Miklausen's 1997 book

[Ken Kinman]

    Well, although I wouldn't highly recommend the Miklausen book (and
myself glad that I borrowed it rather than buying it), I actually enjoy
reading this kind of book from time to time.
    In 1857, Darwin wrote (I hope I've got it right):  I am a firm believer
that without speculation there is no good and original observation.
     Miklausen's speculations may be on the wild side overall, but that
doesn't prevent me from digging deeper in case there are some "nuggets of
wisdom" in there somewhere.  The fact that he and I hold some similar views
on the origins of life does not cast aspersions (guilt by association) on
those views in my opinion, and therefore poses no dilemma from my
perspective.
     Most of Miklausen's speculations may be "resoundingly falsified", but I
still find them interesting and hope to eventually find something of
botanical value in there somewhere.
    As to whether lateral transfers cannot be falsified or whether they are
just "very difficult" to falsify, perhaps that is a matter of differing
philosophies.  I would only say, viva la difference.  Anyway, thanks for the
interesting feedback.  I'm looking forward to once again examining the
"fungal" lateral transfer hypothesis on metaphyte origins.  More of that
"speculation" I think Darwin was referring to, the kind that makes biology
such an interesting field.
                   --------Ken Kinman

>From: Curtis Clark <jcclark at csupomona.edu>
>To: Ken Kinman <kinman at HOTMAIL.COM>, TAXACOM at USOBI.ORG
>Subject: Re: Miklausen's 1997 book
>Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 19:53:07 -0700
>
>At 04:56 PM 8/22/99 -0700, Ken Kinman wrote:
> >  Monocots are purported to be more closely
> >related to sphenophytes than they are to the dicots.
>
>He isn't the first to suggest this (although I hope he will be the last
>:-). It ignores the multitude of synapomorphies of the flowering plants,
>both morphological and molecular. It also ignores that the dicots are not a
>natural group (although I imagine that isn't an issue for him).
>
> >     However, he shows great clarity of thought in discussing some
>aspects
> >of the origins of life, that they were phototrophs evolving in cold
> >circumpolar waters (not thermophilic, as Woese has much of the world now
> >believing) and that chlorophylls did indeed precede
>bacterio-chlorophylls.
> >These ideas on early life are not presently very popular, but on those
> >particulars I can agree with Miklausen.
>
>What a dilemma you are in! That he should agree with you in this regard
>casts aspersions through "guilt by association" on a hypothesis you hold
>dear.
>
> >     It still seems to me likely possibility that charophytes might not
>be
> >the sole ancestors of bryophytes and other land plants, and there was an
> >infusion of genes from other groups---if not phaeophytes, then perhaps
> >fungi (I've now forgotten who proposed that)
>
>A professor at the University of California, Irvine; first name Peter, but
>his last name has slipped my mind, and the reprint is at work. As I
>remember, he believed that certain features of "higher" plants such as
>haustorial growth must have come by lateral transfer (back before it was
>called that) from fungi.
>
>The problem with lateral transfer is that it cannot be falsified; thus it
>has little scientific explanatory value. It may remain as a viable
>explanation when all else has been falsified, but that doesn't yet seem to
>be the case here.
>
> >, or some other group of protists
> >(perhaps other hypotheses have been made that I have never heard of).  I
>am
> >still not enough of a botanist to know if there are any valuable nuggets
>of botanical information buried in the Miklausen book.
>
>But you should be enough of a scientist to know that these ideas are either
>testable hypotheses, or else they are not science. IMO many are testable,
>and resoundingly falsified.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>Curtis Clark                  http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
>Biological Sciences Department             Voice: (909) 869-4062
>California State Polytechnic University      FAX: (909) 869-4078
>Pomona CA 91768-4032  USA                  jcclark at csupomona.edu


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com