[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Non-serpentine lacertids (was RE:WHAT'S GOING ON?)

I think Tom is also wrong in trying to make a distinction between species taxa and higher taxa. Chris was talking about taxa as individuals, but they seem to feel that removal somehow destroys the the "completeness" and naturalness of such "individuals". Is a mother any less an individual after she gives birth?
They are probably just too attached to the sister species concept (convention actually). In reality a mother species gives birth to a daughter species. So I don't think it unnatural to think of a mother class (Reptilia) giving rise to a daughter Class (Aves) when the daughter gives rise to a very successful and divergent lineage.
They can say it is arbitrary exactly where one cuts the umbilical cord, and in that way get away from confronting the real issue (removal). Actually, they don't have "tomophobia"---it is paraphylophobia, which is reinforced through 30 years of peer pressure.
It's not cutting that bothers them, since they slice up their trees like everybody else. It's that paraphyletic removal that scares them, even the way it is done in the Kinman System (which shouldn't scare them at all, but they respond to it without considering, much less understanding, the advantages). It's sort of like a knee-jerk reaction.
------Ken Kinman
From: Dinogeorge@aol.com
Reply-To: Dinogeorge@aol.com
To: tmk@dinosauricon.com
CC: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Non-serpentine lacertids (was RE:WHAT'S GOING ON?)
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 16:18:09 EDT

In a message dated 7/3/00 3:03:18 PM EST, tmk@dinosauricon.com writes:

<< But why cut at all, when it obscures phylogeny? >>

Why not cut, when "every child knows" the difference between a bird and a
dinosaur? Not cutting obscures morphology.
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com