Re: Archaeoraptor still a nomen nudum

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/5/01 0:53:03 AM EST, bh480@scn.org writes:

<< Taken together, these shortcomings in Olson's attempt to attach the name 
Archaeoraptor to a dinosaur pretty well nullify his efforts and leave the 
name a nomen nudum. Under a strict reading of the ICZN, Olson's misguided 
 actions do not sink Microraptor nor deprive the paleontologists who 
published the full scientific description of their authorship. >>

I agree 100% with Ben's reading of the Code regarding Archaeoraptor, and I 
think that would ordinarily do it for anyone. But here we have a 
paleontologist of considerable reputation, from the National Museum of 
Natural History, who has been arguing exactly the opposite, namely, that 
Archaeoraptor is a validly created name that he has even affixed to a type 
specimen. I doubt whether Storrs Olson would accept Ben's "strict 
interpretation" of the code, in view of what he has already contributed to 
the situation. The purpose of adding Archaeoraptor to the index of rejected 
names is to confirm that the name no longer has any scientific standing, and 
to finish off this argument once and for all, so that there will be no 
further possibility of raising this issue again in the future.