[Taxacom] Vicariant form-making

[John Grehan]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Karl Magnacca
> 
> Okay, having looked it up I see what Mike was talking about: it does
> indeed read like nonsense, including using different definitions for
> various words.  I don't see much point in continuing this discussion.

Ok. But at least you now understand the term.

> 
> On Thu, November 16, 2006 7:01 pm, Michael Ivie wrote:
> > Dear Taxacomers, isn't it clear he does this just for the attention?
If
> > no one answers his drivel, it will go away eventually (being as he
is a
> > true believing  evangelist, it might take a long time -- I am
thinking
> > of the scruffy guy preaching on street corners for weeks on end with
> > everyone just walking by them, ignoring them...).  I know, I am
giving
> > him the attention he craves, but hey, I am only human, and can only
take
> > so much.
> 
> Sigh...I know, I need to avoid the temptation.  There's just too few
> people to argue with around here.

I assume you view panbiogeography as drivel - which is ok. People are
entitled to their opinions. But keep in mind that the method works - no
one has ever demonstrated that the standard tracks and nodes do not
exist, that there are vicariant patterns that transcend dispersal
ability, that there are complementary main massings, or that the method
generated novel geological predictions that have been independently
corroborated by geologists. If you think its all drivel, how about
showing this to be the case for Heads' recent article on Fiji?

John Grehan