[Taxacom] [iczn-list] Fraudulent alteration of databases to commit scientific theft and fraud.

Fri Apr 11 19:49:20 CDT 2014

Looking at this in some more detail, the argument by Thomas et al. (2014) , against Hoser (2013), is highly dubious! Even if it is true (which is certainly not obvious from the online database entries), that the designated holotypes are field sightings only, Thomas et al. invoke Art. 16.4! See http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted-sites/iczn/code/index.jsp?article&nfv=true#4
Please note also: Recommendation 73B. Preference for specimens studied by author. An author should designate as holotype a specimen actually studied by him or her, not a specimen known to the author only from descriptions or illustrations in the literature.
?
It may not be best practice, by a long chalk, but Hoser may have validly designated a holotype by way of a field sighting of that individual, no part of which is preserved. He may not have even seen or studied the holotype, but THAT DOES NOT MAKE THE NEW NAMES UNAVAILABLE! At least it is very unclear, so Hoser should be given the benefit of the doubt. Thomas et al. (2014) are just acting as "bully boys" against Hoser. The taxa that they describe as new already had names, so they are guilty of adding to confusion and instability. Of course, Hoser is also being his usual self, i.e. a complete twit, but twittery has no?consequences for nomenclature ...
?
Cheers,
?
Stephen

________________________________
From: "Gaimari, Stephen at CDFA" <stephen.gaimari at cdfa.ca.gov>
To: "iczn-list at afriherp.org" <iczn-list at afriherp.org>; "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> 
Sent: 
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] Fraudulent alteration of databases to commit scientific theft and fraud.

I was only commenting on the availability of the two names in question from Ray?s paper, relative to what seems to be the situation according to Ray?s own youtube video. I am not commenting on anything really beyond that, and I?m not on one ?side? or the other. I don?t know if Ray laid his eyes on any specimen of those species/subspecies he described, but if he didn?t, I just don?t know what to say? He could have asked the curator in Florida for a picture? something. But he certainly could not have looked at the specimens he designated as holotypes, as they were observation records only. To be kind here, I find that to be bad form at a minimum. But one thing seems clear ? if what Ray presented is so ? then the two species-group names in question were not made available by Ray?s paper. What Ray?s foes did in the Zootaxa paper may be outside of standard etiquette, but I have no comment about that.
Cheers,
Steve

From: Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 4:58 PM
To: Gaimari, Stephen at CDFA; iczn-list at afriherp.org; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] Fraudulent alteration of databases to commit scientific theft and fraud.

Well, what he actually said is vague and ambiguous. I was invoking the principle of charity to attribute to him the most sensible possible interpretation, in line with scientific etiquette. Anyway, this whole thing stinks. I haven't read over the relevant papers yet, but I will do so now (and will also send Hoser the full Zootaxa article). Just to preempt the conclusion slightly, I suggest that renaming other peoples taxa should only be done if it is 100% certain that the earlier names are unavailable for some reason.
Cheers,
Stephen

From: "Gaimari, Stephen at CDFA" <stephen.gaimari at cdfa.ca.gov<mailto:stephen.gaimari at cdfa.ca.gov>>
To: "iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org>" <iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org>>; "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>
Sent: Saturday, 12 April 2014 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] Fraudulent alteration of databases to commit scientific theft and fraud.

That?s not what he said. His explicit meaning was that his species is available because, hey, look, they cited one of the paratypes. That of course is nonsense. If it was not described properly under the Code, such that the name is unavailable, those ?paratypes? are utterly meaningless anyway, except to refer to an author?s concept for a taxon prior to its description. It would be no different than my writing in a paper that I have an unnamed new species that has characteristics X, Y and Z, and here is the label data.
Cheers,
Steve

From: Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz<mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>]
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 3:38 PM
To: Gaimari, Stephen at CDFA<mailto:Stephen at CDFA>; iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org>; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] Fraudulent alteration of databases to commit scientific theft and fraud.

