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

RE: Princeton Field Guide



David Marjanovic wrote:

<Whatever you want it to be.>

  And this tells me that effective scientific discourse cannot occur on the 
definition of the word "genus." Thanks, David, for proving what I wrote 
earlier. This also tells me that I _can_ have 70 species of *Varanus* (or more, 
many more) and it would be _right_, because (gosh darnit) I'm worth it, and my 
CV will be so _HUGE_.

  You see, the issue is cascading: A genus, a family, a species, are all ranks. 
And in their pretense, systematists will at least adhere to one of these as a 
recognition of true biological or taxonomic utility (mostly the species, but 
sometimes the genus) and enforce this through nomenclature, which must be then 
followed. So I cannot really pretend that some taxa do not exist because my 
concept structure is different from theirs. Note how the quoted premise does 
not benefit science?

Cheers,

Jaime A. Headden
The Bite Stuff (site v2)
http://qilong.wordpress.com/

"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)

"Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different 
language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to 
kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at 
things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)