[Taxacom] panbiogeography suppression

Sat Sep 4 05:37:08 CDT 2021

Sorry Jason,

But John is not alone in questioning the validity of "modern biogeography"
(or modern systematics for that matter). There is definitely a place for
panbiogeography in modern biogeographic discussions. Please don't assume
you speak for all. There is no question that certain approaches in
systematics and biogeography are easier to publish than others, but that in
itself does not make them superior. I do not identify personally as a
panbiogeographer, but I see value in the approach and serious problems with
the current favoured methods. There is need for continued discussion across
the various approaches, not suppression of one over another.

Best,

Tony

On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 7:13 PM JF Mate via Taxacom <
taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:

> John, you are offering nothing new that can convince the rest of the field
> that you are correct. The argument over panbiogeography is not entirely
> disimilar to the Ptolomeic epicycles. There are better, simpler models that
> can account for biogeographic patterns without upending the whole field and
> that is why biogeography has moved one.
>
> Best
>
> Jason
>
> On Sat, 4 Sep 2021, 13:20 John Grehan, <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > Comments below bold text.
> >
> > *Science is falsifiability through evidence and Croizatian*
> >
> > *panbiogeography is pretty much the opposite in many cases (it is*
> >
> > *cherry picking). *
> >
> > So you say.
> >
> > *I (and most taxonomists I believe) have no issue with*
> >
> > *articles that collect "patterns" which are a priori consistent with*
> >
> > *geological processes. That is the bread and butter of biogeography *
> >
> > But panbiogeography is not about collecting patterns that are consistent
> > with geological processes! It is about matching biological patterns with
> > tectonic structures (tectonic patterns) that are responsible for
> geological
> > processes.
> >
> > *but it needs to be tested.*
> >
> > Tectonic correlations are a matter of empirical record.
> >
> > *When it becomes "not science" is when patterns are rammed down the
> throat
> > in spite of other evidence,*
> >
> > So you say.
> >
> > *which invariably is disregarded as "defective".*
> >
> > Not specific, so cannot comment.
> >
> > *This makes it pseudo-science.*
> >
> > Uninformative
> >
> > *If your patterns are incongruent with other evidence then they are
> > doubtful*
> >
> > If?
> >
> > *and when inconsistent with all other evidence*
> >
> > such as?
> >
> > Cheers, John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 10:07 PM JF Mate via Taxacom <
> > taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> "Maori science". Unpack that John. As Ziv had said, other than the call
> to
> >> journals to reject papers at face value the rest of their article is
> spot
> >> on. Science is falsifiability through evidence and Croizatian
> >> panbiogeography is pretty much the opposite in many cases (it is
> >> cherrypicking). I (and most taxonomists I believe) have no issue with
> >> articles that collect "patterns" which are a priori consistent with
> >> geological processes. That is the bread and butter of biogeography but
> it
> >> needs to be tested. When it becomes "not science" is when patterns are
> >> rammed down the throat in spite of other evidence, which invariably is
> >> disregarded as "defective". This makes it pseudo-science. If your
> patterns
> >> are incongruent with other evidence then they are doubtful and when
> >> inconsistent with all other evidence then it is, lacking other evidence,
> >> wrong. Accept that and you will find people more receptive.
> >>
> >> Best
> >>
> >> Jason
> >>
> >> On Sat., 4 Sep. 2021, 07:57 John Grehan via Taxacom, <
> >> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Ziv,
> >> >
> >> > I expect you won't know about a recent attempt in NZ by some
> scientists
> >> to
> >> > disconnect Maori science from other science. So I don't understand
> what
> >> is
> >> > dishonest about referencing such a possibility.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers, John
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 5:29 PM Ziv Lieberman via Taxacom <
> >> > taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > John,
> >> > > Your question "why not, for example, call for the suppression of
> Māori
> >> > > science?" is, at best, poorly thought through, and at worst an
> >> > intentional,
> >> > > dishonest conflation of issues which is deeply disrespectful. I
> >> choose to
> >> > > not infer where your intentions fall on this spectrum.
> >> > >
> >> > > While I actually don't agree with the recommendations of Waters et
> al.
> >> > > (2013) to not publish panbiogeographic works as a blanket policy,
> >> there
> >> > are
> >> > > some obvious differences in the scenario called for in this paper
> and
> >> > your
> >> > > hypothetical situation. Waters et al. (2013) lay out a cogent,
> >> > > evidence-based, and highly specific criticism of the
> panbiogeographic
> >> > > approach. They give explicit reference to epistemological and
> >> > > methodological conflicts between panbiogeography and the modern
> >> approach,
> >> > > which they illustrate with particular examples. In other words, they
> >> > > clearly justify*—*or at the very least, explain*—*their contention
> >> that
> >> > "as
> >> > > it stands, panbiogeography is not a useful approach for evolutionary
> >> > > biology" (p. 3). They provide a structure which could be responded
> to,
> >> > > point by point, with evidence of your own.
> >> > >
> >> > > Obviously, no such logical structure could be erected to dismiss
> >> research
> >> > > produced by a (real or perceived) racial or ethnic group. Of course,
> >> > > history has seen many such attempts to justify eugenics and other
> >> > > scientific racism. But such arguments would be patently untrue, i.e.
> >> > unable
> >> > > to withstand logical, scientific, and moral refutation.
> >> > >
> >> > > In summary: your choice of language and analogy degrade your point
> as
> >> a
> >> > > whole, discredit your position as a critical thinker, and represent
> >> > > co-option of social justice issues into an unrelated scientific
> >> > discussion.
> >> > > In fact, the use of this analogy makes it seem like you lack an
> >> > > understanding of the problem you are criticizing, whether that is
> >> true or
> >> > > not. This tactic also detracts from the realities of the
> >> marginalization
> >> > of
> >> > > indigenous peoples, which ironically contributes to upholding the
> >> kind of
> >> > > (historical and present) exclusionism which you are taking advantage
> >> of
> >> > to
> >> > > express your outrage.  You cannot behave this way while
> simultaneously
> >> > > calling for scientific integrity and credibility.
> >> > >
> >> > > -Ziv Lieberman
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > Taxacom Mailing List
> >> > >
> >> > > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> > > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> > > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> >> > > taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> > > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >> > >
> >> > > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
> >> 1987-2021.
> >> > >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >> >
> >> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> >> > taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >> >
> >> > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
> >> 1987-2021.
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >>
> >> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> >> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
> 1987-2021.
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.
>

-- 
Dr Anthony C. Gill
Natural History Curator, Macleay Collections
Chau Chak Wing Museum
University of Sydney
NSW 2006
Australia.

Ph. +61 02 9036 6499