The "Hoser review" of the genus Thamnophis...

[-MARWOLAETH-]

That moment when you've failed to impress the hobbyist and scientific community all at the same time...

[EasternGirl]

I would just like to add that Mr. Hoser forgets that many of us on here are trained in evaluating valid and reliable research...so while he says that no one has debunked his theories...I believe that many of us did debunk his theories...and we are actually qualified to do so. Also, I want to say that no one has challenged my new name of Thamnophis marnieus scottus...therefore, by Mr. Hoser's rules, I suppose that is now an official name for eastern garters. Please make a note of this official change.

[kibakiba]

Since I know more than Mr. Hoser about ordinoides, that makes my name for Unicornus Pinkus official. No one has challenged that either.

[Stefan-A]

Since I know more than Mr. Hoser about ordinoides, that makes my name for Unicornus Pinkus official. No one has challenged that either.

Unicornus is a synonym for Acanthina.

[kibakiba]

Okay then. Unicornius pinkus. Anything conflicting with that?

[Stefan-A]

Okay then. Unicornius pinkus. Anything conflicting with that?

Not to my knowledge.

[Didymus20X6]

my-little-pony-friendship-is-magic-andrea-libman-3.jpg

[Steveo]

Brony alert.

[kibakiba]

Unicornius Pinkus is officially official. Anymore conflicting evidence doesn't matter at all, because I have a job as a professional gamer dancer. Everything is irrelevant.

[Steveo]

I would just like to add that Mr. Hoser forgets that many of us on here are trained in evaluating valid and reliable research...so while he says that no one has debunked his theories...I believe that many of us did debunk his theories...and we are actually qualified to do so. Also, I want to say that no one has challenged my new name of Thamnophis marnieus scottus...therefore, by Mr. Hoser's rules, I suppose that is now an official name for eastern garters. Please make a note of this official change.

I challenge your name because you can't name something after yourself :P You can, however, name it for someone else.

Seriously though, we do have some real scientists here. I've done real work and had been published before I even finished my degree. The paper presented by Mr. Hoser would not earn a passing grade even in a 3rd year biology course without substantial revision and addition of the missing sections. How are we supposed to understand the results without knowing the methods? I also consider it a grave offense to cite your own previous work unless it was such a pioneering effort that nobody else has published on it; taxonomy certainly does not fit this description.


The paper gives nothing but morphological evidence, but that is already how most of the naming was done in the first place. The only realistic way to reclassify organisms in 2012 is with solid genetic analysis, of which none is present.