[Previous by date - Re: PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]
[Next by date - Re: PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]
[Previous by subject - PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]
[Next by subject - PhyloCode: Re: Sereno's (2005) new definitions]
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:25:48 +0100 (MET)
From: [unknown]
To: phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications
> > > If PhyloCode wins it will take over the vocabulary of Evolution= . > > > > Sorry, I don't understand that either. ~:-) > > In dictionaries you have listed specialized uses for words like the > word work in ordinary life and the word work in physics. Physics > doesn't care how much someone sweats to declare something work. So = if > PhyloCode wins it will be used for Evolution irrespective of ordina= ry > usage like with dinosaurs and birds. I disagree. Firstly, the PhyloCode does not try to define evolution. = It=20 defines clade names and nothing else. Secondly, evolution already has= a=20 definition -- the one evolutionary biologists use. The PhyloCode coul= dn't=20 change that even if it wanted to. Really, stop being concerned about dictionaries and glossaries. :-) > My goodness! Welcome to the 21st. century! Indeed. :-) --=20 Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch? NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie