[Previous by date - Re: ISPN, CPN, and Companion Volume]
[Next by date - Re: Apomorphy-based clades; was Re: Panstems]
[Previous by subject - RE: On the Other Phylogenetic Systematics, Nixon and Carpenter]
[Next by subject - RE: RE: Nathan Wilson's question]
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:02:55 -0400
From: [unknown]
To: phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: RE: Paleontology [was: Re: Thoughts on the Paris meeting]
Just for the record - I wasn't complaining about paleontologists, but was merely making an observation regarding percentages or numbers of representarives versus other groups, and I hadn't even mentioned vertebrate paleontologists specifically. The numbers reflect interest= by researchers in certain disciplines versus disinterest by others. Th= e facts that disciplines are disproportionately represented should be a concern if a code is meant to cover all taxonomic groups. Differences= in nomenclatural opinions aside, I actually enjoyed the opportnity to exchange ideas with paleontologists (when else would I interact with such individuals?), e.g. over dinner. -----Original Message----- =46rom: jonathan.r.wagner@mail.utexas.edu [mailto:jonathan.r.wagner@mail.utexas.edu]=3D20 Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 12:04 PM To: David A. Baum Cc: phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu Subject: Paleontology [was: Re: Thoughts on the Paris meeting] Quoting "David A. Baum" <dbaum@wisc.edu>: > I agree with Scott that the=3D20 > PhyloCode has become too concerned with the=3D20 > narrow concerns of vertebrate paleontologists [...] Could we please stop picking on VP? At least HALF of the vertebrate paleontologists at the meeting opposed these supposed accomodations t= o the "narrow concerns of vertebrate paleontologists." The proposal to limi= t definitions to node- and stem-based formats CAME from a vertebrate paleontologist. Many of the most emphatic objections to apomorphy-bas= ed definitions also came from vertebrate paleontologists. As far as I ca= n tell, proportionally more VP folks than vertebrate neontologists oppose panstems. Folks, it's not that vertebrate paleontologists are trying to bend th= e PhyloCode to their will, it is that there are a lot of VP people in the ISPN. There HAS been a subtle polarizing of the ISPN, with one group advocating certa= in ideas, and others opposing them. This polarity is NOT along disciplinary lin= es. As far as I can tell, paleontology and neontology are approximately equally represented in these groups relative to the composition of the Society as a whole= . So, please, lets concentrate on the ISSUES, and not the PEOPLE! Jon