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

[-MARWOLAETH-]

Are yu sure you passed crazy camp Marnie?lol jk

[kibakiba]

She's definitely less crazy than this hoser guy. I think he should go to a crazy camp... Preferably at an asylum.

[-MARWOLAETH-]

I think he's licked one to many Cane toads.

[thesnakeman]

Dear all, if ability to make "noise" counts, then I have lost the argument.

All the best

Snakeman

PS Still await contradictory evidence to this (below),

Thamnophis-Phylogeny-new-genera-pyron-cut-marked-up.jpg

[Stefan-A]

Dear all, if ability to make "noise" counts, then I have lost the argument.

All the best

Snakeman

PS Still await contradictory evidence to this (below),

Thamnophis-Phylogeny-new-genera-pyron-cut-marked-up.jpg

I suggest you start answering the questions and criticisms. This is not your personal soapbox, this is not your personal blog, this is not your personal journal. This is a forum, not a place for monologues or soliloquies, but for interaction.

It's also not a place to deposit your scribblings. If you're going to pop in once a month to market your little pamphlet and then basically just run away, I'm going to start treating it as spamming.

[-MARWOLAETH-]

Can't he see that our main problem with all this is that he isn't presenting the evidence that his 'journal' promises[which has been stated to him numerous times] yet he still feels we have the burden of proof.
If you aren't going to answer our questions why come hear?
why.jpg

[Stefan-A]

Can't he see that our main problem with all this is that he isn't presenting the evidence that his 'journal' promises[which has been stated to him numerous times] yet he still feels we have the burden of proof.

The evidence that Thamnophis is paraphyletic is in one of the articles he cites, but his actions are silly and premature. He's done no research and he's not a scientist, so it's pointless to argue over the science with him. He probably just doesn't understand it. What is open for criticism, is his own actions (from jumping the gun, to splitting the clade, to the details of the names), his professionalism and his motives.

[chris-uk]

His actions are that of a parasite on the scientists who have actually done some primary research. By "publishing" a literature review that references everyone else's work and draws conclusions that are not expanded or supported in his own writing, he is taking a shotgun approach. Afterall, with the pure volume of articles Hoser has published at least a few of the reclassifications must be correct, and he's been clever enough not to be too specific, so it would be difficult to say in the future that he was correct in his conclusion but for completely wrong reasons.

I think it's time that we put this topic to bed. Hoser isn't going to explain why he's reclassified Thamnophis, the best we can hope for is him posting another picture of his reclassification and him repeating that "nobody has disproved it". It's a "flying spaghetti monster", we don't have to disprove it.

[kibakiba]

You should have banned him for advertising his book in the first place. I don't know about you guys, but I consider that to be spam.

[Didymus20X6]

It's Russell's Teapot, basically. Someone making extraordinary claims has the responsibility to present evidence for those claims and to defend those claims against criticism. In Russell's Teapot analogy, an extraordinary claim is made: that there is a teapot orbiting Mars. When the claim is disputed by those requiring proof, the claimant then simply says, "You can't prove it isn't." It's essentially an attempt to argue that the lack of evidence is actually evidence; it's the same type of circular reasoning behind most conspiracy theories. That might have worked in Arkham City, but it doesn't work in real science.

And the whole "I'm a scientist and you're not!" line of reasoning is what we call an argument from authority: it's essentially saying, "I'm right purely based on who I am." It goes hand-in-hand with ad hominem, which is essentially, "You're wrong purely based on who you are." And neither argument - authority or ad hominem - carries any real weight in any kind of discussion, except perhaps political (and even there it shouldn't). But honestly, if what a bunch of non-experts think doesn't really matter, then doesn't that in and of itself make this entire discussion irrelevant? Hoser should be arguing with his fellow scientists, not with a bunch of reptile keepers.

And given that this isn't primarily a scientific forum, but a hobbyist forum, I can't help but think that the discussion isn't even relevant here. We're arguing over how certain species of garter snake should be scientifically classified, what names they should be called? You might as well be arguing over whether a bratwurst should be called a sausage.

The bottom line: when the consensus of the scientific community agrees with Mr. Hoser, then we can take him seriously. Until then, he might as well be blowing steam out his butt for all it matters.