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

Re: Publication and the Code



Accessible, indeed, but seemingly not before november and nor after
december according to what I read on the musem website (
http://www.washakiemuseum.org/temporary_10.html ).

Hope that the holotype is remain in this institution, unless a world
tour was planned for "brontodiplodocus".

Jocelyn

2010/10/7 Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com>:
>
> I agree since it's electronic and has no indication of being deposited in 
> libraries, the paper does not meet ICZN standards.  Thus "brontodiplodocus" 
> is a nomen nudum.  As for the specimens being privately owned, the holotype 
> is said to be "on public exhibition at the Washakie Museum and Cultral 
> Center, Worland Wyoming."  So it seems publically accessable to me.  Not easy 
> to examine close up perhaps, but sauropod workers are no strangers to 
> holotypes being mounted in museums and hard to get at.  I should also note 
> that the authors examined and photographed real specimens like the Diplodocus 
> longus holotype, so even if their ideas are crazy, they're at least going 
> through the trouble to research in person as opposed to sitting behind their 
> computers.  Also the material is beautifully illustrated, much better than in 
> many (most?) valid descriptions of sauropods.  It should be easy to tell from 
> the photos what Amphicoelias "brontodiplodocus" is.  I think ignoring the 
> material helps no one.  The specimens exist and science isn't like a court 
> case where some evidence is inadmissable.
>
> Mickey Mortimer
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 00:37:35 +0100
>> From: mike@indexdata.com
>> To: danchure@easilink.com
>> CC: VRTPALEO@usc.edu; dinosaur@usc.edu
>> Subject: Re: Publication and the Code
>>
>> On 7 October 2010 00:14, Dan Chure  wrote:
>> >  I am reposting this because it might easily have been missed in a flurry 
>> > of
>> > posts about an Allosaurus specimen for sale.  However, this is of much
>> > broader import that the Allosaurus specimen.
>> >
>> > Tom Holtz posted this link:
>> >
>> > http://dinosauriainternational.com/downloads/Amphicoelias.pdf
>>
>> This paper proposes an extraordinary hypothesis -- that ALL Morrison
>> diplodocoids are congeneric -- and that requires extraordinary
>> evidence. But because the alleged evidence is all in privately owned
>> specimens, it can't be verified. In effect, there is no verifiable
>> evidence for the hypothesis. Add to this that the paper is privately
>> published, that it was not peer-reviewed, and that it suffers from
>> mechanical errors that do not speak well of its authors' competence
>> (such as a bibliography consisting mostly of papers that are never
>> cited), I think the best thing we can do is just ignore it. When the
>> specimens in question reside in a properly curated, publicly
>> accessible collection, and are published on in a peer-reviewed paper
>> in respected venue, then we'll be in a position to judge what the
>> taxonomic consequences, if any, of the new specimens are.
>>
>> (This is a shame, since the material is sensational and there are
>> plenty of gorgeous photographs in the paper.)
>>
>> -- Mike.
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > This paper might be of concern because this is a privately published
>> >  monograph, published by a commercial entity digging and selling fossils,
>> > creates a new taxon that synonymizes a number of long recognized distinct
>> > sauropod genera into it, and the "new" species' skeletons may be up for 
>> > sale
>> > in the future.  The issue of self publication of new taxa is occurring with
>> > some regularity in the dinosaurian arena of paleontology, but could impact
>> > any aspect of VP.  Some think the ICZN is quite out of date on the self
>> > publication issue and have handed down some faulty decisions about it in
>> > disciplines other than VP.  Others think that this is okay and will just
>> > sort itself out. I am not of the latter opinion.  Nevertheless, I thought
>> > that it would be useful for members of these list to be aware of this
>> > publication and its implications.
>> >
>> > Dan
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>



-- 
Jocelyn Falconnet