Taxacom: Science fraud - Nature

Richard Jensen rjensen at saintmarys.edu
Fri Aug 25 14:46:20 CDT 2023


This coming from someone who once responded to a hot Taxacom topic by
saying that "definitions don't matter"!  Do you still believe that, John?

Cheers,

Richard J

On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 3:00 PM John Grehan via Taxacom <
taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:

> Tony - which meaning of plausible? Presume the first, but with multiple
> meanings possible I thought worth checking with you.
>
>    1. Seemingly or apparently valid, likely, or acceptable; credible.
>    2. Persuasive or ingratiating, especially in an effort to deceive.
>    3. Worthy of being applauded; praiseworthy; commendable; ready.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 2:35 PM Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > OK John, thanks for the clarification. In any case your proposed
> "tectonic
> > correlations" with historic biogeographic events seem perfectly plausible
> > to me.
> >
> > 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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gkdEW9dTzRrVSNHSyRH11fcXGPB8w%2BDzjX%2ByVn4YJ%2FA%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 26 Aug 2023 at 02:37, John Grehan via Taxacom <
> > taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Of course it's a 'rant', just like any other on this list, so no
> offense.
> >> Funding - agreed, that is a pertinent issue. For panbiogeography this is
> >> not only a problem where supporters of suppression and censorship are
> well
> >> funded, but when a particular perspective dominates funding sources,
> >> opposing research (panbiogeography)  has no chance at all. I forgot to
> >> include in earlier posting that suppression and censorship is supported
> by
> >> at least one scientific institution - the Royal Society of New Zealand.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 1:00 AM Stephen Thorpe <
> >> stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Tony,
> >> > I'm not sure what John is on about either ... probably just another
> >> > biogeographer rant (sorry John!)
> >> > However, John does raise some valid general issues, but nobody seems
> to
> >> > like to discuss these issues. One such issue concerns the notion of
> >> > "fraud", but I'm framing it as a funding issue. Is it fraud for a
> >> project's
> >> > merits to be misrepresented to funders by applicants, or is it simply
> >> > "worth a shot?" If a funded project's merits are subsequently found to
> >> have
> >> > been misrepresented in an accepted  application, then should the
> >> funding be
> >> > refunded? Do funders even care? Does anybody even care? These are,
> >> > unfortunately, real issues.
> >> > Cheers, Stephen
> >> >
> >> > On Friday, 25 August 2023 at 04:43:53 pm NZST, Tony Rees <
> >> > tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Hi John,
> >> >
> >> > I am still confused as to the subject matter of your post. You 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.
> >> > -------------------
> >> >
> >> > First of all, the journal involved is not Nature, so the title of the
> >> > topic is misleading (as I already stated). Second, retracting a poor
> >> paper
> >> > written by persons with no credentials in climate science, in a
> >> non-climate
> >> > science journal, that makes large and unfounded claims regarding a
> >> > particular aspect of climate science, is simply an indication of poor
> >> (or
> >> > more likely, inappropriate) peer review, so does not seem to prove
> >> > anything. Then you introduce something to do with the lab leak theory
> of
> >> > COVID origin, which seems to indicate nothing as well, in addition to
> >> > flying in the face of all published evidence. Then you claim that the
> >> use
> >> > of CODA methods in biogeography are some sort of fraud, with some
> >> > implication that views to the contrary are being suppressed, despite
> the
> >> > fact that you have a paper already out in "Cladistics"  in which such
> >> > matters are apparently discussed (https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.1111%2Fcla.12537&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Fd0Mn7ot24lpXWySt7XvCzaLhbWUB7sLeGoEYXnmLnc%3D&reserved=0).
> >> So
> >> > what is the overall point of this thread, or can it simply be put to
> >> rest?
> >> >
> >> > Not wishing to be unhelpful here, just somewhat confused...
> >> >
> >> > 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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gkdEW9dTzRrVSNHSyRH11fcXGPB8w%2BDzjX%2ByVn4YJ%2FA%3D&reserved=0
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 10:03, John Grehan via Taxacom <
> >> > taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I agree fully with Stephen about avoiding 'nefarious motivations',
> even
> >> > though they might be true. My focus is on the use of methodologies
> that
> >> > purport (functionally or operationally) one thing (empirical evidence)
> >> but
> >> > are another (imagined evidence). As a rhetorical question, one might
> ask
> >> > about papers by Waters and his cohort  if they do not include
> >> consideration
> >> > panbiogeographic evidence where pertinent given that they have
> >> > publicly stated their support for suppression and censorship of
> >> > panbiogeography. Having made their declaration it would seem absence
> >> would
> >> > have to be intentional which raises the obvious inference. But I will
> >> > refrain from characterizing it a fraud since without an explicit
> >> statement
> >> > in each case one could really not know. On the other hand, other
> people
> >> > have stated their deliberate intention of not citing or discussing
> >> > panbiogeography, so in those cases their works would seem to be
> >> fraudulent.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 6:34 PM Stephen Thorpe <
> >> stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
> >> > >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Mike,
> >> > >
> >> > > The term fraud does have a broader meaning in English, not
> restricted
> >> to
> >> > > the legal definition. For example, it can be said of a person that
> he
> >> is
> >> > a
> >> > > fraud. If there is any ambiguity in contexts like the present one,
> >> then
> >> > it
> >> > > is perhaps best to use the phrase tantamount to fraud.
> >> > >
> >> > > Scientific studies and articles may in fact have an aspect of true
