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

[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.

[thesnakeman]

Marwoleath and others above. One of a number of robust phylogenies is posted by myself above to refute false claims by some here that I had "no evidence" to support the splitting of "Thamnophis". Now that some evidence is presented I get claims of intellectual theft and the like.
In terms of this new allegation, I suggest you take a read of the Rules of the ICZN.
Now I know it is hard for people to admit that they are in the wrong, but surely one of you here can admit that you don't have a shred of evidence to refute what I have presented or published in terms of the phylogenies for Thamnophis is recognised pre-2012.
All the best

[guidofatherof5]

I for one will be awaiting any changes the ICZN deem appropriate. They are the final word in this matter(at this point) and all those wishing to make changes to any taxonomy can submit their work to them and await their decision.

[chris-uk]

Jeeze... You just don't get it do you? Showing us a picture of a phylogeny isn't "evidence". Evidence is showing us the phylogeny and actually telling us why it is correct. I refer you back to Stefan's pictures of houses, I've seen them but I don't for one minute believe that Stefan is an architect.
You come onto a Thamnophis forum with your claims but can't be bothered to explain to the laymen here why you are right. Now we've already covered the lack of credibility of the place you published, if you aren't willing to tell us more about your evidence I'd suggest that you redirect your time and attention to an audience that is more receptive.

[Didymus20X6]

OR to an audience that has some authority within the scientific community to dictate the changes you propose instead of to a bunch of hobbyists. If you honestly believe you are correct, then address other scientists and see if you can shift the consensus. As I said before, once the consensus of the scientific community has weighed in on your evidence, then we'll be in a position to take your claims seriously.

But if you treat them the same way you've treated us - by presenting your little teapot theory without adequate evidence and demanding we prove you wrong - then I suspect they'll just laugh you off stage.

[thesnakeman]

Chris-UK, with one year's expertise with reptiles, your comments attacking me are treated with the weight they deserve.
I posted the details of the papers here not to seek your approval. If that had been my intent, I'd have done this BEFORE publishing the results of the audit, not after.
As noted, the papers have all been peer reviewed and due the quality of evidence supporting the taxonomy, the reviewers all agreed with my position.
I therefore posted the details of these papers on this forum as I expected people here to be interested in names they are likely to see in circulation in coming years, also to show which snakes are included in each group and as part of a bridge between the professional and amateur herpetologist, viz also a common division between taxonomist and keeper.
I skate between all communities and try to get all to work togeather, although clearly some posting here seem to take an adversial position to everything.
Now the (relevant) professional herpetologists will in the fullness of time either accept my taxonomy or reject it, and they are made aware of the relevant paper/s via the various database and RSS feeds they have access to, such as Zoological Record and the like.
Most are hidden behind so-called "paywalls" and are therefore inaccessible to most "plebs" and people on this forum, which is further reason why I thought I'd post details of the papers here.
Sorry to the noisy few who seem to be bent on trolling rather than much else.
Now here's some advice to all here.
I post here an image or two of one of the wonderful snakes we have here and I ask you to all look at this and then if you have any snakes in your posession to take one out of it's cage and spend a full five minutes handling it and admiring it's magnificent natural beauty.
All the best

A1.jpgA2.jpgA3.jpgA4.jpg

[-MARWOLAETH-]

Chris-UK, with one year's expertise with reptiles, your comments attacking me are treated with the weight they deserve.

A1.jpgA2.jpgA3.jpgA4.jpg

So you are dismissing his valid questions because he only has a years experience with reptiles?

[Stefan-A]

Chris-UK, with one year's expertise with reptiles, your comments attacking me are treated with the weight they deserve.

Non sequitur, ad hominem.

I posted the details of the papers here not to seek your approval. If that had been my intent, I'd have done this BEFORE publishing the results of the audit, not after.

Tough noogies. The second you posted here, you set yourself up for approval or disapproval. Your comments are going to be treated with the weight they deserve, considering that your expertise here is completely unproven.

As noted, the papers have all been peer reviewed and due the quality of evidence supporting the taxonomy, the reviewers all agreed with my position.

Not interested. Did you know that there are peer reviewed "creation science" journals these days?

I therefore posted the details of these papers on this forum as I expected people here to be interested in names they are likely to see in circulation in coming years,

Not going to happen.

also to show which snakes are included in each group and as part of a bridge between the professional and amateur herpetologist, viz also a common division between taxonomist and keeper.

Architect-fireman.

I skate between all communities and try to get all to work togeather,

How's that working for ya?

although clearly some posting here seem to take an adversial position to everything.

Most of all, stupidity.

Now the (relevant) professional herpetologists will in the fullness of time either accept my taxonomy or reject it,

They sure will.

Sorry to the noisy few who seem to be bent on trolling rather than much else.

Glass houses, etc.

Now here's some advice to all here.

Oh, rapture!

I post here an image or two of one of the wonderful snakes we have here and I ask you to all look at this and then if you have any snakes in your posession to take one out of it's cage and spend a full five minutes handling it and admiring it's magnificent natural beauty.

So in other words, you want us to grab a snake for absolutely no reason and fiddle about with it for no benefit at all to the snake.

[d_virginiana]

Now here's some advice to all here.
I post here an image or two of one of the wonderful snakes we have here and I ask you to all look at this and then if you have any snakes in your posession to take one out of it's cage and spend a full five minutes handling it and admiring it's magnificent natural beauty.
All the best

A1.jpgA2.jpgA3.jpgA4.jpg

Before he gets kicked off, I kind of want to point out to him that one of the 'one or two wonderful snakes' he has is actually a frog.

[thesnakeman]

"Before he gets kicked off, I kind of want to point out to him that one of the 'one or two wonderful snakes' he has is actually a frog".

On that note it may be worthwhile to lock this thread as I don't see it going anywhere.

All the best