Not exactly. There were far more problems with the two kingdom approach. It
is just that they have been ignored for so long. Modern methods have shown
that they can be ignored no more.
Who knows what "nature" believes? "Nature" is only a metaphor anyway.
One must ask the questions before they can find the answers.
Dave Haas <dhaas at prodigy.net> wrote in article
<MPG.12684b57fa9ac7ce989689 at news.prodigy.net>...
> My 3 cents. Nature does not believe in categories. Taxa are created by
> humans. Since everything is related to everything else drawing the lines
is
> going to be controversial. You would think the easiest place to make
> distinctions would be at the kingdom level but the more we find out the
> harder it is to decide where one kingdom ends and another begins. I bet
> there are more problems today than there was when we had the old 2
kingdom
> system. Now we simply throw everything that doesn't fit in the four
> or five existing kingdoms into protista. It seems the more we know the
more
> we don't know
>> D. Haas
>
