On Fri, 16 Jun 1995, Dennis Paulson wrote:


> Chris, I wonder if you would agree with me that splitting is a fad right
> now (because of a reassessment of species concepts, rather than
> arbitrariness), just like lumping was a fad some decades ago (for the *very
> same reason*). Bob Zink and other proponents of the PSC concept, much as I
> respect them and their work, are merely pursuing vigorously an alternative
> hypothesis that could even be called a "bandwagon," the "truth" of which is
> no more apparent than that of the BSC. I suppose we could argue clines vs.
> step clines vs. truly independent evolution until the cowbirds come home,
> and someone would still have to make somewhat arbitrary decisions as to
> what constitutes a species. The AOU check-list committee is now favoring
> this new concept in its decision-making process.

I agree wholehartedly. I never said the PSC was *right*! I just said it
was fun to argue for it.

> But there are still all kinds of anomalies to cause head-scratching
> indefinitely, for example populations that look the same but are
> demonstrably genetically different and vice versa. How would these be
> treated under the PSC?

Split 'em all! :-)


Chris "On the wagon" Hill
Seattle, WA
cehill at u.washington.edu