Re: Defining clades like a REAL man (Was: New PaleoBios pa

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

> To me, such a
> self-destructing clade definition seems like a coward's way out.

Well, fine -- I've always been proud to be a confessing coward. =8-)

> It encourages people to go ahead and name the clade irrespective of the
> support for the topology in which is was conceived, because the magic
> will make it vanish if it goes wrong.

It still requires careful choice of anchors so that it really vanishes even 
if something unforeseen goes wrong!

> But I think it's better to wait until all the phylogenetic ducks
> are in a row before naming the clade in the first place.

In principle I agree, but there are some possible clades that urgently need 
a defined name...

> "Those who do not understand UNIX are condemned to re-invent it,
> poorly" -- Henry Spencer.

:-D

-- 
Lust, ein paar Euro nebenbei zu verdienen? Ohne Kosten, ohne Risiko!
Satte Provisionen für GMX Partner: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/partner