[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Eponymous Taxa [was: RE: new _Scleromochlus_ ref]



Of course you could clear this all up so easily by sacrificing all names
above genus level and replacing them with numbers if only that weren't so
darned daunting to would-be students of palaeontology and professors alike.
Both daunting to do abd daunting to plow through afterwards.  Still - it's
nice to know we have an emergency plan in case nothing else works.

----- Original Message -----
From: <NJPharris@aol.com>
To: <znc14@ttacs.ttu.edu>; <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>
Cc: <dinosaur@usc.edu>; <wagner@ttu.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 1999 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: Eponymous Taxa [was: RE: new _Scleromochlus_ ref]


> In a message dated 9/22/99 12:50:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> znc14@TTACS.TTU.EDU writes:
>
> >         So, the way I see it, you have three options:
> >
> >  1)      Abandon PT.
> >
> >  2)      Make up your own rules.
>
> OK, who is in charge of making and upholding the rules here?
>
> I've been salving my conscience by reminding myself that nothing is truly
set
> in stone as yet, and there might still be the possibility of someone
coming
> through and clearing up the mess that PT has evolved into (in certain
> instances, of course).
>
> Should I just go ahead and kill myself?
>
>
> >  3)      Try to make the best of the situation. Maybe it does make sense
> that
> >  the "true crocodyles" rose from among the "false crocodiles". It may
seem
> >  sinful for a cladist to say this, but does *everything* have to be an
> >  exclusive dichotomy?
>
> Nobody has a problem with crocodiles "rising" from "false crocodiles"; the
> whole point of PT is that under that system, the true crocodiles ARE
"false
> crocodiles"!
>
> --Nick P.