[Previous by date - Re: AFROTHERIA, CROWS & SPECIES CONCEPTS]
[Next by date - RE: AFROTHERIA, CROWS & SPECIES CONCEPTS]
[Previous by subject - Re: AFROTHERIA, CROWS & SPECIES CONCEPTS]
[Next by subject - Re: AFROTHERIA, CROWS & SPECIES CONCEPTS]
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 12:20:42 -0400
From: JRW <jrwakefield@convergeadv.com>
To: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>, PhyloCode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu, dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: AFROTHERIA, CROWS & SPECIES CONCEPTS
> Therefore -- because everything is weird in human "phylogenetics" > -- nobody would regard a cladogram and phylogenetically defined names as > too weird to be taken serious. This looks like a great chance. Who'll try? > :-) Simple, we are all Pan. There is less differences in one genus of other groups than there is between several proposed genera in the human chain. There is also not enough hard measurable characteristics in the fossils found to make a definative cladogram. Thus, until there is, keep it with what we do know. Humans and Pan are 98% genetically idential, thus those species between must have been less diverse. We are all Pan. Richard Wakefield