[Taxacom] Antw:Re: Antw:Re: Evolution of human-ape relationships, remains open for investigation

Dick Jensen rjensen at saintmarys.edu
Fri Aug 12 21:26:12 CDT 2011 

Gosh, John.  If I recall correctly, your response to Don C. was to "read the paper"!  What's good for the goose isn't good for the gander?

Dick J

----- Original Message -----
From: John Grehan <jgrehan at sciencebuff.org>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Sent: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:46:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Antw:Re: Antw:Re: Evolution of human-ape	relationships, remains open for investigation

This kind of assertion is uninformative and pointless. If Peter can specify something in particular about those papers that make a point for him then there is something to discuss. Just saying 'read the papers' is silly (it would be like me saying that to those who ask questions on this list about panbiogeography or make various assertions about it to go read the panbiogeographic literature).

Most of what is talked about on this list in all manner of subjects has been talked about or said before somewhere.


John Grehan

-----Original Message-----
From: P.H. HOVENKAMP [mailto:phovenkamp at casema.nl] 
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 3:22 PM
To: John Grehan; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Antw:Re: [Taxacom] Antw:Re: Evolution of human-ape relationships, remains open for investigation

Straight from the horse's mouth:
I expect a discussion to continue from where it was stopped, not to be repeated from the beginning for ever and ever and ever and ever. 
In this discussion, the participants are repeating the arguments made between 1966 (significant date) and 1985 (approximately, date without any significance whatsoever), apparently without realizing it. 

I don't know whether I can expect that John realizes that his arguments are incoherent - but others should realize that they have been made before.

Read the papers.

Best,

Peter Hovenkamp




Op 12/08/11, John Grehan   schreef: 

> Bet all you like Pierre, but I want to hear from Peter directly.
> 
> John Grehan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu](javascript:main.compose() On Behalf Of Pierre Deleporte
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 12:38 PM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Antw:Re: Evolution of human-ape relationships, remains open for investigation
> 
> 
> I bet Peter is suggesting that you read it before talking of cladistic 
> analysis with outgroup rooting
> I further bet that Peter is expecting that this reading could help you 
> to understand your own logical incoherence - like a priori selecting 
> characters a clique-lique way, while performing standard parsimony 
> analysis on the surviving data set, while acknowledging at the same time 
> that the characters you assassinated would have survived for an analysis 
> at a larger phylogenetic scale (see you last posts), all kinds of 
> inconsistencies the Maddisons would certainly not recommend - see also 
> your pet textbooks (if any, I have growing doubts about this...)
> 
> Pierre
> 
> 
> Le 12/08/2011 18:20, John Grehan wrote:
> > So what is the point you want to make with respect to Maddison et al?
> >
> > John Grehan
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: P.H. HOVENKAMP [mailto:phovenkamp at casema.nl](javascript:main.compose()
> > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 4:57 PM
> > To: John Grehan; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > Subject: Antw:Re: [Taxacom] Evolution of human-ape relationships, remains open for investigation
> >
> > This is exactly the topic of the discussion in the 70ties/80ies I referred to earlier.
> >
> > If this post makes it to the list: scroll down in John's previous message to find a number of references to classic papers in which this topic is treated. To which may be added a paper by Maddison, Donoghue and Maddison from 1984 on outgroups and parsimony.
> >
> > Apparently, these are still relevant, and are to be considered required reading.
> >
> > Peter Hovenkamp
> >
> > Op 11/08/11, John Grehan  schreef:
> >
> >> "Binary transformation series, whether restricted in a way that one
> >> character state is present in the ingroup and absent in the outgroup or
> >> not, contribute the same number of steps to a parsimony analysis
> >> independently of the polarity assessment so identifying polarity in this
> >> characters prior to the analysis is irrelevant."
> >>
> >> But an algorithm cannot distinguish derived states if they are not
> >> specified. If one mixes in non-derived states and codes them as such,
> >> then no problem - but then why bother including them?
> >>
> >> John Grehan
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >>
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >>
> >> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
> >>
> >> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >
> > The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
> >
> > (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pierre DELEPORTE
> UMR6552 EthoS
> Université Rennes 1
> CNRS
> Station Biologique
> 35380 PAIMPONT
> tél (+33) 02 99 61 81 63
> fax (+33) 02 99 61 81 88
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> 
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
> 
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
> 
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> 
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:
> 
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
> 
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org

(2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

More information about the Taxacom mailing list