Maybe…but I doubt many of these phylogenies use DNA, and if so, likely only a single or few genes. Nowhere near enough resolution to accurately determine genetic relatedness. Woody plants may actually be more related than we think.

These sorts of phylogenies tend to use morphological characteristics which is an unreliable measure of genetic relatedness.

I will stand corrected if wrong though

Undoubtedly. There’s not many games I’d put above it.

Johnny Silverhand did nothing wrong.

True. A good way around this is to test ideas across multiple people. N=1 is just bad science.

And also asking: “but shit how, specifically?”

Not saying it’s easy

You don’t need their permission to write it up yourself

Fuckin’ a. Respect

I agree with you. People can walk and chew bubblegum if ya get me.

It sends a message - this is a warning shot. If things don’t change, another extended boycott can be organised. These people think quarterly, 7 days isn’t insignificant on that time horizon.

What are you doing?

Pimp boy