What Kind of Bird is That?

[Tom Reichner]

Since this thread is veering into emotionally charged territory (and truth be told, as a POC in a community (birding) that is overwhelmingly not represented by people who look like me, I am quite emotionally invested in this), perhaps we should close this thread with the agreement that there will be disagreements about this whole renaming business and leave it at that.

I certainly don’t want to close the thread after getting in the last word, so please do respond to my message if you like. Maybe we can close it in a day or so so that we don’t let this matter get between us.

.
I think that most of us are mature enough to continue discussing this matter as long as we want to, even if we have different opinions, values, perspectives, and priorities.

In fact, this community impresses me with how we have carried on here in this thread ..... we have some diametrically opposing viewpoints, yet we have responded to each other with complete respect. Personally, I don't like how it feels to be shut up or closed down whenever my opinion happens to be different than that of a moderator.
.

 

[joayne]

The moderators will only step in if the discussion veers off topic or in the event of personal attacks.
It certainly is not dependent on a personal view of any Moderator. I would ask that you do not infer otherwise.

 

[Lyn2011]

Not all name changes are because of the original name was a bad person, sometimes they think a bird (or insect or plants) belongs to a different group. Well, we are used to the old names, so why change. There are too many changes, if you ask me. It's no wonder that people have questions because of it.

 

[Capn Jack]

Within the natural sciences, the rule that reserves naming rights for the first on the scene has prevailed.

How would you do it? I understand naming critters can be controversial since the local people may have known of them for ages in that case, they should get naming rights in my opinion. The specimens simply weren't known "to science". This is different from naming new celestial objects such as comets. I got to name an algorithm I developed- I had to call it something! In my case, I doubt there will be any controversy.

 

[Capn Jack]

Not all name changes are because of the original name was a bad person, sometimes they think a bird (or insect or plants) belongs to a different group. Well, we are used to the old names, so why change. There are too many changes, if you ask me. It's no wonder that people have questions because of it.

In this case, the changes are to better group similar objects. As our understanding of the natural world changes, our models of the world change, causing name changes. The common names of animals and birds, plants, etc. need not change. Generally, the specific name doesn't change but the organism might be moved to another genus. The specific name would be changed if the "new" genus already has that specific name. I'm sorry about the changes- in some small way, I contribute to it.

Edit: Those name changes are a pain to biologists too! They don't make those decisions lightly!

 

[OhLook]

How would you do it?

It'd be presumptuous of me to propose a way to do it, since this isn't my field. In general, I have no quarrel with giving naming rights to the first describer and encouraging recognition of individuals and local populations connected to the species. The controversy now doesn't seem to involve recently identified species anyway. It's all about removing an honor from long-dead people whose reputations have suffered as views of right and wrong have changed.

In renaming, I think wiping away all personal names is uncalled for. Steller did nothing scandalous that I know of. When citizens or government authorities tear down statues of people who've fallen from favor, they don't tear down the statues of all people in their territory. Why do it with names of creatures?

 

[Fogey]

I think the days of explorers and random people "discovering" new species is over. These days, new species are discovered, more often than not, by scientists and researchers slogging their way through forests or deep in the ocean. So, the discoverer and the person publishing the results are often one and the same. In cases where the discoverer is an amateur, they would reach out to the nearby scientific establishment (museum, university, etc.) and have the pros take over the task of determining the taxonomy. I think the reasonable thing to do at this point would be for the scientist to name the organism after the amateur who found it first and I do believe this happens quite often.

Ummm! So who was Turdus philomelos? and what kacky habits did they have?

 

[West Coast Birder]

Ummm! So who was Turdus philomelos? and what kacky habits did thay have?

Blame Linnaeus. Apparently, Turdus is Latin for Thrush!