Steve,
I think I understand what Raymond was meaning here, and if so, he is correct. Although paratypes have no name bearing status, they do have a function (or else we wouldn't have them!) Their function is as a (fallible) guide to what taxon the author had in mind when they named the new species. So, if you cannot examine a holotype for some reason, examination of paratype(s) is the next best thing to determine the species if the description isn't altogether clear.
Cheers,
Stephen

From: "Gaimari, Stephen at CDFA<mailto:Stephen at CDFA>" <stephen.gaimari at cdfa.ca.gov<mailto:stephen.gaimari at cdfa.ca.gov><mailto:stephen.gaimari at cdfa.ca.gov<mailto:stephen.gaimari at cdfa.ca.gov>>>
To: "iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org><mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org>>" <iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org><mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org>>>; "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>>
Sent: Saturday, 12 April 2014 5:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] Fraudulent alteration of databases to commit scientific theft and fraud.

Another thing to point out, regarding your youtube video. You claim that they examined one of your type specimens - by the number this was a paratype. You go on to say that the paratypes are essentially next in line if the holotype is lost.
You said "if the paratype gets lost, it resorts to paratypes, which is exactly why they are allocated". That is not true at all. Paratypes have no name bearing status.
Cheers,
Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>] On Behalf Of Frank.Krell at dmns.org<mailto:Frank.Krell at dmns.org>
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 9:09 AM
To: viper007 at live.com.au<mailto:viper007 at live.com.au>; iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org>; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] Fraudulent alteration of databases to commit scientific theft and fraud.

Raymond,
You cannot trust databases. They always contain mistakes and are constantly updated, corrected, or new mistakes get introduced.
So the main question is: When did you physically examine and label your holotypes? When did you hold the specimens in your hand?
Frank

Dr. Frank-T. Krell
Curator of Entomology
Commissioner, International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature Chair, ICZN ZooBank Committee Department of Zoology Denver Museum of Nature & Science
2001 Colorado Boulevard
Denver, CO 80205-5798 USA
Frank.Krell at dmns.org<mailto:Frank.Krell at dmns.org>
Phone: (+1) (303) 370-8244
Fax: (+1) (303) 331-6492
http://www.dmns.org/science/museum-scientists/frank-krell
lab page: http://www.dmns.org/krell-lab

The Denver Museum of Nature & Science aspires to create a community of critical thinkers who understand the lessons of the past and act as responsible stewards of the future.

From: iczn-list-bounces at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list-bounces at afriherp.org> [mailto:iczn-list-bounces at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list-bounces at afriherp.org>] On Behalf Of Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 6:47 AM
To: iczn-list at afriherp.org<mailto:iczn-list at afriherp.org>; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Subject: [iczn-list] Fraudulent alteration of databases to commit scientific theft and fraud.

Dear all,

This week a paper was published renaming two turtles I named in a paper published last year.
The paper alleges my types were never held at the University of Florida, based on an online database record, showing my holotype specimens as sighting records only (as opposed to bodies at the place).
Going on to assert my descriptions are therefore null and void, the authors (10 listed) go on and rename the species using the same data.
Now if the claim were to be correct, the action would be OK.
However I have been able to show quite easily that the relevant database entries have been fraudulently altered along with a total of about 150 others in a serious act of badly executed scientific fraud, committed to justify the ultimate action of improperly renaming the two turtles.
BTW. The details of the case are in a 20 minute video posted here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1hv_GEVf9U&feature=youtu.be
My question is has anyone else here ever encountered this sort of caper before?

Raymond Hoser

Snakebusters*<http://www.snakebusters.com.au/> - Australia's best reptiles* The only hands-on reptiles* shows that lets people hold the animals*.
Reptile parties*<http://www.reptileparties.com.au/>, events, courses
Phones: 9812 3322
0412 777 211
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org/

Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.

_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org/

Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.

_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> 

http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org/

Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.

_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org/

Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.