Available Now at New York Worms!
News & Events:
Posted by WW on March 07, 2002 at 04:51:37:
In Reply to: Re: Hoser names OK posted by Raymond Hoser on March 07, 2002 at 04:19:34:
: Heard much the same story about a year back.
: I was told that someone DNA'd a pailsus and then WW told them not to publish their findings as it made his Pailsus = King Brown theory look a bit shakey.
Yeah, right - let's see:
- Someone spends the time, money and effort to do some decent scientific work on Pseudechis/Pailsus
- Then, instead of publishing it and getting a good paper out of their effort, they hold back on it, solely to spare me the embarrasment of seeing a few remarks on some WWW Forum contradicted ?????
C'mon Ray, I am flattered that you ascribe such influence to me, but the world of herpetology is considerably bigger than our little tiffs here.
: I haven't mentioned it previously for fear of starting another flame war, but perhaps it'd be wise for WW to either confirm or deny the reports ... I'm happy to take his word on this one for the time being(for the sake of keeping the peace)
For the record, I have absolutely and categorically NEVER, EVER discouraged or impeded ANYONE from publishing ANY scientific data on this or any other group of animals - quite the opposite, I would like to see this situation resolved as much as anyone. As I have said a million times, my criticisms of your work center on your methods, not your conclusions.
As an aside, if you want to make serious accusations such as the one above, then I would suggest that you get hold of some evidence to back it up.
: Maybe also someone here could enlighten us as to whether or not Ulrich Kuch is publishing the results of the DNA results of the Pailsus skin I sent him way back in 1998?
Ulrich is working on a number of projects. Having had the IJ Pseudechis description snateched from under his nose, I imagine he will be focusing on some of his other projects for the moment.