RE: Philidor: No Class

["Richard Forrest" <richard@plesiosaur.com>]

The whole reptile/bird/dinosaur thing is a mess because the issue is
complex, confused and lacking in information. A cladistic analysis may give
a clearer resolution of the problem than a 'traditional' interpretation, but
that does not mean that it must be closer to the truth. The basic rule of
any computer programme is 'garbage in, garbage out'. My observation is that
papers publishing cladograms take raw data on characters without any
theoretical model of the combination of genetic, ontogentic and
biomechanical forces moulding those characters. I would suggest that without
such a theorical model, any cladistic analysis is essentially meaningless as
a phylogenetic interpretation.

Richard Forrest
richard@pleiosaur.com
www.plesiosaur.com


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu]On Behalf Of
John Conway
Sent: 29 August 2002 06:15
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Philidor: No Class



On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 02:50  PM, philidor11@snet.net wrote:

> On the other hand, the Linnaean system is so stable that your
> theorizing would be at the fringes.

Stable?! That stretches credulity. The whole reptile/dinosaur/bird MESS
is entirely linnaean. Phylogenetically it is much more stable.


John Conway, Palaeoartist

"All art is quite useless." - Oscar Wilde

Protosite: http://homepage.mac.com/john_conway/
Systematic ramblings: http://homepage.mac.com/john_conway/phylogenetic/