> >> legal
> >> > > fraud, if their merits were misrepresented to the funder. However,
> the
> >> > onus
> >> > > might be on the funder to properly evaluate applications and reject
> >> any
> >> > > misrepresentations/exaggerations. In practice though, all my
> >> experience
> >> > > suggests that there are few effective safeguards here. Personally, I
> >> > think
> >> > > that if an article is retracted by the publisher, then the funder
> >> should
> >> > > also be reimbursed for the waste of funding, but I suspect that
> >> doesn't
> >> > > happen!
> >> > >
> >> > > Funding issues aside, there are plenty of scientific articles out
> >> there
> >> > > that are simply of poor quality or just plain wrong (whether by
> >> > > incompetence or by design). Peer review doesn't seem to be very
> >> effective
> >> > > in practice. So, as with anything, one simply has to maintain a
> >> critical
> >> > > attitude and, if something is seen to be wrong, try to publicly
> >> explain
> >> > why
> >> > > it is wrong. Rants probably just do more harm than good.
> >> > >
> >> > > So, John's opinion on the matter does matter, as much as anyone
> >> else's,
> >> > > but he perhaps just needs to take a different approach and avoid
> >> > ascribing
> >> > > nefarious motivations, even though it might be true. Better to just
> >> > > critique the content, rather than going down the rabbit hole of
> >> possible
> >> > > motivations.
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers, Stephen
> >> > >
> >> > > On Friday, 25 August 2023 at 09:51:17 am NZST, Michael A. Ivie via
> >> > Taxacom
> >> > > <taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > It does not matter that YOU consider it fraud, your opinion has no
> >> value
> >> > > as to the meaning of a criminal act, there is a definition of the
> word
> >> > > and crime, you don't just get to make things up.  You can do that in
> >> > > biogeography, and that is not fraud either.
> >> > >
> >> > > Mike
> >> > >
> >> > > On 8/24/2023 3:28 PM, John Grehan wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > ***External Sender***
> >> > > >
> >> > > > If one sticks to fraud as 'intentional deception' then I would
> >> agree.
> >> > > > As I cannot provide proof of such intention, this would not apply.
> >> > > > CODA is an operational deception, and in that regard I consider it
> >> > > > fraudulent, definitions notwithstanding. Cheers, John
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 5:24 PM Michael A. Ivie <
> mivie at montana.edu>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >    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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gkdEW9dTzRrVSNHSyRH11fcXGPB8w%2BDzjX%2ByVn4YJ%2FA%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gkdEW9dTzRrVSNHSyRH11fcXGPB8w%2BDzjX%2ByVn4YJ%2FA%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gGe9gKrmHTUuWbcMBN0gRALPYMQ2zxT0lmVhH%2FGy0Hc%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gGe9gKrmHTUuWbcMBN0gRALPYMQ2zxT0lmVhH%2FGy0Hc%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gkdEW9dTzRrVSNHSyRH11fcXGPB8w%2BDzjX%2ByVn4YJ%2FA%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gkdEW9dTzRrVSNHSyRH11fcXGPB8w%2BDzjX%2ByVn4YJ%2FA%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gkdEW9dTzRrVSNHSyRH11fcXGPB8w%2BDzjX%2ByVn4YJ%2FA%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gkdEW9dTzRrVSNHSyRH11fcXGPB8w%2BDzjX%2ByVn4YJ%2FA%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2F9ynnTJYQB4vmz7bpf6BkX65caB2ajQneyV8QcNbiSE%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2F9ynnTJYQB4vmz7bpf6BkX65caB2ajQneyV8QcNbiSE%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JrES8Ov3QeNxwlATejEUydFR8qm3AwgH5%2FzWD%2BBw5Vg%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JrES8Ov3QeNxwlATejEUydFR8qm3AwgH5%2FzWD%2BBw5Vg%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2F9ynnTJYQB4vmz7bpf6BkX65caB2ajQneyV8QcNbiSE%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2F9ynnTJYQB4vmz7bpf6BkX65caB2ajQneyV8QcNbiSE%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302059811%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2F9ynnTJYQB4vmz7bpf6BkX65caB2ajQneyV8QcNbiSE%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z%2Fs6vK8jrP8HSl3jHR%2Frdi2q16d47Jhu0oq5sJ0ihD0%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z%2Fs6vK8jrP8HSl3jHR%2Frdi2q16d47Jhu0oq5sJ0ihD0%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z%2Fs6vK8jrP8HSl3jHR%2Frdi2q16d47Jhu0oq5sJ0ihD0%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>        <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z%2Fs6vK8jrP8HSl3jHR%2Frdi2q16d47Jhu0oq5sJ0ihD0%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > >>    <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%3D&reserved=0
> >> > > > <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > 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
> >> > > 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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z%2Fs6vK8jrP8HSl3jHR%2Frdi2q16d47Jhu0oq5sJ0ihD0%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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
> >> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> > 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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z%2Fs6vK8jrP8HSl3jHR%2Frdi2q16d47Jhu0oq5sJ0ihD0%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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
> >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> 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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z%2Fs6vK8jrP8HSl3jHR%2Frdi2q16d47Jhu0oq5sJ0ihD0%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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ukHZim1UCsrDHyxl08pmI%2FHmD8gzGtc7nDuz%2Fk1l7E4%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
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> 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%7C3a2bc0418a7d494f570908dba5a3fc9c%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638285897302216027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z%2Fs6vK8jrP8HSl3jHR%2Frdi2q16d47Jhu0oq5sJ0ihD0%3D&reserved=0
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for
> about 36 years, 1987-2023.
>


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


More information about the Taxacom mailing list