RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (17) < ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... >   
  Topic: VMartin's cosmology, where he will not be off-topic< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 14 2008,17:13   

aposematism of worms?

listen now goddammit if you put parsley on my cheeseburger and call it lettuce I'm going to have to go talk to that pimply faced 19 year old kid that is your manager and we'll have something done about it.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2777
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 14 2008,17:38   

Quote (VMartin @ Mar. 14 2008,16:08)
The problem is so complicated that I would reccomend that we should first focus only on some part of it. What would you prefer - are really coral snake models nocturnal/diurnal or - what kind of predators they have? Give the exact name of snakes and their predators you would like to support your view of mimicry.

Marty

Three quick points.

1) the jstor link works fine for me. If you want to look it up yourself, here is more information
   Avian Predation of Coral Snakes

       Neal Griffith Smith

       Copeia, Vol. 1969, No. 2. (Jun. 3, 1969), pp. 402-404.

       Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?si....O%3B2-W


2) I don't give a damn if other snakes are mimics, pseudomimics, trans-mimics, or slovakian belly dancers. My original points are that you are incorrect about coral snakes being strictly nocturnal, about it being impossible for predation of these snakes to occur, and about a lot of other things that have come up on this thread. Deal with those. But finally and most importantly, deal with

3) What is your favored explanation of the origin of snakes that seem to mimic coral snakes?

thanks

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
† † † † † † † † † † † † - Pattiann Rogers

   
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,01:43   

Albatrossity2

Quote

2) I don't give a damn if other snakes are mimics, pseudomimics, trans-mimics, or slovakian belly dancers.



Why are you so angry? Only because a researcher at jstor called the whole coral-snake issue as pseudomimicry?

And why do you want to discuss the issue? You'd better go to MacDonald instead where Erasmus and bipolar Arden are mailing their orders to AtBC.


As to your link. The author observed TWO falcon preying on coral snakes. I don't know if you consider number TWO to be sufficently supportive for an idea, that coral snakes are strictly diurnal or what. Obviously both falcons were successful. In this case as well:


Laughing falcon (Herpetotheres cachinnans) predation on coral snakes (Micrurus nigrocinctus) was recorded in two incidents that illustrate previously unreported variation in predatory behavior. In the first, the falcon held a live coral snake by the posterior end for an extended period of time, rather than decapitating it immediately. In the second, the falcon left a decapitated coral snake in a tree for more than 2 h before returning to recover its prey. A variety of behavioral adaptations may protect laughing falcons from coral snake venom.




here

I would say those falcons aren't selective agents. You should probably find some example where a predator has been bitten by the snake and survived. Such an example would support your neodarwinian fairy-tale about coral snake mimicry.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Assassinator



Posts: 479
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,05:41   

Quote
I would say those falcons aren't selective agents.

They are, everything non-random (because random things like forest fires and vulcanoes are called genetic shift, or was it drift? keep mixing those up) that alters the allel-frequencies in a population is a selective agent. Predation, like those falcons, is an (non-random) example of them.
Quote
You should probably find some example where a predator has been bitten by the snake and survived. Such an example would support your neodarwinian fairy-tale about coral snake mimicry.

It's about the fact that predators would be scared shitless, won't hunt them. Our current explanation is that that's because they look poisonous even though we're not (and we can check that, just capture one and check if they have poison glands). If you've got something better wich eliminates our current explanation we would be glad to hear it (and perhaps a Nobel-price in biology would await), currently you haven't offerd anything better.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,07:51   

Quote
I don't know if you consider number TWO to be sufficently supportive for an idea


Well Martin I'd say that there are a bunch more than two folks around here that think you are just a bag of air.

If you wish to give your theory that will replacenko das darwinismus we are listening.  giggling, but listening.

GET BACK TO WORK MARTIN THOSE TOILETS AIN'T GONNA CLEAN THEMSELVES SON!!!

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2777
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,08:52   

Quote (VMartin @ Mar. 15 2008,01:43)
Why are you so angry?

Nice try. How about this one instead?

You have so far failed to tell anyone your explanations for any biological phenomenon, preferring to consistently misrepresent biological facts and theories. If you think that is a fair exchange, you are wrong. If you think that should make a person "angry", you are wrong as well. But it sure can lead to frustration.

As noted (and ignored) before, I don't have a theory of mimicry, pseudo-Darwinian or otherwise. I have merely provided facts which you said did not exist. They do exist, and still you feel compelled to act as if you are correct about all of this. I'm not here to discuss my theory of mimicry. I'm here in the vain hope that you can provide us with your theory, and an equal opportunity to poke holes in your notions. Sounds fair to me. So I'll try again.

What is your favored explanation of the origin of snakes that seem to mimic coral snakes?

[chirp chirp]

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
† † † † † † † † † † † † - Pattiann Rogers

   
Henry J



Posts: 4013
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,12:45   

Quote
I would say those falcons aren't selective agents. You should probably find some example where a predator has been bitten by the snake and survived. Such an example would support your neodarwinian fairy-tale about coral snake mimicry.


