Biogeography of Dietes (Iridaceae)

Ken Kinman kinman at HOTMAIL.COM
Thu Jan 23 06:15:10 CST 2003

      I couldn't agree more.  I am still not sure if this brand of
panbiogeography is too much "pan" or too little "pan".  It just doesn't
strike me as very predictively heuristic.  More like being frozen by an
excessive and overwhelming fear of circular reasoning, and thus ending up
with a rather minimal amount of scientific value.
      Charles Darwin got some things wrong, but considering what was known
at the time, he was incredibly good at pushing the envelope----and the
overall fitness of his ideas have certainly given them a superior ability to
survive much competition and "predation".  I suspect the same will happen
with the ideas of Ernst Mayr which have gotten a lot of criticism in the
past decade or so.  So it goes.   It all comes out in the scientific "wash"
eventually, and future philosophers and historians of science are going to
have their hands full analyzing the past couple of decades in the history of
              ----- Ken
>From: Geoff Read < at NIWA.CO.NZ>
>Reply-To: Geoff Read < at NIWA.CO.NZ>
>Subject: Re: Biogeography of Dietes (Iridaceae)
>Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:52:16 +1300
> > I cannot comment informatively on such speculations. The track homology
> > suggests that the evolution of Dietes is most closely bound with the
> > geological history of the Indian Ocean.
>Gosh, that's fantastic news! What a revelation! Thank goodness
>panbiogeography is around to shed light into  these quirky dark corners of
>distribution of life on our planet.
>John, feel free to quote that endorsement on the cover of your next book.
>Not to be unkind, and it's an interesting happenstance, and I love these
>conundrums as much as anyone, but there is only one eastern data point. I
>don't think calling the simple reality a standard track is of any benefit
>to the
>rest of us.
>   Geoff Read < at>

MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*

More information about the Taxacom mailing list