Here's a rather contrarian viewpoint about plant diversity and natives vs. exotics. In a nutshell, Hudson argues that the decline in biodiversity is so severe ( due, essentially to humans paving the planet ) that most sources of plant diversity should be encouraged. Additionally he points out difficulties in defining "exotic" and "native" due to the way seeds spread naturally. This from a fellow who for many many years has been a source of seeds of rare and unique plants. He argues that feel-good councils that make rules about invasive and exotic species may do more harm than good. An interesting view from someone that I have a lot of respect for.
If there is even less diversity in the plant world than we thought, then I guess his argument may be even stronger. Anyway, possibly something more interesting to read ( ha! yes I know this is/. ) than the OP.
While these vocabulary items are important and these skills are definitely useful, learning this skill in isolation (which most texts teach) is pretty useless as students do not connect these skills to a greater picture.
It's hard enough --and sometimes not possible-- to connect to the greater picture without willfully ignoring it. You have to learn a lot of mathematics before it starts to connect. You're not gong to be ready for a course in real analysis until you can manage calculus pretty fluently ( and analysis illuminates why various parts of calculus actually work. ) So let's make it harder still and simply not even try.
I followed that story and while it is true that the wind blew the pollen onto the farmer's land, he then carefully saved the seed only from the part of his crop that was GE-pollinated. So it was more than an accident that he ended up with Monsanto's GE seed for his next year's crop. Nevertheless, it does seem to me somewhat scary when a farmer cannot save his own seed. I'm not particularly sympathetic toward Mansanto!
He probably does enjoy it. I read his book when it first came out in the early 80's. The book was interesting and had beautiful color pictures, but was extremely difficult to read because of the overwhelming arrogance and self aggrandizement. It seemed like every other sentence was something like "We were the first in the world to recognize this" and "All those other smucks never noticed that" and "this would never have been discovered if it weren't for our overarching genius"...
I found the mathematics fascinating, but the tone of the book was almost unbearable. For me, the personality and attitude seeping through detracted from what would otherwise tremendously interesting. If I remember correctly, there were accusations that several other researchers were not adequately credited for their part in the development of fractal geometry, but that was over 20 years ago and I could be thinking of something else...
Actually this is not quite right. c = c in a vacuum, but the interstellar medium is not a vacuum. The density of electrons makes the ISM a dispersive medium, and velocity of wave propagation is a function of frequency. So, for example, X-ray evidence of a gamma-ray burst arrives before the "afterglow" at radio frequencies. See Kraus, "radio astronomy" chapter 9.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a rather contrarian viewpoint about plant diversity and natives vs. exotics. In a nutshell, Hudson argues that the decline in biodiversity is so severe ( due, essentially to humans paving the planet ) that most sources of plant diversity should be encouraged. Additionally he points out difficulties in defining "exotic" and "native" due to the way seeds spread naturally. This from a fellow who for many many years has been a source of seeds of rare and unique plants. He argues that feel-good councils that make rules about invasive and exotic species may do more harm than good. An interesting view from someone that I have a lot of respect for.
If there is even less diversity in the plant world than we thought, then I guess his argument may be even stronger. Anyway, possibly something more interesting to read ( ha! yes I know this is /. ) than the OP.
Related, excellent read, for those interested Plants, Man, and Life
Bingo.
While these vocabulary items are important and these skills are definitely useful, learning this skill in isolation (which most texts teach) is pretty useless as students do not connect these skills to a greater picture.
It's hard enough --and sometimes not possible-- to connect to the greater picture without willfully ignoring it. You have to learn a lot of mathematics before it starts to connect. You're not gong to be ready for a course in real analysis until you can manage calculus pretty fluently ( and analysis illuminates why various parts of calculus actually work. ) So let's make it harder still and simply not even try.
I first read this as: I've been looking forward to that whole tabbed booting thing they invented.
I followed that story and while it is true that the wind blew the pollen onto the farmer's land, he then carefully saved the seed only from the part of his crop that was GE-pollinated. So it was more than an accident that he ended up with Monsanto's GE seed for his next year's crop. Nevertheless, it does seem to me somewhat scary when a farmer cannot save his own seed. I'm not particularly sympathetic toward Mansanto!
He probably does enjoy it. I read his book when it first came out in the early 80's. The book was interesting and had beautiful color pictures, but was extremely difficult to read because of the overwhelming arrogance and self aggrandizement. It seemed like every other sentence was something like "We were the first in the world to recognize this" and "All those other smucks never noticed that" and "this would never have been discovered if it weren't for our overarching genius"... I found the mathematics fascinating, but the tone of the book was almost unbearable. For me, the personality and attitude seeping through detracted from what would otherwise tremendously interesting. If I remember correctly, there were accusations that several other researchers were not adequately credited for their part in the development of fractal geometry, but that was over 20 years ago and I could be thinking of something else...
Actually this is not quite right. c = c in a vacuum, but the interstellar medium is not a vacuum. The density of electrons makes the ISM a dispersive medium, and velocity of wave propagation is a function of frequency. So, for example, X-ray evidence of a gamma-ray burst arrives before the "afterglow" at radio frequencies. See Kraus, "radio astronomy" chapter 9.