[Taxacom] Origin of New Caledonian Biogeography

John Grehan jgrehan at sciencebuff.org
Tue Nov 18 14:20:29 CST 2008


Of course the relevance of something that does not appear is obscure.
How could it be otherwise?

In what way does the lizard distribution not follow the structure Heads
referred to?

John Grehan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Geoff Read
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:42 PM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Origin of New Caledonian Biogeography
> 
> >>> On 19/11/2008 at 4:45 a.m., "Robert Huber" <rhuber at wdc-mare.org>
> wrote:
> > And I promise: I will never join discussions on panbiogeography
again
> unless
> > I can provide some peer reviewed and published arguments ;)
> 
> Actually, apart from the title, the word panbiogeography hardly
appears
> (twice in the conclusions), and the word track never appears. So its
> relevance is obscure.
> 
> I struggled to believe after failing to concur with the author's
Method
> statement that 'It was observed that the lizard disjunction in New
> Caledonia (Fig. 1A) follows a major geological structure, the sillon
or
> furow.'  And the word 'follow' just doesn't hack it as a useful
technical
> term.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom mailing list
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom




More information about the Taxacom mailing list