If he conforms closely with the Code, then there is very little anyone can do to suppress his names using the ICZN. The names he prosposes must therefore be judged on the basis of their scientific merit. If there isn't any data to support the new names, these proposals can simply be ignored. I understand that there is a good chance that Ray Hoser can luck out and one of the taxa he names will be considered valid by newly discovered data. In that case, someone would indeed have to use his name. That of course is annoying since it deprives the researcher who does the hard work the increasingly rare chance to name a new taxon. But then again, some researchers have had similar bad luck because some museum workers somewhere in the world had given a name to a pickled specimen simply because it looks different from other specimens in the collection. Their methodology is in fact little different than Ray Hoser's or for that matter, the methodology of the late E.H. Taylor of the Univ. of Kansas.

There simply is unfortunately no way around the inconvenience of having to deal with synonyms. Changing the rules of the ICZN is not a cure for "Taylor taxonomy," the practitioners of which simply name new species on the basis of a difference in the appearance of as few as a single specimen.

Regards.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Hide Replies ]