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

RE: Monotremes

Anthony Docimo writes:
 > >  > >  > Is it "parochial" because its human?
 > >  > >
 > >  > >No.
 > >  >
 > >  > ah.
 > >  >
 > >  > then *why* is it parochial?  that's what I don't understand.
 > >
 > >Let me quote myself (or you can just scroll up 25 lines :-) The
 > >view from _any_ absurdly short slice of geological time will be
 > >parochial.  As palaeontologists, our task is to look at the
 > >_whole_ of time
 > I've no problem with that....my concern is that people interested
 > in paleontology *might be frightened away* by the idea of having to
 > phrase everything in cladograms.

I really don't know what you mean by "phrase everything in
cladograms".  Does what we're discussing now -- the definition of
monotremes -- fall under that description?

All we're saying is that the nice, clear division of life into widely
separated groups that we see now is caused by ignoring the previous
half-billion years.  Is that "phrasing everything in cladograms"?

 > >(well, the range of time that encompasses the organisms we study,
 > >anyway.  Personally I can live without the Miocene.)
 > *makes a note to eliminate the Miocene*

Well, that's just for me.  For some reason, there are plenty of people
out there who find the Miocene wholly tolerable.

 _/|_    ___________________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor    <mike@indexdata.com>    http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "Ideally, the office staff should be able to simply turn on the
         APPLE ][, type {RESET} 6{CTRL}P {RETURN} and immediately be in
         the midst of the accounting program.  This is the essence of a
         "turnkey" system" -- Apple DOS "Do's and Don'ts" manual, 1979