[Taxacom] Seed plants of Fiji

[John Grehan]

Michael Ivie is quite correct in noting that nothing is "totally"
independent in science. However, that was not my intention and I am
sorry that he was not sufficiently familiar with panbiogeography to know
that. The independence of panbiogeography stems from the methods and
principles that are specific to the research program. Those methods and
principles involve spatial analysis of geographic relationships in terms
of tracks, nodes, baselines, and main massings, and geological
correlation. These are all conceptual tools specific to panbiogeography
- although various researchers have used one or more of these techniques
both before and after panbiogeography was formalized. 

The significance of the methodological independence may be seen with the
synthesis of geology and biogeography. Most studies approach geology in
terms of accepting a particular geohistorical narrative and then
constructing the biogeographic narrative based on various assumptions
about centers of origin, dispersal ability, and age of the taxon. In
panbiogeography one must first identify the spatial characteristics of
individual and multiple distributions in terms of their track, node,
baseline, and main massing geography. These characteristics provide a
way of predicting the probable geographic sector involved, and from that
one can associate the relevant geological context in terms of
correlating geological patterns with the biogeographic pattern. The
correlation or lack thereof can provide a purely biogeographic basis by
which to predict to what extent a theorized geological history may or
may not be involved with the evolution of that distribution.
Correlations between distributions and particular geomorphological
features may lead to predictions that do not correspond with consensus
views about geohistory, or they may correspond only to some
geohistorical narratives (either the majority view or one or more
minority views). Craw (1987) gives a good illustration with respect to
the Chatham Islands, showing how there were two entirely contradictory
geohistorical theories and that both could be supported by the tracks
through a different geohistorical context. But the geomorphological
correlation itself rests on the geological context given to those
features so the application of the method itself is influenced by
background knowledge in geology as it may also be influenced by
systematic theory. The process is known as reciprocal illumination.

John Grehan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Michael A. Ivie
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:13 PM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Seed plants of Fiji
> 
> I have been following this, but finally have the piece of info needed
to
> understand:
> 
> John Grehan wrote:
> 
> > They neither help nor hinder if one accepts that biogeography
> >
> >constitutes an independent research program with its own methods and
> >principles. That is true of panbiogeography, but it may not be true
of
> >all other methods. There are geologists who have suggested such
> >structures as I have talked about, but you wont see them by just
looking
> >at a map of the Pacific.
> >
> >
> If something is totally independent of everything else, and relies
only
> on internal logic, not on consistency with other sources of
information,
> it is called RELIGION,  which is consistent with "Panbiogeograpy," the
> holy scripture of which is Croizat's wonderfully ambiguous and totally
> unreadable (except by the faithful) books of the same title.
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom mailing list
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom