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: Extinction & Loss of Habitat

  • Subject: Re: Extinction & Loss of Habitat
  • From: "Phil Bunch" <pbunch@cts.com>
  • Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 11:11:01 -0600 (CST)

Actually there is one hopeful aspect to mass extinctions. They are
generally followed by "rapid" evolutionary radiations. Not of course
that we will enjoy the process since rapid in the evolutionary sense
is slow by our measure. We are losing much that is beautiful and/or of
interest. However, as we create many new habitats, something will
adapt to grow in or on them. I don't think that DNA will just give up.
In fact since we consider these new habitats to be ours, much of what
evolves will be seen as weeds or pests.  We just barely stay ahead of
the species we don't like.  There is no question that we will reap
what we sow.

Phil Bunch

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted.Held@hstna.com <Ted.Held@hstna.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list AROID-L <aroid-l@mobot.org>
Date: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 16:55
Subject: Re: Extinction & Loss of Habitat


>
>Thank you Ron,
>
>I am actually a good-natured person who likes to challenge
conventional
>views. And I agree with you completely about marmosets.
>
>I wish there were an alternative for those people who chop down the
natural
>world to make a living. I think the majority are helplessly poor. And
they
>certainly don't know about the complexities of an ecosystem. I
believe one
>day we will solve the crisis, but I think quite a bit more
destruction will
>take place first. I am not in favor of it. I am resigned to it and
hope it
>can be minimized.
>
>I'll have to take your advice about American slang. I am quite
cognizant
>about slang as I am the slang consultant for our European colleagues
who
>work here in the US (I work for Henkel of Duesseldorf, Germany). I
find
>that our coworkers arrive with a very good command of English but
they
>cannot understand anything discussed in our meetings.
>
>I have had two other comments to me from the list to my private
e-mail. The
>whole subject of extinction and the history of life is a passion of
mine.
>Thanks for responding.
>
>
>
>                    "Ron Iles"
>                    <roniles@eirco       To:     Multiple recipients
of list AROID-L
>                    m.net>                <aroid-l@mobot.org>
>                    Sent by:             cc:
>                    aroid-l@mobot.       Fax to:
>                    org                  Subject:     Extinction &
Loss of Habitat
>
>
>                    11/07/01 02:47
>                    PM
>                    Please respond
>                    to aroid-l
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Ted
>
>Can I congratulate you on provoking discourse & then taking part most
>sensitively so that everybody could both agree & agree to disagree
without
>anybody losing their dignities in the face of hurt insecure egos!
If you
>or any other optimistic person was to be written off the list then I
would
>certainly not remain silent.   I would however request that you do
not use
>Yank-slang that we Old world peoplemost don't understand - like
"cool" &
>"parking lot".
>
>Obtusely under the above heading - If only marmosets could war
against
>Man's
>visionless eco-terrorism, then I'd be the first to request instant
>re-incarnation.
>
>Ron
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <Ted.Held@hstna.com>
>To: "Multiple recipients of list AROID-L" <aroid-l@mobot.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 4:16 PM
>Subject: One Last Comment
>
>
>
>I knew when this started that my comment would touch a nerve among
the more
>ideological among the list members. I guess I am just an optimist
about the
>world. Throughout the history of life (as we know it currently) there
have
>been some pretty remarkable cataclysms where the number of species
have
>been reduced dramatically by all estimates. It is probably the case
that at
>any given "stable" time that a large fraction of the extant species
exist
>in a rather precarious situation. Something comes along and shakes
things
>up (and I suppose this could be construed as "habitat loss" except
that as
>that phrase is usually used in today's parlance it means the whole
"parking
>lot" business - not "natural" climate changes, vulcanization, meteor
>strikes, ice ages, etc.) and a host of the more specialized species
get the
>rug pulled out from under them. In fact, if the "trajectory" of all
the
>species present at any one time could be known and plotted, one would
find
>that some are on the ascendency, vigorous, robust, while others are
in
>decline, weak and prone to succumb to shocks of various sorts.
Naturally,
>some of the weak species are really cool from the parachial human
>perspective. A lot of the coolest plants that this list likes are in
that
>category. But from the standpoint of the history of the world,
whether
>people like a particular life form does not matter very much.
>
>To be sure, people are now able to intervene in evolution in both
good ways
>and bad. We can make parking lots and we can artificially propagate
cool
>plants and animals and keep them going. From the comments I read
about the
>Philodendron spiritus-sancti it is not clear why it is such a rare
plant.
>Maybe it is because some preferred habitat is now a parking lot.
Maybe it
>is because the plant was being overwhelmed by more successful species
and
>is hanging naturally on the edge of extinction. Someone brought up
the
>Franklinia issue a day or so ago.The reason Franklinia was hanging by
a
>thread when rescued had nothing to do with loss of habitat then.
There is
>no lack of habitat for Franklinia to be reintroduced into the "wild"
today.
>
>The point is that species extinction is a really old thing and that
for the
>vast majority of extinctions human parking lot building had
absolutely no
>role. That this is happening today is not a valid opposing argument.
>
>I will now be silent on this topic unless people want to write me
off-list.
>
>ted.held@hstna.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>






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