crocodylians, amphibians ... (was Sarcosuchus)

["Ken Kinman" <kinman@hotmail.com>]

Dear All,
    I strongly disagree with Tom Holtz that this situation is analogous to 
calling a titanothere "a rhino", or calling a pterosaur "a dinosaur".  I 
don't know of any prominent scientist who has so grossly misclassified such 
reptiles in many decades (and the public should indeed be educated on such 
matters).
    Crocodilia/Crocodylia is a completely different matter, as this taxon 
has long included a more inclusive "crocodyliform" content, and it is the 
fault of strict cladists for restricting the usage of this term.  The same 
goes for the even more short-sided redefinition of the term Amphibia 
(especially the most restricted redefinition to the crown group 
lissamphibians).  And try explaining to your fellow non-cladists (much less 
the public) the differences between tetrapods and stegocephalians, and watch 
their eyes roll or glaze over.
    As I have said before, cladistic splintering and redefinitions will 
inevitably lead to an increasing backlash from both the public and a very 
large silent majority of scientists who are really sick of it.  Sorry Chris 
and Tom, but this is just a sign of things to come, so better get used to 
it.
    My suggestion is that we concentrate on the more important things ---- 
that ichthyosaurs and pterosaurs are not dinosaurs, and that titanotheres 
are not rhinos.  But if we get upset every time cladistically splintered 
terminology is rejected, then we risk being ignored on the important stuff.
           -----Ken Kinman


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp