[Previous by date - Re: PhyloCode]
[Next by date - re: phylocode]
[Previous by subject - RE:PhyloCode]
[Next by subject - REPOST: Crowns, Panstems, and their Correspondence to each other]
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:12:42 -0500
From: [unknown]
To: phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: RE:PhyloCode
> Are there some proposals to eliminate species as a category in > PhyloCode > > > > Yes. I guess they won't have much success anytime soon, though. > > > thus generalizing even more living beings? > > > > How do you mean? It is no problem to name clades that are the siz= e of > > species or even smaller. I forgot to answer this point. If species is dropped then beings whic= h diverge from their species could be included. Yisrael ----- Original Message ----- =46rom: "Yisrael Asper" <yisraelasper@comcast.net> To: <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 6:21 PM Subject: Re: PhyloCode > I am not saying for sure the Linnaean system will evaporate even ce= rtainly > not without a fight but I do see that if and it could be fast since= I have > seen remarkably quickly radical scientific ideas become accepted as= the > consensus nowadays, PhyloCode becomes accepted and it would not sho= ck me if > it does then the ISPN will be its official representative and it's > definitions if not its soundness always will be accepted by the sci= entific > community. A parallel is with the IAU in the Astronomical community= which > has like it or not the final word on what is what in the heavens. W= e can > argue that the asteroid Ceres is a planet for instance but unless t= he IAU > were to say that then it's just us talking. For the record I don't = want > Ceres being declared a planet. Why? because it's a part of a belt n= amely the > Asteroid Belt. As for PhyloCode I would not be the least bit surpri= sed if in > ten years or less it is accepted. > > Yisrael > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Marjanovic" <david.marjanovic@gmx.at> > To: "PML" <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu> > Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 6:00 PM > Subject: Re: PhyloCode > > > > > If PhyloCode becomes adopted then the ISPN would be able to exe= rt so > much > > > influence on all dictionary publishers in the world since when = it comes > to > > > the scientific definitions they would be dependent on the offic= ial > > > pronouncements of the scientific community and either accept or= reject > > > them > > > as being in usage but they could not invent their own. > > > > Do you expect that on January 1, 200n, the Linnaean system will > immediately > > evaporate, without a fight? I _hope_ that by then more _professio= nal > > systematic biologists_ will have _heard_ of PN than not. I do thi= nk you > will > > be right -- in (n + 20). Or perhaps as soon as in (n + 10), but t= hat must > be > > doubted. >