeleton, but what next? What about science? The selling of the skeleton is a great mistake.
No. Private individuals should not own scientific specimens. These specimens belong to humanity as a whole and should not become instruments of the ego of wealthy individuals, just as protected species cannot be bought and sold.
Private buyers should be allowed to own fossils only on the condition that the fossil will be available (and kept in an optimal environment) both for public viewing (such as in a museum) and for unlimited scientific research, as regulated by an international paleontologist committee to be set up for that purpose.
No, these should not be owned by private people. They belong to museums and institutes that scientists and the general public should have access to view and to do research on them.
No. They are hoarded away in vaults and never seen again. These should be something everyone can enjoy.
Disgusting! $50,000,000 should go to better causes
NO! Using your extreme wealth to own a public treasure is just another example of what is wrong with the world, especially, but not exclusively, in the USA. If it can not be regulated away, then a tax, equal to the amount of purchase should be applied to offset the public loss and aid smaller institutions in developing their own collections.
No. They are frequently never seen again and are lost to further scientific investigation
No. End of conversation
I think specimens or any part of our distant past on this earth should not be privately owned but allowed to be shared with everyone on this earth. I wonder why selling this T. rex was even considered;
No. Private buyers should not own fossils. Fossils are not and should not be commodities with exchange values. They are part of the planet's heritage that can providd valuable scientific information. Such "samaritans" will do well to make endowments and fund research.
no
In a sane, more equitable, and more decent world, no individual would have so much money that they could outbid even a small museum, university, or research institution.
No it limits knowledge
No, I don't think private investors should be able to own such antiquities. They disappear from the public eye and even scientific research that way, which is a loss to humanity.
Absolutely not. This one is a no brainer.
