In case you haven’t noticed, David Peters is basically suggesting that azhdarchids are more closely related to fucking “rhamphorhynchoids” than to other lophocratine pterodactyloids.
How epically insane indeed. He’s the Comicsnix of palaeontology.
Ah, well … One man’s phylogenetically defined taxon is another man’s crap name.
As long as David Peters doesn’t figure out how to make a matrix for phylogenetic analysis, you can safely ignore everything he says about phylogeny and phylogenetics.
Which is unfortunate, because so far he’s the only one who uses reasonably large taxon samples on a whole lot of problems.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.