My late colleague Harold Morowitz once made a comment in an afternoon working 
conversation, which I found funny and fun.  He said something like “I remember 
only 45 years ago when the lagomorphs split off from the rodents”.

Kind of like Paul Erdos, the 4 billion year old man.

Eric



> On Dec 27, 2020, at 12:44 PM, Gary Schiltz <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> When I studied biology at university back in the 1970s, my recollection is 
> that most biologists in those days thought of species as an interbreeding 
> population of individuals. Over the years, I've seen this definition give way 
> more and more to defining species by genetic differences alone. Though I 
> haven't been professionally a biologist for over 40 years (if ever), my life 
> as a birdwatcher (and occasional keeper of coveted lists of species seen) has 
> been affected by this shift. Based on genetic analysis (possibly tempered by 
> studies of behavior, range, morphology), bird species are frequently "split" 
> into two or more separate groups, either "subspecies", "races", or even full 
> blown "species" (yay!! I've seen both those, add another species to my life 
> list). Or the converse is also true - based on genetic analysis (tempered as 
> above), ornithological consensus will deem two or more species to be merely 
> different races or subspecies of one species, which we refer to as "lumping" 
> (boo!!! lost some bragging rights about my life list).
> 
> I asked an ornithologist friend about this a couple of years ago. I've always 
> been a "lumper" at heart, even if it does result in my life list being 
> shorter. To me, if two individuals decide to mate, and produce offspring, 
> they ought to be considered the same species. Maybe adding the requirement 
> that the offspring are themselves fertile and able to produce fertile 
> offspring. My ornithologist friend seems pretty firmly in the camp that 
> defines species by their genetics. I asked him if this wasn't rather 
> arbitrary, and the only thing I remember him mentioning (which I never 
> followed up on studying) was the notion of a "clade". I won't comment further 
> on that, since I know absolutely nothing about clades.
> 
> As a side note, we certainly don't classify currently living Homo sapiens 
> individuals into different species, but then I don't know if the genetic 
> differences among different races of people are more, or less, significant 
> than that of some other animal species. This would, of course, be hugely (and 
> justifiably, I believe) unpopular among us humans. I asked my parrots what 
> they think, and they just chewed on the furniture more. I don't know if that 
> signifies agreement or disagreement with my ornithologist friend.
> 
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 11:54 AM <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/dec/25/discovery-of-cryptic-species-shows-earth-is-even-more-biologically-diverse-aoe
>  
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.theguardian.com%2fenvironment%2f2020%2fdec%2f25%2fdiscovery-of-cryptic-species-shows-earth-is-even-more-biologically-diverse-aoe&c=E,1,d8ssUiHUP3tLETjJmf50cEcV2upLKBND2qQAnwF__EwkcPtRZ4gDe8VeZoMCaUPYDxPsgQn0SuGFhkQvCAdrBxfgzxgbKmjGgeVhwULSGv75Zs7h4RD5BgK8B7U,&typo=1>
> So what IS a species?  A level of distinctness of design, a degree of genetic 
> differentiation, or an interbreeding population?  And what happens to 
> Darwinism when these things turn out to be not particularly well correlated, 
> in the way that the signs and symptoms of hunger turned out to be not so well 
> correlated as the Cartesian model would require?  Steve Guerin:  if you want 
> to demolish Darwinism, here is where you start.
> 
> Nick  
> 
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,foGr69X29NwVBuhs5_OYQsbJMROEpdBEUDaYJD1iY8L2FLC2CV4ss33T0HL7EUm_QBBNKm3Lx2dp7GjtkILLrvvsBdt7_3M3zwUnWvS4_jC-Ll6X-uo,&typo=1>
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com 
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,fIgA-f_L-FPHCVSbwL_DIGYAiH3XWc41guN_B0ayBDafV2MTyIO_tWpra4FLXDFX4xAqAyUcyc7pYm6Hw6vK0x_JkrIA7CgSiLRu2qWznPU,&typo=1>
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ 
> <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/>
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,Dqlg85Dlbuh8fbdXUEq7uvapBNdOg8XOpZzaapnWLbLn2rRUWnzaTwvIkcLtX3s3LKD4I_M1k4B6yN24IPubDI5mFl6poR6n1wpp0m1O&typo=1>
>  
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,y_Hvb_aasSNzzcMDqntU2KFzJv3N3lbHwjuRS0OptrCSlKUFotBrXNXU20_UjsE7JPfODuGECNKv3NgxJJQOY6mDsU4y_X02_PEO9Lrvg-vgqmOqtrc,&typo=1
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,rt2S6zpgWOLuXwtQXbSXIEwoHSy-RBi8nR31x0zs29bhQROtIQJsvnX2OCxdVDn5UDf6w52Z_vc3Cg5iKj0RZAzSDNKtmMrXM0u8WW-3yfCMcN_rLnU,&typo=1
>  

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

Reply via email to