Re: On naming taxa

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 5/24/01 11:14:43 PM EST, KiernanCR@aol.com writes:

<< While I have plenty of problems of my own with Phylocode, I don't think 
requiring that new names be published in refereed publications is a bad idea. 
>>

One of the reasons I dislike publishing in refereed journals is simply that 
they don't pay. Rather, >I< would have to pay, in many cases. Part of what I 
do for a living is write, and I can't afford to make donations in the form of 
the serious and tedious writing that a journal article requires. Heck, it 
takes me months just to find the spare time in which to write for my own 
websites. Things would be entirely different if I were a salaried 
professional scientist part of whose job is to write for the journals, but 
for many reasons I won't go into right now, I never wanted to be one.

A couple of decades ago, when I compiled my first dinosaur genera list (in 
Mesozoic Meanderings #1), I noticed that several species were being carried 
around in genera to which they obviously didn't belong, as well as a few 
other taxonomic and nomenclatural irregularities. So when I produced MM #2, I 
created a few genera for those species and fixed up the irregularities. 
Didn't need referees; there is no need to burden the serious journals with 
these kinds of trivia, especially when I can sell my publications and thereby 
pay myself something for my research while at the same time fixing up 
dinosaur nomenclature.

My "dinosaur rectification program" concluded in MM #3 (first printing), 
wherein I created the genus Ponerosteus for the species Iguanodon exogyrarum. 
The material is very poor  (a ?marrow endocast of a large ?tibia[!]) and the 
species really should not have been created at all, but since the species 
does exist, it should certainly not be referred to the genus Iguanodon, with 
which it has nothing in common, nor can it be made the type species of the 
genus Procerosaurus, which is preoccupied. (Ponerosteus means "bad bone" and 
refers to the quality of the specimen.) And so much for that.

By the way, tell us sometime about the problems you have with the PhyloCode.