What? A bird that learned about avoiding certain prey, due to surviving a bad experience, would be an example of an animal learning something during its lifetime. It wouldn't be an example of natural selection.

What would be an example of natural selection would be if some birds have an inherited tendency to avoid the snakes, and subsequently they become more prevalent within their species than their relatives that don't have an aversion to that kind of snake.

Henry

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,14:07   

I am surprised you don't even know basics of aposematism. The aposematism to be functional have to deter predators. Predators have to learn first that aposematics are dangerous/poisonous/unpalatable. Obviously falcons are not afraid of coral snakes and prey upon them. Consequently they do not avoid them but probably seek them actively my friends.

You have to present other predators which learn that †coral snakes are †poisonous. They should be bitten and survive it and learn from it. Consequently they would avoid coral snakes' mimics.

Do you know them or there will be another flood of babbling?

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2777
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,14:48   

V

You seem incapable of understanding that I am not defending any explanation of mimicry, Darwinian or otherwise. Let's try this more direct approach.

I am not defending any explanation of mimicry, Darwinian or otherwise.

Furthermore, you seem incapable of understanding why I entered this conversation. I wanted to provide facts to allow you to correct some of your assumptions about coral snakes. These facts are

1) coral snakes are not strictly nocturnal,

2) there are diurnal predators of coral snakes, and

3) not all predators attempting to take a coral snake are killed by the snake.

Maybe you can use those facts to help you explain the existence of snakes that seem to mimic coral snakes. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that modern evolutionary theory fails to explain that. Regardless of that failure, modern evolutionary theory does provide testable hypotheses in this area. Let's assume that tests of these hypotheses fail, and that we need a better explanation.

Your job, as noted before, is to use all of the available observations (including those above) to generate a better explanation. This explanation needs to provide testable hypotheses as well, in order to be considered at least on a par with modern evolutionary theory. So far, despite repeated requests, you have failed to provide this explanation. So I'll try again, in the hope that you will eventually understand what I am asking.

What is your favored explanation of the origin of snakes that seem to mimic coral snakes?

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
† † † † † † † † † † † † - Pattiann Rogers

   
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,16:29   

Your points 1) and 2) could be summarized under one point. There were many voices claiming that coral snakes are nocturnal, or predominantly nocturnal. Interesting point is also that both cases described in previous links occured in the morning.
† †
Quote

3) not all predators attempting to take a coral snake are killed by the snake.


I agree. There are only two cases I 've read about yet.
Digital zero/one: predators who kill and eat coral snakes and species that are killed and eaten by coral snakes. I've never heard about predators trying to kill a coral snake and being bitten by this venomus snake recovered!
And then learned to avoid them!

But such encounters are the only explanation of supposed origin of coral snake's mimics. There is no other.

Quote

What is your favored explanation of the origin of snakes that seem to mimic coral snakes?


Correct: they seems.

Who knows. You know life. Would you like to explain†life? -Unless you are a darwinist of course.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2777
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,16:36   

Quote (VMartin @ Mar. 15 2008,16:29)
   
Quote

What is your favored explanation of the origin of snakes that seem to mimic coral snakes?

Correct: they seems.

Who knows. You know life. Would you like to explain life? -Unless you are a darwinist of course.

In other words, you are content to sit on the sidelines and snipe at the ideas of others, but you have no ideas of your own?

What a waste of your powerful intellect...

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
† † † † † † † † † † † † - Pattiann Rogers

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,18:51   

What a waste of my money!

MARTIN GODDAMMIT GET BACK TO WORK WE ARE NOT PAYING YOU TO FIGHT THE DARWINISMUS YOU ARE BEING PAID TO PICK BEETS.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,20:20   

Quote
Who knows. You know life. Would you like to explain life? -Unless you are a darwinist of course.


Wow.

Marty BRAGS about not even trying to explain anything. He BRAGS about throwing up his hands, giving up, contributing nothing, offering no solutions of any kind, and insulting those who do actual research.

What a worthless waste of food and air.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 15 2008,20:31   

Albatrosity2:
Quote
I am not defending any explanation of mimicry, Darwinian or otherwise.


Here I am being not able to understand your meaning.  Maybe more clear your words should be.  Hoping to understand more your confusing words.  Mayhaps you explain in manner that is worthy of scientific thought and not of mere Darwinismus babble.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2777
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,08:07   

Quote (blipey @ Mar. 15 2008,20:31)
Albatrosity2:
 
Quote
I am not defending any explanation of mimicry, Darwinian or otherwise.


Here I am being not able to understand your meaning.  Maybe more clear your words should be.  Hoping to understand more your confusing words.  Mayhaps you explain in manner that is worthy of scientific thought and not of mere Darwinismus babble.

My apologies. The Darwinismus strabismus precludes me from communicating clearly.



--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
† † † † † † † † † † † † - Pattiann Rogers

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2008,09:14   

Salt?

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2008,13:48   

From the history criticising professor Portmann's concept of descent of testicles.

