[Taxacom] New monkey from Brazil

[J. Kirk Fitzhugh]

How is a bit of hair, a bit of DNA, etc., any more important than the 
physical evidence of a photo? There are no rules of inference that demand 
that a species hypothesis be based on one class of observations to the 
exclusion of any other class, including photographs.

Kirk

At 03:45 PM 5/17/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>Surely, a patch of hair would have been acceptable? or scat? or a DNA
>cheek swab?  Or more than one of these?  Or other things besides a
>photograph.  Not all photographs are equal.
>
>Very best,
>
>R. E. Tulloss
>
>_______________________________________________
>Taxacom mailing list
>Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

-----------------------------------------------------
J. Kirk Fitzhugh, Ph.D.
Curator of Polychaetes
Invertebrate Zoology Section
Research & Collections Branch
Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History
900 Exposition Blvd
Los Angeles CA 90007

Phone:   213-763-3233
FAX:       213-746-2999
e-mail:   kfitzhug at nhm.org
http://www.nhm.org/research/annelida/staff.html
http://www.nhm.org/research/annelida/index.html
----------------------------------------------------