[Taxacom] Should we act now to stop an attack on the rules of Zoological Nomenclature?
Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman
viper007 at live.com.au
Fri Aug 9 22:45:12 CDT 2013
Doug, you’ve missed the point and let’s hope not deliberately.
Wuster went well beyond the bad taxonomy argument and attacks solely against me long ago!
In fact Wuster has made it clear he and his mates seek to rename valid taxa based on “good taxonomy” as in well established species and genera, based on robust evidence and widely accepted (e.g. Aspidorhynchus Fitzinger, 1843,), noting that the late and great Fitzinger is not in a position to argue and fight against Wuster and his mate Van Vallach, who have already sought to rename dozens of Fitzinger species via the introduction of one or more junior synonyms to his name/s!
Doug, I am sure you know “bad taxonomy” is a red-herring argument and used to justify baseless personal attacks, as “bad taxonomy” has always been adequately dealt with via the rule of synonymy. Non-taxa are simply ignored! But based on your preceding post, it may be worth asking are you as an ICZN commissioner there to protect the code, or instead allow it to be attacked from outside and within, with literally every single species being put at risk of renaming by a new generation of cowboys?
As for your comments here, the ICZN were never asked by me to intervene in taxonomic disputes, but you were specifically asked in relation to the publishing of an “opinion” in relation to nomenclatural matters currently destabilizing the code itself, which are within the ICZN’s long-standing domain!
Snakebustersâ - Australia's best reptilesâ
The only hands-on reptilesâ shows that lets people hold the animalsâ.
Reptile partiesâ, events, courses
Phones: 9812 3322
0412 777 211
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 18:44:22 -0700
From: dyanega at ucr.edu
To: viper007 at live.com.au
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Should we act now to stop an attack on the rules of Zoological Nomenclature?
Loathe as I am to rise to the bait, as a Commissioner I should point
out two very fundamental things.
(1) The Code has no mechanism of enforcement, and no power of
compulsion to influence the willingness of taxonomists to comply
with the rules. The lepidopterological community, for instance, has
decided to ignore the Code's rules regarding gender agreement. We
can't stop them from doing this, just as we can't stop the
herpetological community from deciding whose names they would rather
(2) The Commission still - at this point in time - has a
long-standing policy of not interfering in disputes over taxonomy.
Whether you agree with their claims or not (obviously you do not),
Wuster and others have accused you (and others) of being
unscientific, and doing bad taxonomy, and they are quite
explicit in stating that this is why they are urging people to
ignore your work. To the extent that one accepts the claim of your
work being unscientific (and there is, in my view, ample reason to
agree with this assessment), then their objections are relevant to
the Code under certain interpretations, but anything relating to bad
taxonomy is outside the Commission's jurisdiction, and as such they
are free to express their opinion, and others are free to agree with
Doug Yanega Dept. of Entomology Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314 skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
"There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
More information about the Taxacom