Couldn't resist this one....I have only one question, seeing as how I do not
like to flame people in public. I dont understand how Ludvig, the original
poster, can think that molecular systematics is bullshit seeing as how it is
the only method I know of that utilizes only homologous characters! (If you
take the care to align the sequences properly) How can you build a phylogeny or
a taxonomy using anything else and call it realistic?
I agree that data should be analyzed with scutiny, i.e., we should not go
blindly into dogma. But hasn't the biggest problem with phylogenetics been the
inability to separate homology from analogy, and doesn't molecular data address
this problem, finally, better than any other?
Flames away! (Be kind, though, I'm still young and naive)
Diane
