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

Re: More on the genus problem

To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: More on the genus problem
From: don ohmes <d_ohmes@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-results: msg-ironport0.usc.edu; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
In-reply-to: <841911.1166.qm@web63807.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Reply-to: d_ohmes@yahoo.com
Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu

--- On Sun, 9/20/09, Erik Boehm <erikboehm07@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Its all a big mess, as I said, I've never heard a good
> definition for a species, so I wouldn't expect a good one
> for a genus.
> 
> It is whatever is convenient for classification.

A caveat: I suggest the term "useful" as opposed to "convenient". 

Convenience w/out usefulness is the essence of counter-production, grasshopper. 
Woo, boy, am I martzed...

References:
- Re: More on the genus problem
  - From: Erik Boehm <erikboehm07@yahoo.com>

Prev by Date: Re: More on the genus problem
Next by Date: Re: More on the genus problem
Previous by thread: Re: More on the genus problem
Next by thread: Raptorex: some thoughts
Indexes: