Taxacom: Biogeography sciences in the real world

[John Grehan]

Probably n0one of you are in any way under the illusion that science is
objective, and that there is a direct competition of competing research
programs Latest example (among many probably) of how it really works is the
paper at

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fresjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com%2Fdoi%2Fpdfdirect%2F10.1111%2Fsyen.12632&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cafa603fd5b7f4d89533408dc4b57dc15%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638468087931226552%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=7WMxuecFOqWASb%2BJSI2BBOYiYRYb2ky6nAdrIKE%2FuOY%3D&reserved=0

that illustrates how the center of origin and chance dispersal research
program responds to exposure of critical methodological flaws
(misrepresenting molecular divergence dates as actual or maximal, and
ancestral areas analyses as empirical even though they use area units that
have no actual existence) - in this case just ignore them. I wrote to the
authors the following:

Dear colleagues,

In reference to your recent paper I found it interesting to see that you
applied molecular divergence dates to exclude earlier origins even though
this is not empirically possible with fossil calibrated ages. And you use
ancestral areas analyses that can generate artifactual vicariance and
chance dispersal events, and cannot empirically distinguish between the two
processes for a paraphyletic grade relationship of areas. All this is
extensively documented in the literature. I guess lack of acknowledgement
of these critical problems is not surprising given that one of you
(Trewick) is a signatory of a paper calling for suppression and censorship
of panbiogeography which he characterizes as akin to young-age Creationism
(and hence quite bizarre that he allowed citation  [however superficial] of
Head's work). And given that kind of politics I guess it's no surprise to
see no reference to Heads 2023 on New Caledonian origins. I have appended a
copy for those not so ostrich-like.

Kind regards,

John Grehan

-- 
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cafa603fd5b7f4d89533408dc4b57dc15%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638468087931226552%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Hh9BRNNKUMI0YdaA725AHIboaCPfRCUDpCJfqOC3%2FoM%3D&reserved=0 (use the 'visit archived web site'
link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.