[Taxacom] Forgotting at the edge of miracles
John Grehan
calabar.john at gmail.com
Fri May 1 12:11:05 CDT 2015
Yes, one could just say its all imaginary and go off and do something else.
John Grehan
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Pierre Deleporte <
pierre.deleporte at univ-rennes1.fr> wrote:
>
> In my view, "pure pattern" biogeography suffers of the same flaws
> as "pure pattern" (= purely 'struturalist') classifications
> (phenetics of ages, 'pattern cladistics' of varied sorts... pick your
> choice)
>
> there "are" no self-evident classifications and classes out there;
> we conceive them, not discover them as materially consistent entities
>
> there "are" no self-consistent 'clades' out there,
> they are conceived according to some rules and (hopefully) some needs
> (e.g. historical evolutionary narratives, or purely structuralist
> arbitrary classes...)
>
> there "are" no tracks or baselines out there,
> they are conceived such way by biogeographers of some kind
> who decide to trace virtual lines on maps according to some self-styled
> rules
>
> classificatory decisions (however sensible or not)
> are of course not "testable" in themselves; they are arguable at best -
> and explanations are inductive, not refutational in themselves
> (Kirk can explain that...)
>
> it is not clear for me if contemporaneous 'panbiogeography'
> is still conceived as a purely "independent" structuralist approach
> (see the rich archive on this list)
> or has been completely turned into plain classical vicariance biogeography
> (based on a privileged model of speciation and resulting distributions
> with explicit phylogenetic reference)
>
> if the latter is the case, why not abandon the panbiogeographic jargon,
> historically linked to a particular classificatory formalism?
> Hovencampian distributional "gaps" (= putative locations of 'barriers')
> between vicariant sister groups could profitably take the place of "tracks"
> with the advantage of possibly being two-dimensional
> (= considering the whole intervening zone
> between spatial distributions of sister groups).
>
> Best,
> Pierre
>
>
>
> Le 27/04/2015 12:56, Peter Hovenkamp a écrit :
>
>> That's interesting. You appear interested in refutations of tracks, nodes
>> and baselines.
>> Could you please take your favourite standard track, node or baseline (I
>> have no preference) and just lean back and think what evidence you would
>> accept as refuting evidence. Then let us know.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Peter Hovenkamp
>>
>>
>> John Grehan schreef op 26-Apr-15 om 6:45 PM:
>>
>>> I’m not so sure that the situation in biogeography is so complex in
>>> general. There are standard tracks, nodes and baselines. They have been
>>> extensively documented and none refuted. There are spatial correlations
>>> with geomorphology. These have been widely documented and none refuted.
>>> Some have objected to there being an informative relationship, but
>>> usually
>>> because of the misapplication of molecular clocks.
>>>
>>> I would be interested to know the empirical basis for the predication
>>> that
>>> 40- 60 vegetable species have successfully colonized Cuba every million
>>> years. What is the basis for dating Quercus oleoides var sagraeana at
>>> less
>>> than a million years?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cuba definitely has an interesting biogeography with key connections
>>> across
>>> the Pacific (not surprising given geologist’s predictions for a Pacific
>>> origin for some of the Cuban geology) and it is within one of the major
>>> biogeographic nodes of the world).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John Grehan
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Dr. Antonio Lopez <cycas at mnhnc.inf.cu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Biogeography is a synthesis science, in this science anything can be
>>>> seen
>>>> from the point of view of the biology or from the geography only. But in
>>>> these cases we would have the history of the four blind ministers and
>>>> the
>>>> elephant. That makes everything much more complex, but we should assume
>>>> it
>>>> with that same complexity. For me, vicarianz and dispersal are two
>>>> faces of
>>>> the same coin, not different coins. The dispersal at big distances,
>>>> without
>>>> doubts is an exception. In accordance with my calculations to Cuba
>>>> arrived
>>>> between 40 and 60 vegetable successful species every million years,
>>>> which
>>>> is nothing. The oldest lineage that we have identified (as much for
>>>> calculation as for DNA), Pinus tropicalis, is probably in the area
>>>> before
>>>> the rupture of Pangea and the most recent Quercus oleoides var
>>>> sagraeana, a
>>>> hybrid, has less than a million years. Both share the almost exact same
>>>> distribution.
>>>>
>>>> In the 60-70 millions of years of biggest Antilles, the events of
>>>> massive
>>>> extinction are recurrent and with them vicariant processes constants
>>>> have
>>>> taken place. Then came processes of adaptive radiation. All that which
>>>> has
>>>> generated species with mechanisms of adaptation to avoid the extinction
>>>> of
>>>> the linages. We have more than 2.5 thousand of endemic species (50% of
>>>> our
>>>> flora)
>>>>
>>>> As a famous taxonomist, unfortunately already dead, wrote: a true
>>>> taxonomic nightmares. I can say the same thing as biogeographist.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dr. Antonio López Almirall
>>>>
>>>> Conservador del Herbario
>>>>
>>>> Museo Nacional de Historia Natural
>>>>
>>>> Obispo 61, Plaza de Armas
>>>>
>>>> Habana Vieja 10100, La Habana
>>>>
>>>> CUBA
>>>>
>>>> Email cycas at mnhnc.inf.cu
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *De:* John Grehan [mailto:calabar.john at gmail.com]
>>>> *Enviado el:* sábado, 25 de abril de 2015 09:56 p. m.
