Badlands and Bones: Locating Dinosaur Provincial Park, Alberta, within a Transnational History of North American Badlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perspectives on Parks 2010 Presentations NiCHE has archived audio presentations from this event Evans, Stirling. "Badlands and Bones: Locating Dinosaur Provincial Park, Alberta, within a Transnational History of North American Badlands" Historical and Global Perspectives on Provincial, Local & Regional Parks in Canada. 29 October 2010. Bio: Stirling Evans is a Professor and the Louise Welsh Chair in Southern Plains and Borderlands History, in the Department of History at the University of Oklahoma. Abstract: “Badlands and Bones” tracks the environmental and conservation history of Alberta’s Dinosaur Provincial Park. Preservation of this place was unique as one of the first efforts to recognize the scenic beauty of badlands—landscapes created by millions of years of erosion and characterized by prairie grasslands, buttes and gullies, hoo-doos, caprocks, and spectacular colours in the strata of eroded hillsides. More unique is that DPP’s creation was meant to preserve the unequalled paleontological resources of the region. It is there where more dinosaur fossils have been discovered in one place than anywhere else on earth. Thus, the government of Alberta drew on the expert testimony of scientists, archaeologists, geologists, fossil hunters, and rock hounds to establish this park in 1955. Indeed, geology, paleontology, and conservation all fused in this park to protect an area so unique that UNESCO recognized it as a World Heritage Site in 1979. Part of the park’s history revolves around the way it has been interpreted. Drawing from the rich records of its early years (preserved in the Provincial Archives of Alberta and at the Glenbow Museum Archives), “Badlands and Bones” illustrates how the park became a popular tourist destination replete with ranger-guided tours, ampitheatre presentations, and children’s activities. Finally, DPP is part of a larger, transnational system of grassland and desert badlands that stretch from northern Mexico to the Prairie Provinces. This presentation will locate DPP among over seventy identified badlands areas (preserved in a variety of different methods) in the North American West. How the park is unique, and perhaps how it is not compared to its U.S. counterparts, will be part of the focus of the paper.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".