[Taxacom] Rejoinder to a monster review

[Richard Jensen]

John,

These examples reflect the decisions/opinions of individuals (perhaps
groups of individuals), not of the process of science.  I still contend
that suppression of knowledge is not part of the scientific endeavor (i.e.,
the process of science).  My role as a scientist is not to suppress airing
of ideas put forth by others.  Rather, my role, if I believe those ideas
are not worthy of being treated as science, is to provide evidence to
refute those ideas.

Dick J

On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 5:38 PM, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:

> And I must cite another explicit example. The editors of the popular
> science Journal 'Natural History' sent me a letter stating that they would
> never publish any viewpoint that did not conform to the molecular theory of
> humans and chimpanzees being most closely related. They would not allow
> molecular theory to be challenged. This from a journal that has its very
> reason for existence as the dissemination of science.
>
> John Grehan
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Richard Jensen <rjensen at saintmarys.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> John,
>>
>> Can you please cite references for your claim that the "process of
>> science is...to suppress".  While I know that there are numerous instances
>> of movements to suppress information, I wasn't aware that such suppression
>> was part of the process, at least not as I understand the process of
>> science.
>>
>> Dick J
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 4:22 PM, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I get the impression that quite a few natural science journals shy away
>>> from allowing debate or responses. Syst Biol certainly went that way over
>>> the attack they published against panbiogeography so I suppose its not
>>> surprising to see in other journals. After all, the process of science is
>>> not only to discover, but also to suppress. Not good or bad, but just the
>>> way it works.
>>>
>>> John Grehan
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Richard Zander <
>>> Richard.Zander at mobot.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Taxacomers:
>>> >
>>> > A monster review of my book was published by the journal Cladistics,
>>> but
>>> > they refused to publish my rebuttal. Another journal with a kindly
>>> editor
>>> > did so, however.
>>> >
>>> > My rejoinder to this nasty review was entirely collegial, gentle,
>>> caring
>>> > and supportive of all forms of systematics, and I hope solvent of
>>> > misunderstandings. I only mentioned Hitler once.
>>> >
>>> > Those of you who continue to enjoy the continuing and increasingly
>>> surreal
>>> > drama of the paraphyly wars might view my review of the review:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> http://phytoneuron.net/2014Phytoneuron/110PhytoN-ParaphylophilyResponse.pdf
>>> >
>>> > Richard
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -------
>>> > Richard H. Zander
>>> > Missouri Botanical Garden - 4344 Shaw Blvd. - St. Louis - Missouri -
>>> 63110
>>> > - USA
>>> > richard.zander at mobot.org<mailto:richard.zander at mobot.org>
>>> > Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm and
>>> > http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Taxacom Mailing List
>>> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>>> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>> >
>>> > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>
>>> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Richard Jensen, Professor
>> Department of Biology
>> Saint Mary's College
>> Notre Dame, IN 46556
>>
>
>


-- 
Richard Jensen, Professor
Department of Biology
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, IN 46556