Taxacom: Science fraud - Nature

Michael A. Ivie mivie at montana.edu
Thu Aug 24 16:24:02 CDT 2023


What you describe does not fit the definition of Fraud.


On 8/24/2023 2:46 PM, John Grehan wrote:
>
> ***External Sender***
>
> Thanks for the word of caution Mike. I am referring to CODA as a 
> fraud, but not making any assertions about individuals with respect to 
> ' intentional perversion of truth'. CODA is itself fraudulent as it 
> does not do what it is constructed to do - to provide scientific 
> (empirical) evidence for conclusions about (chance) dispersal and 
> vicariance. It is a fraudulent practice because it misrepresents 
> fossil calibrated molecular divergence ages as actual or maximal 
> (which is simply impossible empirically, it has to be imagined), uses 
> recipes such as BioGeoBears that can render results in favor of 
> chance dispersal when vicariance is an equally applicable mechanism, 
> and it uses areas that have no empirical (scientifically verifiable) 
> boundaries. Whether CODA supporters knowingly ignore this is another 
> matter.
>
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 4:35 PM Michael A. Ivie via Taxacom 
> <taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
>
>     John,
>
>     Perhaps you need to look up the definition of fraud, as it is a word
>     worthy of civil suit for slander:
>
>     "**intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part
>     with something of value or to surrender a legal right"
>
>     Fraud is to get something of value, it is not the same as suppression.
>
>     perhaps you mean dispute or suppression.
>
>     Mike.
>
>     On 8/24/2023 2:16 PM, John Grehan via Taxacom wrote:
>     > **External Sender**
>     >
>     > Yep - although CODA stands for center of origin, dispersal, and
>     > adaptation (adaptation as a means of dispersal, and dispersal as a
>     > mechanism for differentiation). I see no problem bringing the
>     matter up
>     > here as many taxonomists have strong views about biogeography
>     (haven't met
>     > any that don't at least), and all the molecular
>     taxonomists/systematists
>     > practice CODA methods that don't do what they claim, or use non
>     > empirically non-existent units of analysis.
>     >
>     > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:52 PM Tony Rees<tonyrees49 at gmail.com>
>     wrote:
>     >
>     >> Hi John, an 800 word (all right, 791) extended quotation
>     disputing the
>     >> origins of COVID hardly qualifies as "not wanting to go down
>     the COVID
>     >> hole", but I will let it pass...
>     >>
>     >> I must confess the acronym CODA as related to biogeography is
>     unfamiliar
>     >> to me, however a brief google search led me here: "Biotic
>     assembly in
>     >> evolutionary biogeography: a case for integrative pluralism" by
>     Juan J.
>     >> Morrone. published in 2020 in "Frontiers of Biogeography",
>     which claims to
>     >> "... discuss the differences between the dispersal-vicariance
>     model and the
>     >> center of origin-dispersal-vicariance (CODA) and vicariance
>     models". My
>     >> guess is that if you have a problem with claimed fraud in "CODA
>     practice",
>     >> you should take it up in a forum or publication route relevant
>     to that
>     >> topic. Sorry.
>     >>
>     >> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
>     >> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116091788%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Ss7f477IqcxvOgDyxdoHKsT5Up2rHcfpxDELj0s5A08%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116091788%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Ss7f477IqcxvOgDyxdoHKsT5Up2rHcfpxDELj0s5A08%3D&reserved=0>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 05:31, John
>     Grehan<calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
>     >>
>     >>> I would add that the examples given concern instances where
>     the fraud
>     >>> involved a minority but what happens when the fraud is
>     committed by the
>     >>> majority (as in CODA practice)?
>     >>>
>     >>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:26 PM John
>     Grehan<calabar.john at gmail.com>
>     >>> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>> Yeah  - not wanting to go down the COVID hole, or any other
>     subject.
>     >>>> Just happened to be example issues. Cheers, John
>     >>>>
>     >>>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:04 PM Tony
>     Rees<tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
>     >>>>
>     >>>>> Hi John, you wrote:
>     >>>>>>   If a climate paper was published in Nature or Science,
>     which are not
>     >>>>> climate journals, is this because the authors wished to
>     avoid peer review?
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> No, I think it is fair to say that these are special cases,
>     that sit
>     >>>>> somewhere above more discipline-specific journals, for
>     articles deemed to
>     >>>>> have high importance; and accordingly, would seek out the
