hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
 Navigation
Articles
Gallery of Plants
Blog
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Patents
Mailing Lists
    FAQ
    Netiquette
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
Links
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: ANSWERS


Ben:

>>This fall when I get some hosta seeds I will study their 
>>germination.

>yOU HAVE NOT STUDIED THEM AND STILL" KNOWS" I AM WRONG!

I do not believe that I said you were wrong.  It's just that you 
haven't proven to me that you are right.  I am willing to concede that 
you may be correct IF you would only provide me with some proof.  You 
keep saying all I have to do is look in any recent book on biology.  
Ben, I'm a busy man, I don't have time to look through a thousand 
books to find something that will support your view.  I've already 
looked through one of the great books of plant anatomy and didn't find 
anything to support your view.  Yet, you REFUSE a simple request to 
state the book(s) that support your view, the page numbers and to give 
some brief quotations from those sources so that all of us on this 
robin know what you are refering to.  Is it really so difficult to do 
this - or is it more likely that these books really don't exist!  You 
are making a claim that some references support your view, but yet 
you refuse to give us those references and you still want us to 
believe you are correct just because you say you are correct!  Come on 
Ben, I wasn't born yesterday.

>I DID GIVE YOU REFERENCES INCLUDING PAGE NUMBERS EG THE BOOK ON PLANT 
>BIOLOGY ( 1997) OF RAVEN I WILL NOT DO IT ALL OVER AGAIN 

One book!  That's all you have?  I don't have Raven and I doubt that 
any others on this robin have it either.  So Ben, how about doing us 
all a big favor and QUOTE the pertinent passages so all of us on this 
robin can be educated.  

>THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN STYLE BETWEEN A SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE 
>AND AN ARTICLE FOR A HOBBY JOURNAL

I'll agree with you on this point, but that doesn't mean that BAD 
science should be any more acceptable in a hobby journal then in a 
peer review scientific journal.  

When I asked you how you came to the consclusion that a mutated gene 
could not have more then 99% of the activity of the original gene you 
said "I DID NOT USE 100 PROCENT AS NOT TO CONFUSE IT WITH WILDTYPE."  
Unfortunately, you did confuse a lot of people and this is just plain 
BAD science.  If you didn't want to confuse anyone, then why not 
rewrite the sentence rather then make a blank, incorrect statement 
that you know is incorrect.  There is no excuse for this kind of bad 
writing.

>NO MATTER WHAT I SAY YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE ME ANYWAY 

That is not true.  I'll believe you when you provide the proof.  You 
tend to make blanket statements that you expect people to believe just 
because you say so.  Ben, it's one thing to say "given such and such a 
situtation it is POSSIBLE that mitotic crossing over is the cause" 
compared to your "given such and such a situtation mitotic crossing 
over is THE cause."  You have absolutely no evidence or proof that 
mitotic crossing over ever occured in hostas, yet you make a blanket 
statement that mitotic crossing over is responsible for a large number 
of hosta sports.  Where is the proof, as we sometimes say in America 
"where's the beef."

>IT DOES NOT MATTER OR THE COTYL STAYS ABOVE OR BELOW SOIL LEVEL

Now I know you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to 
seed germination.  

>lILIUM HAS A SINGLE COTYL LIKE HOSTA BUT I DONT KNOW HOW 
>THEY LOOK LIKE

You don't know what a lily cotyledon looks like, but yet you know it 
has a cotyledon just like a hosta!  AMAZING!  Can you explain how a 
lily cotyledon is just like a hosta cotyledon when you have never seen 
a lily cotyledon?

>MOST/ALL THESE CLUES CAN BE DERIVED FROM MY BOOK ON SPORTS. 

Your book on sports is mostly useless.  

>>You still haven't explained what vegetive seed propagation is.
>THIS IS A MISTAKE/MISPRINT MADE SOMEWHERE

I'll accept that.  

>MAYBE NEXT TIME YOU CAN COMMENT ABOUT THE MAIN MESSAGE OF THE 
>ARTICLE: IDENTITY /SIMILARITY OF SPORTS INSTEAD OF NICKPICKING

Actually, I would like to get to that topic, but it is difficult to do 
because your rules for sports in hosta are so full of holes and there 
are so many errors in your articles that it is difficult to figure out 
just what you are trying to say.

>ps WHERE  DID YOU PUBLISH ALL INFORMATION GLEANED IN 20 YEARS WITH 
>AGGRESSIVE PROPAGATION? 

I have not published it.  After 20 years of propagating daylilies, and 
now hostas, I've learned a few things.  These are mostly trade 
secretes that are not discussed very much outside the nursery trade, 
but are available for those who want to make the effort to find them. 
Anyone with a good knowledge of horticulture and botany should be able 
to figure them out without too much trouble.

Joe Halinar



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN





 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index