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

RE: Platecarpus tympaniticus - how to analyze a nomen dubium

Nick, you should know better. Take the tomato like a man.

Marsh named *Ceratops,* *Ceratopsidae,* and *Ceratopsia.* He was presumably 
aware of the use of the first to coin the latter two, coined a mere 2 years 
earlier, and blissfully unaware of the incorrect stem of _ops_.


Jaime A. Headden
The Bite Stuff (site v2)

"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 

> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 02:53:55 -0400
> From: npharris@umich.edu
> To: tijawi@yahoo.com
> CC: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Re: Platecarpus tympaniticus - how to analyze a nomen dubium
> Quoting Tim Williams :
> > To put it another way, unless Marsh was 100% clear that Ceratopsia
> > was named after _Ceratops_ (rather than Ceratopsia and _Ceratops_
> > just having the same etymologies) then there is no requirement under
> > PhyloCode to include the _C. montanus_ type as an internal specifier
> > for Ceratopsia.
> Except that "Ceratopsia" isn't based on _Ceratops_ (that would be
> Ceratopia), but must instead be based on something like "Ceratopsis".
> (Ducks rotten tomato)
> ****************************************************************
> Nicholas J. Pharris
> "An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how
> much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know
> and what you don't."
> --Anatole France