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

Re: Minotaurasaurus controversy

----- Original Message ----- From: "Luis Oscar Romero" <lor@fibertel.com.ar>
To: "dinosaur" <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 6:38 PM
Subject: RE: Minotaurasaurus controversy

English not being my native language, maybe I have failed to be clear. What I meant by "properly published" it's a new publication that replaces the former one, assigns a new name to the fossil, and drops the bad guy into oblivion... (".. The name of the perpetrator...").

But there is no way to drop a valid name into oblivion, and *Minotaurasaurus* is valid, because there is a type specimen, a diagnosis, and so on. Neither the provenance of the specimen nor (while I am at it) the stupid second _a_ in the name matter at all. To assign a new name to the fossil would mean to create an objective junior synonym which would be invalid.

The whole ICZN is online: http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp