[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Overhauling the tree of life
In a message dated 9/30/00 3:00:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> and my conclusion was (and continues to
> be) that a cladisto-eclectic approach is what is most needed both in the
> short run, and most definitely for the long term.
I am not an anti-cladist but I have to agree with Ken on this. I have said
this before that cladisitics is merely _another_tool with which to discern
the tree of life. I view it as a necessary part of lower level taxonomy ,
i.e. below Family level. Linnaean or other taxonomic methods should never
entirely be abandoned.
To become so dogmatic with any ONE method, tool or belief system etc., to the
exclusion of all others such that other methods become "false" or useless, or
worse IMNSHO where the attack becomes personal , pays a disservice to science
and the scientific method.
1) The K-T impact/extinction theory
2) Origin of Birds
3) Cladistics vs. other methods
There are probably more. The archives of this list and other lists are rife
with flame wars over these topics which all degenreate to personal attack.
We _all_ should endeavor to be more ecclectic when using the tools of our
profession and with wach other.
My 2c worth.
Thomas R. Lipka