Editorial follies: why sweat the small stuff

[Ken Kinman]

>>Reid,Robert (1998): Mass stranding of horseshoe crabs. Underwater
>>Naturalist 24(2), 22-26.
>>What is whimsical about this? Sorry for my naivete. I don't get it.
*******************************************************************
Dear Dave and other Taxacomers:
      I agree with Dave---this sounds like a very interesting article,
which I intend to read now that I know about it.  However, I also agree
that the mermaid paper (although I haven't seen it) might be something
we could have done without and used the journal space more effectively.
      But why sweat the small stuff?  Personally I'm am much more
worried about scientific misinformation that looks and sounds very
serious and scientific, but really turns out to be circular reasoning
and trying to justify preconceived notions.  That's why I am shocked
that the Mayr vs. Woese debate (as one example) has received almost no
attention on TAXACOM.  Both Mayr and Woese realize that this is no
arcane debate, and it is sad that most biologists seem to be treating it
as such.  Depending on how things turn out, this debate will someday be
seen as either a important turning point or as a missed
opportunity---and in the end, such a missed opportunity will result in a
great deal of unnecessary scientific confusion and REAMS UPON REAMS of
wasted journal space.  Sorry to be so pessimistic, but that's how I see
it.
                                     Kenneth E. Kinman


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com