[Taxacom] quote of the week

[John Grehan]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karl Magnacca [mailto:kmagnacca at alumni.wesleyan.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 11:43 AM
> To: John Grehan
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] quote of the week
> 
> On Wed, March 26, 2008 12:45 pm, John Grehan wrote:
> > What is the point of this sarcasm?
> 
> I can't speak for Pierre, but I will anyway, since I had to restrain
> myself from writing a similar post.  The point, dear sir, is to try to
get
> into your head some of the irritation that many on Taxacom feel as a
> result of your filling up the list with constant posts on your pet
> subject.  

But everyone on the list has the right to fill it up with their constant
posts on their pet subjects - or is this not correct?

If you have genuine data on it then by all means go ahead and
> publish it in a journal.  But the innumerable posts that display an
> astonishing lack of knowledge about cladistics, phylogenetics,
genetics,
> molecular biology, etc., etc., get tiresome pretty quickly.

If you feel that way, then don't read my posts.

> A real morphological study showing a closer relationship between
> orangutans and humans than humans and chimps would be interesting.
Yet
> another listserv post, about how an isolated character (one that
requires
> intense squinting for a non-specialist to perceive in the way you
> apparently do) is going to overturn molecular evidence that you
> simultaneously display stunning ignorance of - not so interesting.

Sorry, I can't figure out how you thought there was only an isolate
character. I have made it clear in various posts that there are at least
30 well substantiated characters. However, I do post items pertaining to
individual characters as they arise. Perhaps you had not seen the
earlier posts and so in future I will continue to mention the total
number of characters when any one is being discussed to avoid this
confusion.

John Grehan