[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Hanson 2006, Mortimer, Baeker response
On 6/25/06, Tim Williams <email@example.com> wrote:
>it was very sad to see what influence enthrallment with cladistics had on
>the design of the rennovated fossil halls at the High Temple of Cladistics,
>the AMNH in NYC.
I think the AMNH fossil halls are great. I hope to visit them again at the
end of the year.
I agree--the best natural history museum I've been to.
I will say this, though--basing the organization of specimens on
phylogeny is a bit unstable. Even on my first visit in '95 (or '96?),
shortly after the display was completed, there were already outdated
cladograms on display (e.g., with tyrannosaurids as carnosaurs).
Going the more normal route of organizing specimens by time period is
more stable. And of course helps to emphasize concepts like
paleoecology and "deep time".
That said, the structure of the tree of life at general levels is
pretty stable, and it's nice to see a museum trying something
different. And it is more effective at emphasizing the concept of life
on earth as a vast tree.
The Dinosauricon: http://dino.lm.com
Parry & Carney: http://parryandcarney.com