[Taxacom] Fwd: Woodpeckers, primates, as well as the Wallace Line gauntlet

[Jason Mate]

John,

there are two ways, dispersal or vicariance. You can´t have 3rd way of "vicariance but unsupported", or is that your null? If your data doesn´t support vicariance you know which box you can tick. Saying "Using chance dispersal as an imagined explanation leads nowhere as it fails to predict biogeographic patterns or geological correlations" is nonsensical. Do you honestly believe that history is that clean? That it is a beautiful story played along tectonic blocks just for our delight? Who forgot to tell the Hawaiian terrestrial biota? 
Have a good one.


Jason



> Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 08:31:25 -0400
> From: jgrehan at sciencebuff.org
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Fwd:  Woodpeckers, primates,	as well as the Wallace Line gauntlet
> 
> Jason,
> 
> You are correct that the panbiogeographic method assumes neither
> vicariance nor dispersal. But the result of the global analyses is that
> track patterns do not support means of dispersal (theorized
> dispersability) from imagined centers of origin as the key to the origin
> of distribution and differentiation. 
> 
> Using chance dispersal as an imagined explanation leads nowhere as it
> fails to predict biogeographic patterns or geological correlations.
> Whether this is 'open minded' or not one can decide for one's self - if
> it matters to anyone. I wonder if its more open minded than the reaction
> one gets periodically that the successes of panbiogeography in making
> tectonic correlations or geological predictions was just meaningless
> blind luck. Only in evolutionary theory does this philosophy of science
> seem to be acceptable.
> 
> It is an irony that molecular papers over the last decade have focused
> more and more on presenting maps of distribution for their taxa,
> something that was often lacking or poorly presented in many (but not
> all) morphologically based studies.
> 
> John Grehan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Jason Mate
> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 5:25 PM
> To: Taxacom
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Fwd: Woodpeckers, primates, as well as the
> Wallace Line gauntlet
> 
> 
> 
> >  
> > As usual, I'm in complete agreement with everything you've written.
> Using chance (dispersal) to explain a pattern is just nihilism and leads
> nowhere. On the positive side, have a look at the Mol. Phylogen. Evol.
> website. 13 of the 46 forthcoming papers (28%) have chosen to put maps
> in their graphic abstracts - their most interesting result was a
> geographic pattern! At the rate these patterns are now accumulating, I
> can't see the concept of chance dispersal lasting much longer. Once it's
> dropped, a real science of biogeography may develop. 
> 
> Yup, Panbiogeography is an open-minded endeavour indeed where neither
> vicariance nor dispersal is assumed. Or am I misreading? ;)
>  		 	   		  
> _______________________________________________
> 
> 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