[Taxacom] Phylogenetic Classification?

Thomas Lammers lammers at uwosh.edu
Mon Jul 27 06:24:20 CDT 2009

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Zander <Richard.Zander at mobot.org>
> I abhor creationism, and am sorry that it is such a scary thing in
> California. On the other hand, classification is the basis for
> scientific study of nature, biodiversity, and natural processes.
> Classification by holophyly is a major disaster for Western 
> science. And it is happening now.

Agreed.  The threat to science of the patrently unscientific dogma of cladistic classification is FAR greater  than creationism.  Creationism is an external threat, championed by a few religious nuts. Cladistic classification is a rot from within, championed by alleged scientists.

No one has yet explained to me what scientific principle paraphyletic groups violate.   No one has yet explained to me why we can only bestow names on holophyletic taxa.  Oh, I hear lots of words, but they are devoid of meaning.  They are pious blather.

Some day, cladistic classification will join its philosophical kin Phlogiston Theory, Lysenkoism, and Hollow Earth Theory on the scrap heap of history.

Thomas G. Lammers, Ph.D.

Associate Professor and Curator of the Herbarium
Department of Biology and Microbiology
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh


More information about the Taxacom mailing list