Molecular biology = micromorphology

[John Grehan]

Just because misspellings are used to trace histories this does not mean
that misspellings NECESSARILY reflect historical sequence so that does
not show that random non coding mutations NECESSARILY reflect
phylogenetic sequence either (upper case for necessarily to emphasise
what I am concerned with here).

John Grehan

John Grehan 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taxacom Discussion List [mailto:TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Curtis Clark
> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 10:45 AM
> To: TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
> Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] Molecular biology = micromorphology
> 
> On 2005-11-28 07:25, John Grehan wrote:
> > I suppose the theoretical justification is out there somewhere, but
if
> > non coding mutations are random why should they necessarily reflect
> > phylogenetic sequence?
> 
> For the same reason that misspellings can be used to trace the
histories
> of medieval manuscripts: inheritance.
> 
> Or is that too Darwinian?
> 
> --
> Curtis Clark                  http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
> Web Coordinator, Cal Poly Pomona                 +1 909 979 6371
> Professor, Biological Sciences                   +1 909 869 4062