>     best (?) experts
>     >>>>> in relevant fields for review of any particular article.
>     That would be the
>     >>>>> hope, anyway :)
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> Not going to go down the rabbit hole of origins of Covid at
>     this time,
>     >>>>> however I note that the Rupert Murdoch-owned "Australian"
>     was strongly
>     >>>>> promoting views by a Sky News Journalist (who wrote a book
>     on the same
>     >>>>> subject last year) that everything is a cover-up and the
>     virus escaped from
>     >>>>> the Wuhan Lab. I fact checked her first 4 statements and
>     they were all
>     >>>>> incorrect, after which I lost faith in her analysis. For now
>     I think the
>     >>>>> best summary is probably at
>     >>>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FOrigin_of_COVID-19&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=BVCKzHJzVraoO7DVlGaZP8BSM%2FwVF5Ij32n2sqZKyc8%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FOrigin_of_COVID-19&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=BVCKzHJzVraoO7DVlGaZP8BSM%2FwVF5Ij32n2sqZKyc8%3D&reserved=0>,
>     which Taxacom
>     >>>>> readers are welcome to consult for more detail, or even
>     amend if they
>     >>>>> disagree with it.
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> Regards - Tony
>     >>>>> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
>     >>>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e77mgswT04KmCTLtO06GdfDfwWv8yErVX63FL9p40S4%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e77mgswT04KmCTLtO06GdfDfwWv8yErVX63FL9p40S4%3D&reserved=0>
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>> On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 04:43, John
>     Grehan<calabar.john at gmail.com>
>     >>>>> wrote:
>     >>>>>
>     >>>>>> That's an interesting quote about not publishing in a
>     climate journal
>     >>>>>> for a climate paper:  "This is a common avenue taken by
>     'climate skeptics'
>     >>>>>> in order to avoid peer review by real experts in the
>     field." But just
>     >>>>>> because a climate paper is not published in a climate
>     journal does not mean
>     >>>>>> that it can avoid 'peer' review. It depends on the journal
>     and the intent
>     >>>>>> of the editor to ensure that proper peer review takes
>     place. If a climate
>     >>>>>> paper was published in Nature or Science, which are not
>     climate journals,
>     >>>>>> is this because the authors wished to avoid peer review?
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 2:40 PM John
>     Grehan<calabar.john at gmail.com>
>     >>>>>> wrote:
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>>> Thanks for that clarification Tony. As for Nature "might
>     have a
>     >>>>>>> higher degree of scrutiny" - who knows. Saw this as yet
>     unresolved issue
>     >>>>>>> below, this time involving Nature. I don't keep regular
>     track of such
>     >>>>>>> questions, although perhaps I should, and write something
>     on fraud in CODA
>     >>>>>>> biogeography - but then who would publish such?
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>> A growing number of people, including prominent
>     scientists, are
>     >>>>>>> calling for a full retraction of a high-profile study
>     published in the
>     >>>>>>> journal Nature in March 2020 that explored the origins of
>     SARS-CoV-2.
>     >>>>>>> The paper, whose authors included immunology and microbiology
>     >>>>>>> professor Kristian G. Andersen, declared that evidence
>     clearly showed that
>     >>>>>>> SARS-CoV-2 did not originate from a laboratory.
>     >>>>>>> “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory
>     >>>>>>> construct or a purposefully manipulated virus,” the
>     authors wrote in
>     >>>>>>> February.
>     >>>>>>> Yet a trove of recently published documents reveal that
>     Andersen and
>     >>>>>>> his co-authors believed that the lab leak scenario was not
>     just possible,
>     >>>>>>> but likely.
>     >>>>>>> “[The] main thing still in my mind is that the lab escape
>     version of
>     >>>>>>> this is so friggin’ likely to have happened because they
>     were already doing
>     >>>>>>> this type of work and the molecular data is fully
>     consistent with that
>     >>>>>>> scenario,” Andersen said to his colleagues, according to a
>     report from
>     >>>>>>> Public, which published a series of Slack messages between
>     the authors.
>     >>>>>>> Anderson was not the only author who privately expressed
>     doubts that
>     >>>>>>> the virus had natural origins. Public cataloged dozens of
>     statements from
>     >>>>>>> Andersen and his co-authors—Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin,
>     Edward C.
>     >>>>>>> Holmes, and Robert F. Garry—between the dates January 31
>     and February 28,
>     >>>>>>> 2020 suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 may have been engineered.
>     >>>>>>> ” …the fact that we are discussing this shows how
>     plausible it is,”
>     >>>>>>> Garry said of the lab-leak hypothesis.
>     >>>>>>> “We unfortunately can’t refute the lab leak hypothesis,”
>     Andersen
>     >>>>>>> said on Feb. 20, several days after the authors published
>     their pre-print.
>     >>>>>>> To complicate matters further, new reporting from The
>     Intercept
>     >>>>>>> reveals that Anderson had an $8.9 million grant with NIH
>     pending final
>     >>>>>>> approval from Dr. Anthony Fauci when the Proximal Origin
>     paper was
>     >>>>>>> submitted.
>     >>>>>>> ‘Fraud and Scientific Misconduct’?
>     >>>>>>> The findings have led several prominent figures to accuse
>     the authors
>     >>>>>>> of outright deception.
>     >>>>>>> Richard H. Ebright, the Board of Governors Professor of
>     Chemistry and
>     >>>>>>> Chemical Biology at Rutgers University, called the paper
>     “scientific
>     >>>>>>> fraud.”
>     >>>>>>> “The 2020 ‘Proximal Origin’ paper falsely claimed science
>     showed
>     >>>>>>> COVID-19 did not have a lab origin,” tweeted Ebright.
>     “Newly released
>     >>>>>>> messages from the authors show they did not believe the
>     conclusions of the
>     >>>>>>> paper and show the paper is the product of scientific
>     fraud and scientific
>     >>>>>>> misconduct.”
>     >>>>>>> Ebright and Silver are among those pushing a petition
>     urging Nature
>     >>>>>>> to retract the article in light of these findings.
>     >>>>>>> Among those to sign the petition was Neil Harrison, a
>     professor of
>     >>>>>>> anesthesiology and molecular pharmacology at Columbia
>     University.
>     >>>>>>> “Virologists and their allies have produced a number of
>     papers that
>     >>>>>>> purport to show that the virus was of natural origin and
>     that the pandemic
>     >>>>>>> began at the Huanan seafood market,” Harrison told The
>     Telegraph. “In fact
>     >>>>>>> there is no evidence for either of these conclusions, and
>     the email and
>     >>>>>>> Slack messages among the authors show that they knew at
>     the time that this
>     >>>>>>> was the case.”
>     >>>>>>> Only ‘Expressing Opinions’?
>     >>>>>>> Dr. Joao Monteiro, chief editor of Nature, has rebuffed
>     calls for a
>     >>>>>>> retraction, The Telegraph notes, saying the authors were
>     merely “expressing
>     >>>>>>> opinions.”
>     >>>>>>> This claim is dubious at best. From the beginning, the
>     Proximal
>     >>>>>>> Origin study was presented as authoritative and
>     scientific. Jeremy Farrar,
>     >>>>>>> a British medical researcher and now the chief scientist
>     at the World
>     >>>>>>> Health Organization (WHO), told USA Today that Proximal
>     Origin was the
>     >>>>>>> “most important research on the genomic epidemiology of
>     the origins of this
>     >>>>>>> virus to date.”
>     >>>>>>> Dr. Anthony Fauci, speaking from the White House podium in
>     April
>     >>>>>>> 2020, cited the study as evidence that the mutations of
>     the virus were
>     >>>>>>> “totally consistent with a jump from a species of an
>     animal to a human.”
>     >>>>>>> Fact-check organizations were soon citing the study as
>     proof that COVID-19
>     >>>>>>> “could not have been manipulated.”
>     >>>>>>> Far from being presented as a handful of scientists
>     “expressing
>     >>>>>>> opinions,” the Proximal Origin study was treated as
>     gospel, a dogma that
>     >>>>>>> could not even be questioned. This allowed social media
>     companies (working
>     >>>>>>> hand-in-hand with government agencies) to censor people
>     who publicly stated
>     >>>>>>> what Andersen and his colleagues were saying
>     privately—that it seemed
>     >>>>>>> plausible that SARS-CoV-2 came from the laboratory in
>     Wuhan that
>     >>>>>>> experimented on coronaviruses and had a checkered safety
>     record.
>     >>>>>>> Indeed, even as media and government officials used the
>     Proximal
>     >>>>>>> Origin study to smear people as conspiracy theorists for
>     speculating that
>     >>>>>>> COVID-19 might have emerged from the Wuhan lab, a Defense
>     Intelligence
>     >>>>>>> Agency study commissioned by the government questioned the
>     study’s
>     >>>>>>> scientific rigor.
>     >>>>>>> “The arguments that Andersen et al. use to support a
>     natural-origin
>     >>>>>>> scenario for SARS CoV-2 are based not on scientific
>     analysis, but on
>     >>>>>>> unwarranted assumptions,” the now-declassified paper
>     concluded. “In fact,
>     >>>>>>> the features of SARS-CoV-2 noted by Andersen et al. are
>     consistent with
>     >>>>>>> another scenario: that SARS-CoV-2 was developed in a
>     laboratory…”
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 2:22 PM Tony
>     Rees<tonyrees49 at gmail.com>
>     >>>>>>> wrote:
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> Hi John,
>     >>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> I took a look at the paper which is online and open
>     access. I must
>     >>>>>>>> say when I saw it at the time of original publication I
>     thought its main
>     >>>>>>>> conclusions very odd and at variance with almost all
>     other research on the
>     >>>>>>>> topic.
>     >>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> Just to be clear per your thread title - the paper does
>     not appear
>     >>>>>>>> in "Nature" (which I imagine might have a higher degree
>     of scrutiny), but
>     >>>>>>>> in "The European Physical Journal Plus" which is a
>     different outlet, albeit
>     >>>>>>>> from the same publisher.
>     >>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> Best - Tony
>     >>>>>>>> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
>     >>>>>>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e77mgswT04KmCTLtO06GdfDfwWv8yErVX63FL9p40S4%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e77mgswT04KmCTLtO06GdfDfwWv8yErVX63FL9p40S4%3D&reserved=0>
>     >>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>> On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 03:59, John Grehan via Taxacom <
>     >>>>>>>> taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
>     >>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>>> Recently when I noted about ZooNova as a publication
>     option, a
>     >>>>>>>>> Taxacom
>     >>>>>>>>> colleague implied (oof list) that the journal was
>     dubious because he
>     >>>>>>>>> considered one (or more) papers to be dubious (in that
>     person's
>     >>>>>>>>> judgement).
>     >>>>>>>>> Here is a classic case of a 'Top' journal retracting a
>     paper,
>     >>>>>>>>> showing that
>     >>>>>>>>> the supposed 'prestige' of a journal has nothing
>     necessarily to do
>     >>>>>>>>> with its
>     >>>>>>>>> content. In this case it was picked up on because the
>     paper in
>     >>>>>>>>> question
>     >>>>>>>>> appears to have run afoul of a sufficient number of
>     prominent or
>     >>>>>>>>> influential researchers. In biogeography this does not
>     happen, as
>     >>>>>>>>> the
>     >>>>>>>>> prominent (powerful and influential) players all play to
>     the fraud
>     >>>>>>>>> (that
>     >>>>>>>>> being the misrepresentation of what CODA methods can or
>     cannot do or
>     >>>>>>>>> support). Power is everything in science.
>     >>>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>>> Top science publisher Springer Nature said it has
>     withdrawn a study
>     >>>>>>>>> that
>     >>>>>>>>> presented misleading conclusions on climate change
>     impacts after an
>     >>>>>>>>> investigation prompted by an AFP inquiry.
>     >>>>>>>>> AFP reported in September 2022 on concerns over the
>     peer-reviewed
>     >>>>>>>>> study by
>     >>>>>>>>> four Italian scientists that appeared earlier that year
>     in the
>     >>>>>>>>> European
>     >>>>>>>>> Physical Journal Plus, published by Springer Nature.
>     >>>>>>>>> The study had drawn positive attention from
>     climate-sceptic media.
>     >>>>>>>>> The paper, titled "A critical assessment of extreme
>     events trends
>     >>>>>>>>> in times
>     >>>>>>>>> of global warming", purported to review data on possible
>     changes in
>     >>>>>>>>> the
>     >>>>>>>>> frequency or intensity of rainfall, cyclones, tornadoes,
>     droughts
>     >>>>>>>>> and other
>     >>>>>>>>> extreme weather events.
>     >>>>>>>>> Several climate scientists contacted by AFP said the study
>     >>>>>>>>> manipulated
>     >>>>>>>>> data, cherry picked facts and ignored others that would
>     contradict
>     >>>>>>>>> their
>     >>>>>>>>> assertions, prompting the publisher to launch an
>     internal review.
>     >>>>>>>>> "The Editors and publishers concluded that they no
>     longer had
>     >>>>>>>>> confidence in
>     >>>>>>>>> the results and conclusions of the article," Springer
>     Nature told
>     >>>>>>>>> AFP in an
>     >>>>>>>>> email late Wednesday.
>     >>>>>>>>> The journal's editors published an online note stating
>     that the
>     >>>>>>>>> paper was
>     >>>>>>>>> retracted due to concerns over "the selection of the
>     data, the
>     >>>>>>>>> analysis and
>     >>>>>>>>> the resulting conclusions".
>     >>>>>>>>> --
>     >>>>>>>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0>     (use the 'visit archived web
>     >>>>>>>>> site'
>     >>>>>>>>> link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
>     >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>     >>>>>>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>     >>>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions
>     to:taxacom at lists.ku.edu <mailto:to%3Ataxacom at lists.ku.edu>
>     >>>>>>>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>     >>>>>>>>> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
>     <https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom>
>     >>>>>>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>     >>>>>>>>> taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
>     >>>>>>>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>     >>>>>>>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3LJP8%2BF0LN6B9v6BAa9P12PpNt6%2BgpCNQLOOWyJGqGc%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3LJP8%2BF0LN6B9v6BAa9P12PpNt6%2BgpCNQLOOWyJGqGc%3D&reserved=0>
>     >>>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>>>> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring
>     >>>>>>>>> alliteration for about 36 years, 1987-2023.
>     >>>>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>> --
>     >>>>>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0>     (use the 'visit archived web
>     >>>>>>> site' link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
>     >>>>>>>
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>>>> --
>     >>>>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0>     (use the 'visit archived web
>     >>>>>> site' link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
>     >>>>>>
>     >>>> --
>     >>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0>     (use the 'visit archived web site'
>     >>>> link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
>     >>>>
>     >>>
>     >>> --
>     >>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0>     (use the 'visit archived web site'
>     >>> link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
>     >>>
>     > --
>     > https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0>     (use the 'visit archived web site'
>     > link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Taxacom Mailing List
>     >
>     > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:taxacom at lists.ku.edu
>     <mailto:to%3Ataxacom at lists.ku.edu>
>     > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe,
>     visit:https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
>     <https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom>
>     > You can reach the person managing the list
>     at:taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu <mailto:at%3Ataxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu>
>     > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched
>     at:https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3LJP8%2BF0LN6B9v6BAa9P12PpNt6%2BgpCNQLOOWyJGqGc%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3LJP8%2BF0LN6B9v6BAa9P12PpNt6%2BgpCNQLOOWyJGqGc%3D&reserved=0>
>     >
>     > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring
>     alliteration for about 36 years, 1987-2023.
>
>     -- 
>     __________________________________________________
>
>     Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
>
>     NOTE: two addresses with different Zip Codes depending on carriers
>
>     US Post Office Address:
>     Montana Entomology Collection
>     Marsh Labs, Room 50
>     PO Box 173145
>     Montana State University
>     Bozeman, MT 59717
>     USA
>
>     UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
>     Montana Entomology Collection
>     Marsh Labs, Room 50
>     1911 West Lincoln Street
>     Montana State University
>     Bozeman, MT 59718
>     USA
>
>
>     (406) 994-4610 (voice)
>     (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
>     mivie at montana.edu
>     _______________________________________________
>     Taxacom Mailing List
>
>     Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
>     For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>     https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
>     <https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom>
>     You can reach the person managing the list at:
>     taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
>     The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>     https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3LJP8%2BF0LN6B9v6BAa9P12PpNt6%2BgpCNQLOOWyJGqGc%3D&reserved=0
>     <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3LJP8%2BF0LN6B9v6BAa9P12PpNt6%2BgpCNQLOOWyJGqGc%3D&reserved=0>
>
>     Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring
>     alliteration for about 36 years, 1987-2023.
>
>
>
> -- 
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0 
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C062ab32a74ef4600118b08dba4e87478%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285091116248456%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fY5D8OfD21ZswCLoQh2B6Wayv%2BJ8hJN7ecHsOUodp9E%3D&reserved=0> (use 
> the 'visit archived web site' link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research 
> page' link.

-- 
__________________________________________________

Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.

NOTE: two addresses with different Zip Codes depending on carriers

US Post Office Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
PO Box 173145
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717
USA

UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
Montana Entomology Collection
Marsh Labs, Room 50
1911 West Lincoln Street
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59718
USA


(406) 994-4610 (voice)
(406) 994-6029 (FAX)
mivie at montana.edu  


More information about the Taxacom mailing list