I was fourth author out of eight on the earth-shattering Bowen et al. analysis of intercontinental mammalian immigration at the Paleocene-Eocene boundary (Science, March 2002: PDF). Guess that makes me an instant expert on stable isotope stratigraphy...

My megafaunal overkill simulation paper in Science (June 2001: PDF) earned me my full 15 minutes of fame, and possibly even convinced a few people that hunting by humans can cause mass extinctions - assuming, of course, that they approve of arithmetic. Pretty good for a paper with no new data that has nothing to do with any of my other research (if I do say so myself). But it does have lots of equations - just take a look at the supplementary materials document.

The long-awaited paper on Phanerozoic marine invertebrate diversity patterns (PNAS, May 2001: PDF) debuts the work of my highly conspiratorial and thoroughly un-American Paleobiology Database group. The main result is that the amount of work that goes into writing a manuscript scales as the number of people involved, not as the inverse of said number. Ain't sociology grand?

I really got carried away with a paper by me, Paul Koch, and Jim Zachos on climate and diversity dynamics (25th anniversary issue of Paleobiology, December 2000: sorry, no PDF yet). Fortunately, Paul, Jim, the editor, the reviewers, and my parole officer all insisted that I tone it down -- too bad you'll never get to read the original, truly grumpy version. Here's the abstract.

By the grace of Wing, I have been allowed to publish a "New boring methods" companion paper that outlines the gory details of the methods used to obtain the mammal data in the Koch-Zachos paper (Paleobiology, December 2000: PDF).

My "Ten more years in the library" paper (Geology, November 2000: PDF) shows that all the years of work I've put into revising the North American mammal time scale and hashing out methods for dealing with sampling biases actually makes a difference -- and you don't even have to squint your eyes too much to see that the old and new diversity curves are completely different.

My baffling thought piece on within-lineage evolutionary trends (Paleobiology, September 2000: PDF) was originally submitted to TREE, but rejected on the grounds that it was too original -- despite lacking data, methods, results, equations, statistics, or anything in particular other than a really bad attitude.