(December 24, 2019 at 3:26 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote:Have the paper for free.(December 24, 2019 at 1:27 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: My references are on the table. Look through them; if I've distorted them you're welcome to expose me. My offer to send the papers, if anyone can't access them, extends to you as well.
I don't plan to go through 36 pages of this topic, but I do remember one post that I saw where you referenced some papers, like this:
(December 24, 2019 at 1:27 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: In the absence of known ancestry, relatedness is always an assumption. Homoplasy (such as convergence or reversals) often breaks with this assumption because trait or genetic similarity is not a true indicator of relatedness. (Wake, et al., 2011). Phylogenies are indeed hypotheses (though I disagree they're testable); they attempt to predict various ways in which the relatedness assumption could have played out.
Reference: Wake, D. B., M. H. Wake, and C. D. Specht. 2011. Homoplasy: From detecting pattern to determining process and mechanism of evolution. Science 331: 1032–1035.
I don't have access to those papers but I do have an access to "Cambell Biology" which is a textbook for high school and college-level classes.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication...0/download
PDF format.
Guess what? It does not claim what John claims it says.