Re: Gaia theropod follow-up: a "new" phylogeny

["Jeffrey Martz" <jeffmartz@earthlink.net>]

>Excuse me! Please explain that before I misunderstand the meaning. Insomuch
>that the too much information becomes just NOISE!!! And not a real outcome.


    All right, this can have a grain of truth.  If you read the part in
somebody's analysis where they discuss previous phylogenies, they will
frequently bring up characters that were coded that actually show a lot of
individual variation, post mortem distortion, were actually plater
reconstructions etc... these characters, which do not contribute to
understanding evolutionary relationships for whatever reason, might be
considered "noise" and should be weeded out.
    However, if you mean that cladists should limit the number of valid
features which do seem to show significant similarities and differences
between taxa, I find this a hard position to defend.  I think what you mean
is, "when I read a phylogenetic analysis, it looks like a big confusing list
of numbers and stuff and I don't have or want to take the time to got
through the characters and how they are coded and try to understand them".
Go through Holtz's or anyone else's data matrix and decide which characters
have significance in determining evolutionary relationships and which don't
before you decide which are "noise".  Before you and George complain about
how impossibly time consuming this is, keep in mind that this is something
anybody performing a cladistic analysis should do.  Read the introductory
discussions on previous phylogenies in most analyses, and you will find that
they do just that.  If you take the time to review and understand the
characters, it stops being "noise" and starts meaning something.

>It changes and changes and changes, over and over again.

    One point that has been made already is that it hasn't been changing
that much lately, mostly just in the details.  What is important is WHY it
is changing!  Don't just throw up your hands and say "its too complicated to
understand so it must be completely meaningless and incomprehensible".  If
you want to criticize a phylogeny, be a little more specific.

LNJ
*****************************************************************
It is our duty to make the best of our misfortunes and not to suffer passion
to interfere withour interest and the public good.
-George Washington

It is your business when the wall next door catches fire.
-Horace
*****************************************************************
Jeffrey W. Martz
Graduate student, Department of Geosciences, Texas Tech University
3002 4th St., Apt. C26
Lubbock, TX 79415
(806) 747-7910
http://illustrations.homestead.com/Illustration.html