jc122463
Well-known member
Ok, I know this is probably something that has been discussed here in length (I've read a couple threads), but I feel it's worth rehashing.
My question comes down to whether the 'english' or 'scientific' name should be the authority on identifying a species.
'Scientific' names are meant to be the common denominator as far as classification. 'English' names not only change regionally, but are often meaningless in the vast majority of the world that does not speak english.
The problem that arrises is that we are in a time period where scientific knowledge is in a constant state of expansion. The relationships of birds (genus, species, and sub-species (not to mention family)) seems to be in a constant state of flux.
Is the 'english' name or the 'scientific' name the most consistent?
It seems to me that it would be easier to agree on 'english' names that can then remain constant, while there precise taxonomy is determined, than to accept a 'scientific' name, that will undoubtably be changed, as the constant by which to identify a species.
Please let me know what you think.
Cheers,
Benji
PS - I'll be off birding in Namibia for a while so may not be able to respond myself, but this is something that I've been having heated debates over with fellow birders for a while now and would love to hear what others think. Thanks for your input.
My question comes down to whether the 'english' or 'scientific' name should be the authority on identifying a species.
'Scientific' names are meant to be the common denominator as far as classification. 'English' names not only change regionally, but are often meaningless in the vast majority of the world that does not speak english.
The problem that arrises is that we are in a time period where scientific knowledge is in a constant state of expansion. The relationships of birds (genus, species, and sub-species (not to mention family)) seems to be in a constant state of flux.
Is the 'english' name or the 'scientific' name the most consistent?
It seems to me that it would be easier to agree on 'english' names that can then remain constant, while there precise taxonomy is determined, than to accept a 'scientific' name, that will undoubtably be changed, as the constant by which to identify a species.
Please let me know what you think.
Cheers,
Benji
PS - I'll be off birding in Namibia for a while so may not be able to respond myself, but this is something that I've been having heated debates over with fellow birders for a while now and would love to hear what others think. Thanks for your input.