Message 2005-12-0071: Re: PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications

Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:26:56 +0000

[Previous by date - PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]
[Next by date - Re: PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]
[Previous by subject - Re: PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]
[Next by subject - Re: PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications]

Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:26:56 +0000
From: [unknown]
To: phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: Re: PhyloCode: Re: PhyloCode Taxonomic Classifications

Dear Mike Taylor
I see now that species can be for whatever uses but is not a necessar=
y term for Evolution.
Yisrael Asper
yisraelasper@comcast.net
Pittsburgh PA

If it ain't broke, I can't fix it.


> > > > If PhyloCode wins it will take over the vocabulary of Evoluti=
on.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I don't understand that either. ~:-)
> >
> > In dictionaries you have listed specialized uses for words like t=
he
> > word work in ordinary life and the word work in physics. Physics
> > doesn't care how much someone sweats to declare something work. S=
o if
> > PhyloCode wins it will be used for Evolution irrespective of ordi=
nary
> > usage like with dinosaurs and birds.
>=20
> I disagree. Firstly, the PhyloCode does not try to define evolution=
. It=20
> defines clade names and nothing else. Secondly, evolution already h=
as a=20
> definition -- the one evolutionary biologists use. The PhyloCode co=
uldn't=20
> change that even if it wanted to.
>=20
> Really, stop being concerned about dictionaries and glossaries. :-)
>=20
> > My goodness! Welcome to the 21st. century!
>=20
> Indeed. :-)
>=20
> --=20
> Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch?
> NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie

  

Feedback to <mike@indexdata.com> is welcome!