[Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

[Bob Mesibov]

Richard Zander wrote:

"Note to Bob Mesibov: I've already detailed on Taxacom recently a suggested method for conciliating (as best possible) the results of different approaches to taxonomic analysis and classification. Above is an example."

In which case we're talking past one another. Your conciliation involves hypothesising an overall evolutionary scenario that best explains incongruent data and can be used as base for a maximally useful classification. Your aims are the evolutionary hypothesis, and the classification, which are fine. My aim is to understand what actually happened in the evolution of each lineage.

Jason Mate correctly points out that one person's signal is another's noise. It's worth remembering that *there is no such thing as incongruence*, for the same reason.
-- 
Dr Robert Mesibov
Honorary Research Associate
Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and
School of Zoology, University of Tasmania
Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
Ph: (03) 64371195; 61 3 64371195
Webpage: http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/?articleID=570