Well, yes, we all should not take up too much bandwidth on this one but ...
The real issue for practical data analysis is whether there is something
fundamentally invalid in methods like distance matrix methods.
I don't think so, and I'm not sure exactly where Doug Eernisse stands on
that. I suspect that he is tolerant of them, but there are many
people who think of themselves as cladists who believe that there is
something fundamentally wrong with distance matrix methods because they
are not "cladistic" -- hence Bernard Baum's original concern and all our
semantic disputation.
That was why I yielded to the temptation to use the phrase "moral
distinctions" -- I should have put a smiley-face next to that one.
OK, now I really will shut up about this.
-----
Joe Felsenstein, Dept. of Genetics, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195
Internet: joe at genetics.washington.edu (IP No. 128.95.12.41)
Bitnet/EARN: felsenst at uwavm