>>>> *Para:* Anthony Gill
>>>> *CC:* Stephen Thorpe; Karl Magnacca; Richard Pyle; TAXACOM; Dr. Antonio
>>>> Lopez
>>>> *Asunto:* Re: [Taxacom] Forgotting at the edge of miracles
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We already have plenty of monkeys - us.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John Grehan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Anthony Gill <gill.anthony at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well, I've just set up a bunch of monkeys on laptops. I'm not expecting
>>>> Shakespeare's sonnets, but given enough time I'm hoping they'll knock
>>>> out a
>>>> decent taxonomic monograph or two.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 8:34 AM, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If Stephen's view of biogeography is that it is just a series of beliefs
>>>> or assertions then there is certainly not much more to be said about
>>>> that.
>>>> Everyone is entitled to their beliefs and there is no where further to
>>>> go
>>>> with that. But if one views biogeography as a science in the sense of
>>>> applying methods of analysis (of geography and phylogeny) then one goes
>>>> beyond just stating a personal belief to presenting a reasoned
>>>> judgement or
>>>> argument about the efficacy of particular methods and their results - as
>>>> with any other science.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John Grehan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Stephen Thorpe <
>>>> stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Biogeography is just a pompous "academic" (in the worst sense) waste of
>>>> time! Putting aside, for present purposes, the vast issue of marine
>>>> biogeography, chance transoceanic dispersal of terrestrials is
>>>> *unlikely*,
>>>> yes, but all that means is that it isn't going to happen lots of times
>>>> in a
>>>> short stretch of time. Given many millions of years, it can still happen
>>>> often enough to be a significant factor. There seems to be a slide from
>>>> "unlikely to happen" to "can't happen"! Any academic discipline which is
>>>> based ultimately on chance events is not going to be very useful!
>>>> Biogeography ... we don't need to know! The existence of sister taxa on
>>>> adjacent islands (or other landmasses) can be explained equally well by
>>>> dispersal (since dispersal is most likely to happen between adjacent
>>>> landmasses) or by vicariance (since vicariance is most likely to happen
>>>> between adjacent landmasses)!
>>>>
>>>> Stephen
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>> On Sun, 26/4/15, Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Forgotting at the edge of miracles
>>>> To: "'Anthony Gill'" <gill.anthony at gmail.com>, "'Karl Magnacca'" <
>>>> kmagnacca at wesleyan.edu>
>>>> Cc: "'TAXACOM'" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>, "'Dr. Antonio Lopez'" <
>>>> cycas at mnhnc.inf.cu>
>>>> Received: Sunday, 26 April, 2015, 12:35 AM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The same argument could
>>>> be applied to ANY model of biogeography (dispersal,
>>>> vicariance, panbiogeography, etc., etc.) That is, any
>>>> presumption that any single model accounts for every pattern
>>>> (or even most patterns) is, in my opinion, naïve. This is
>>>> not to say that, in the end, one model does not dominate.
>>>> But we are SO, SO, SO far away from understanding both
>>>> evolutionary history and the actual distribution patterns of
>>>> most living things, that only people who don't really
>>>> understand the nature of biodiversity make claims that we
>>>> are close to fully understanding it.
>>>>
>>>> Aloha,
>>>> Rich
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > -----Original
>>>> Message-----
>>>> > From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
>>>> On Behalf Of
>>>> > Anthony Gill
>>>> > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2015 1:12 AM
>>>> > To: Karl Magnacca
>>>> > Cc:
>>>> TAXACOM; Dr. Antonio Lopez
>>>> > Subject: Re:
>>>> [Taxacom] Forgotting at the edge of miracles
>>>> >
>>>> > Of course, there are
>>>> other from beyond panbiogeography that are concerned
>>>> > that dispersal explanations should not be
>>>> given a first-order explanation for
>>>> >
>>>> everything in biogeography. There is pattern to be
>>>> discovered and explored. A
>>>> > presumption
>>>> of dispersal as an explanation for everything makes for
>>>> > uninteresting, and ultimately irrelevant,
>>>> research. I want no part of that.
>>>> >
>>>> > Tony
>>>> >
>>>> > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Karl
>>>> Magnacca
>>>> > <kmagnacca at wesleyan.edu>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 13:24:32
>>>> "Dr. Antonio Lopez"
>>>> > >
>>>> <cycas at mnhnc.inf.cu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > > Colleague:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> Thank you for the article of Head. Only when I read
>>>> everything I am
>>>> > > > able to
>>>> understand and to reason. I never understood that
>>>> supposed
>>>> > > > difference between
>>>> dispersalism and vicariancism as different
>>>> > > > schools.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > > That's because
>>>> they're not. It's only in the mind of
>>>> panbiogeograpy
>>>> > > supporters like
>>>> Grehan and Heads, who promote the idea that because
>>>> > > rare trans-oceanic dispersal is
>>>> unlikely, that therefore it never
>>>> > >
>>>> happens (while simultaneously claiming that they say no such
>>>> thing,
>>>> > > invoking the undefined term
>>>> "regular dispersal") that such a dichotomy
>>>> > > exists.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Karl
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> > > 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
>>>> 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Dr Anthony C. Gill
>>>> >
>>>> Natural History Curator
>>>> > A12 Macleay
>>>> Museum
>>>> > University of Sydney
>>>> > NSW 2006
>>>> >
>>>> Australia.
>>>> >
>>>> > Ph.
>>>> +61 02 9036 6499
>>>> >
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> > 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 28 years
>>>> of Taxacom in 2015.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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 28 years of
>>>> Taxacom in 2015.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Dr Anthony C. Gill
>>>>
>>>> Natural History Curator
>>>>
>>>> A12 Macleay Museum
>>>>
>>>> University of Sydney
>>>>
>>>> NSW 2006
>>>>
>>>> Australia.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ph. +61 02 9036 6499
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> <http://www.avast.com/>
>>>>
>>>> El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en
>>>> busca de virus.
>>>> www.avast.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>>
>
>
> --
> Pierre DELEPORTE
> UMR 6552 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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list