great point , once again i'm finally getting around to the email after my
G&T for the vevning. so back where we wertre. species . sub-species is all,
academic, a rose by any other name is still a rose. my enemy here is using
self gratification as an ecxcuse for immoratalizing one's self worth by
having a shell named after themselves, honor should not be carried about on
one's shirt sleave nor should gaciousness. It is the humble man who's
remembered years from now as the TRUE hero. I don't see mnay conus
linnaneus, oliva damotta, with the work darwin did on finches i've never
seen a poephilia darwini. were i live here in flordida there are countless
examples of self gratification , heck thwey even gave sideways names!! as
the editor, main writer of our clubs newsletter if i get a nmae wrong they
want to draw a quarter me . if one's in dougfht about "what is a hero " read
a little ralph waldo emerson. "damned are those who find the middle of the
road their bastion!!". marjk
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Patti Z. Lounsbury <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, November 04, 1998 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: Internet Message
 
 
>Hi Tom, Hi Mark.
>
>I am not a respected malacologist..heck, I'm not even a disrespected
>one..but I share Tom's idea. Why wouldn't subspecies appear in the same
>area as parent species..or at the very least in overlapping areas?
>Subspecies apparently share some of the same characteristics as the
>parent species..I can see where geographical separation could have
>caused some of the evolutionary differences that would split them into
>subspecies, but there must be some common link or why would they be
>designated subspecies instead of new species?
>
>Patti "I am so confused" Lounsbury
>New Mexico
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>