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

Re: [dinosaur] Nomenclatural consequences of Oculudentavis khaungraae case (free pdf)



I agree 100% with this work by Dubois!

Marco


------ Messaggio Originale ------
Su Sabato, 22 Ago, 20 At 16:52, Ben Creisler<bcreisler@gmail.com> da:

Ben Creisler
bcreisler@gmail.com

A new paper with free pdf:


Alain DUBOIS (2020)
Nomenclatural consequences of the Oculudentavis khaungraae case, with comments on the practice of 'retraction' of scientific publications.
ZOOSYSTEMA 42(23): 475-482
doi: https://doi.org/10.5252/zoosystema2020v42a23.
http://sciencepress.mnhn.fr/en/periodiques/zoosystema/42/23

Free pdf:
http://sciencepress.mnhn.fr/sites/default/files/articles/pdf/zoosystema2020v42a23.pdf


The recent publication in the journal Nature of a paper describing a new fossil as a 'hummingbird-sized dinosaur', followed immediately by a rebuttal stating that it was in fact a lizard, and then by the 'retraction' of the original paper, raised concerns about the nomenclatural availability of the new binomen Oculudentavis khaungraae that it introduced. It is shown here that so-called 'retraction', by authors, editors or publishers, of a controversial paper, has no bearing under the Rules of the Code on the nomenclatural availability of the paper and of the new nomina or nomenclatural acts it may contain, which can be withdrawn only by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature acting under its Plenary Power. It is furthermore argued that the principle of 'retraction of scientific publications itself is anti-scientific, harmful to the history of science, and belongs in the domain of 'denialism': it should be fully abandoned by serious scientific journals.

====

Virus-free. www.avg.com