[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Ancient neognaths without much generic diversity.

To: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Subject: Re: Ancient neognaths without much generic diversity.
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2008 16:27:36 +0200
References: <BAY110-W458343A7DE1A658194CDF2C53E0@phx.gbl>
Reply-to: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu

Could anyone explain this peculiar phenonemon?


It's very simple:

_*There is no such thing as generic diversity.*_

The term "genus" does not have a definition. Whatever I declare to be a genus is a genus; you can disagree, but I cannot be wrong (and neither can you).

What you are looking at is not biodiversity, it's tradition.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ancient neognaths without much generic diversity.
  - From: Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com>

References:
- Ancient neognaths without much generic diversity.
  - From: Brian Lauret <zthemanvirus@hotmail.com>

Prev by Date: Ancient neognaths without much generic diversity.
Next by Date: Birds have "thumb" genes like alligators: free pdf
Previous by thread: Ancient neognaths without much generic diversity.
Next by thread: Re: Ancient neognaths without much generic diversity.
Indexes: