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