[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: cladobabble--here we go again
> King, Norm wrote:
> > Jonathon Woolf wrote (11/14/97; 6:37a):
> > >OK, time for another of those stupid questions for which I am
> > >probably becoming infamous...
> > None of your questions are stupid. Any one who thinks they are should
> > re-evaluate his/her own attitudes. I hope there are always people around
> > who refuse to embrace new ideas until they have become old, tried and
> > true ideas (and maybe not even then). Our minds all work differently, and
> > such diversity can become the stuff of brilliance. Let's not put too
> > much "peer pressure" on conformity to ideas. Conformity to professional
> > standards, yes, but not to ideas.
> . All taxa should be defined in the same way so they are
> > OK, everybody--I've put on my fireproof suit, and now it's your turn.
> > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
> > Norman R. King tel: (812) 464-1794
> > Department of Geosciences fax: (812) 464-1960
> > University of Southern Indiana
> > 8600 University Blvd.
> > Evansville, IN 47712 e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
> It seems to be quite a struggle to master cladobabble, IMHO this is
> a very large deterant for the public to learn and support all the
> effort involved in palioantology, "if I can't pronounce it, how the
> hell can I spell it, or visualize in my mind what it is"?
> some frustration showing.
> Earl Wood