Re: Plants The sixth sense
- Subject: Re: Plants The sixth sense
- From: Neil Carroll <email@example.com>
- Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 10:24:26 -0600 (CST)
>You may call me old fashioned, but I have a hard time swallowing
>that "evolutionary" events of this type cover billions of years. I
>find it hard to imagine that the earth's distance from the sun
>wouldn't have changed over such a long time span. Small amounts,
>either closer or nearer, would prohibit life as we know it from
Yes, Yes, billions was too much time I meant to say millions. But on the
other hand billions of years would not have made that much difference in the
distance of the earth from the sun. but our axis does rotate slightly off
axis on a cycle of 36,000 years causing a fairly regular ice age.
>Why do we not notice these "experiments" by plants or animals
>occurring today or since science has kept up with things. I mean,
>with the large propagation firms that exist, you'd think that
>occasionally things like this would show up.
Actually a simple experiment which can naturally choose over a short period
of time is given in many basic texts on the subject....that is .......
the dandylions in your lawn eventually only flower on short peduncles
because the mower keeps cutting off the ones with long peduncles. Also the
amount of time that science has 'kept up with things' is really no time at
all. A few hundred years in absolutly nothing in the time span of
An example of this is why do we have two lungs,
>two eyes, two kidneys? Why not three or just one? These basic
>precepts occur in all mammals, not just humans.
Cells split into two not one or three. symetry is tried and true.
No changes that would distinguish
>them as another or new developing species have occurred. This is
>the case for all animals that are known to exist currently.
>Elephants are very much the same as they were three thousand years
Three thousand years is less than a blink of an eye.
Even in the case of Metasequoia glyptostroides (Chinese
>Redwood), it remains unchanged from the fossil record. Also the
>Coelacanth fish and Alligator for that matter.
Some designs are so "perfect" or adaptable that they survive the test of
time. You forgot the cockroach.
>Just to add fuel to the fire: I heard awhile back that some
>scientists hypothesize that basically all species alive today have
>always been around and other, less flexible cousins became extinct
>for various reasons over time.
We KNOW that this is simply not true. The proof is in the fossil record.
What is meant by "Always around" When is "always"? LIke before the earth was
here they were floating around in space?
Perhaps most ancient plants and
>animals will always be unknown due to fossilization never occurring
>or never being found. We may have only discovered a tiny amount of
>species that have existed and just got lucky with what we have.
Probably a very accurate statement
Not flaming just discussing,