PhyloCode: The real problem...again

Ron at Ron at
Sat Jul 5 23:47:11 CDT 2003

----- Original Message -----
From: "Curtis Clark" <jcclark at CSUPOMONA.EDU>
Subject: Re: PhyloCode: The real problem...again

At 19:28 2003-07-05 -0400, Ron Gatrelle wrote:
>>Fascism is a completely legitimate form of political
>> philosophy - just look it up in any dictionary.


> I guess I'm not enough of a political scientist to understand why the
connection with nomenclature is more than just rhetoric.

That was Mike's whole point, there is an _agenda_ (the real problem) behind
the Phylocode.  It is laced with elements endemic to fascism: "movement
based on"... "censorship" and "a policy of belligerent [elitism]".  Their
way or the highway.  Hardliners can not be negotiated with.   My whole
point is that strong words and actions are called for - an unequivocal
stand must be taken.  "They" have left us no choice.  This is not cynicism,
it's facing reality.

> >Throwing some trite URL
> >at it don't change the spots on the Phylocode Leopard.
> You're really pissed, aren't you.

This is actually one of the things about email I am most fascinated with -
assumed moods and intents.  Actually, I was/am anything but pissed.  I just
had nothing better to do.   It's more like getting the overreaction of
people (say a spots fan) when you egg them on a bit about how bad their
team is.  They are the serious ones, the ones that get pissed.  Everyone
else is just having fun.  My whole post was nothing but superfluity and

The sensitivity (from my view) was the overreaction to the legitimate use
of the word fascism - which has nothing to do with Hitler or the Nazis,
except Mussolini was an ally.  It has been said that you can't get
someone's goat unless they have a goat to get.  I figured I could get a
whole herd with the right words.  Like the following...

> >Some of you remind me of a liberal lawyer trying to persuade
> >a jury of the "goodness inside" of a serial rapist.
> Are you telling us that Phylocode and serial rapists are equivalent?
> rather harsh.

That response was so predictable, I could have just wrote it into the
script.  So expecting it, yes.  Phylocode is want to (if left alone - not
resisted) forceably (against the will) strip the traditional taxonomic
community of its activity, system and nomenclature.   THAT is rape.  If I
get mugged and the mugger takes all my money and all my clothes - then
gives me back my underwear and socks, should I say thank you.  Oh, thank
you for leaving us species and subspecies to classify (play with). OK
enough word jousting.

Biological evolution is not friendly to chemistry or mathematical analysis.
Life has a will of its own and makes up its own laws as it goes along.
mtDNA, for  xample, is virtually useless in detecting subspecies and is
incapable of recognizing varioius species.   It is a wonderful tool and
needed (I am currently utilizing it myself) - but the vast majority of time
it simply confirms what we already knew were species or not the "old
fashioned way".  Sometimes it unmasks (splits) cryptic (to humans) species.
At other times is lumps totally and easily manifest species as the same.
By its maternal base, it can not even manifest some hybrids.   The great
minimization of biological, ecological, behavioral, morphological and other
tools (including human instinct) and _over emphasis_ on what is seen under
the microscope and in chemicals will eventually become a thing of the past.
Until these tools are brought down to earth and take a place _along side_
the other tools, those who wield the technology can not be allowed to strip
the current systems or destroy them.

Ron Gatrelle

PS  If it aint simple, it probably aint truth.

More information about the Taxacom mailing list