Those articles which opposed the acceptance of Cope’s rule seemed to have stronger evidence to me. Although Arnold et al. (1995) only looked at foraminifera, previously neglected biases were examined and allowed for the dismissal of many seemingly incorrect mechanisms for Cope’s rule. The main issue that Arnold et al. (1995) addressed was that while a lower limit was being set on size, no upper limit had been set and therefore results were skewed towards larger size. Jablonski (1997) also addressed the issue of concentrating solely on the increase is size itself without looking for other possible explanations. By examining increases in a clade’s size range, Jablonski (1997) was able to show that the over representation of increases in body size was due to the inclusion of data which was due to an increase in variance.