As far as I know professor Adolf Portmann's book Spirit and biology (Geist und Biologie) has never been translated into English. Yet professor Portmann's concept of descent of testicles was criticized heavily in neodarwinian journal Evolution published by Society for the Study of Evolution (can be find at jstor) in 1958.

In the "THE EVOLUTIONARY SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SCROTUM" by Raymond Cowles we can read about cooling of birds spermatozoa:

† † † †  
Quote

In summary it seems probable that in the
aves we have a case of vertebrates, having high
normal body temperatures and no external thermal
regulatory scrotum, substituting for this
device a system that requires nocturnal spermatogenesis
when temperatures are regularly 2-3" C. below the daytime norm and that in addition there is direct ventilation and a 2-3" C. cooling in the air sac that partly or wholly insulates the testes from the viscera and the
kidney with its massive blood flow, while permatogenesis
is in progress, and that in addition sperms may be stored in an external protuberance carrying a convoluted portion of the vas deferens. Surely there is evidence here that does not agree with Portmann's dismissal of
the importance of temperature in reproduction.
Portmann's unwillingness to accept the extensive
experimental work that has been done in
this field since at least as early as 1898 and
continuing to the present, and his substitution
of an "all or none" speculation based solely on
the gaudy posteriors of apes and the ornamented
posteriors of some Artiodactyles is less
than convincing.


Whether or not Cowles' hypothetical involvement
of heat sterility and associated phenomena
will prove to be correct in all respects is a
matter for others to say but because of the possible
importance of heat susceptibility in the
spermatogenic process, it is indeed unfortunate
that in order to support his concept, Portmann
is not even willing to concede the correctness
of the conclusions of literally scores of workers.




and Rodolfo Ruibal Uni California in the same journal:

THE EVOLUTION OF THE SCROTUM

† † † †  
Quote

Direct evidence has been provided
by Riley (1937) to show that avian spermatogenesis
is sensitive to high temperatures....However,
when the birds become active and raise the body
tetnperautre to 110' F. there is a complete cessation
of spermatogenesis. It is clear that instead of contradicting the thermoregulatory theory, the avian condition does provide corroboration, since there is evidence of some analogous adaptation.

------------

Pretty convincing and self-confident neodarwinian stuff, isn't it? Yet the reality seems to be different than neodarwinists would like to have it:

Determination of Testis Temperature Rhythms and Effects of Constant Light on Testicular Function in the Domestic Fowl (Gallus domesticus)

Christine E. Beaupre, 3 ,5 Corinna J. Tressler,4 ,5 Steven J. Beaupr6,6 James L.M. Morgan,5 Walter G. Bottje,5
and John D. Kirby2,5

Center of Excellence for Poultry Science, Departments of Poultry Sciences and Biological Sciences



† † † †  
Quote

It is apparent from the data
that the testis is not cooled by association with an air sac and, indeed, is not cooled by any mechanism. Therefore, spermatogenesis occurs in the domestic fowl at the core body temperature of 40-41 C. Our results provide evidence for the uniqueness of spermatogenesis in the avian testis as compared to that of the mammals examined thus far, in which spermatogenesis occurs at 33-350 C.

and authors ask:

† † † †  
Quote

Our data raise interesting questions relative to reproductive fitness and evolution. For example, why have most mammals evolved external (and cooler) testes, which makes the testes (and most importantly, the genetic potential they contain) much more vulnerable, while the other predominant homeothermic group, Aves, have evolved testes that function efficiently at elevated core body temperatures? †


http://www.biolreprod.org/cgi/reprint/56/6/1570.pdf

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2008,14:03   

What's the real explanation, then, Marty?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2008,14:56   



--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Henry J



Posts: 4013
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2008,16:02   

Quote
Yet the reality seems to be different than neodarwinists would like to have it:


What's the evidence that "neodarwinists" (whoever they are) want things to be the way described in that writeup?

Henry

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 18 2008,01:23   

Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 17 2008,16:02)
Quote
Yet the reality seems to be different than neodarwinists would like to have it:


What's the evidence that "neodarwinists" (whoever they are) want things to be the way described in that writeup?

Henry

Did you notice these words: "Portmann's unwillingness to accept the extensive experimental work"?

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 18 2008,03:50   

SALT?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 18 2008,09:37   

DAMMIT MARTY, I SAID *NO* PICKLES ON MY BURGER!! :angry:

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Henry J



Posts: 4013
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 18 2008,11:27   

Quote
Did you notice these words: "Portmann's unwillingness to accept the extensive experimental work"?


Ah. But that's just one person. One person having an attitude doesn't imply that that attitude is common in the group that he's in.

Henry

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 18 2008,13:01   

Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 18 2008,11:27)
Quote
Did you notice these words: "Portmann's unwillingness to accept the extensive experimental work"?


Ah. But that's just one person. One person having an attitude doesn't imply that that attitude is common in the group that he's in.

Henry

He he, is just the sort of thing foolish neodarwinismist say. You continue run away from my argument like stench.  :angry:

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 18 2008,14:21   

Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 18 2008,11:27)
Quote
Did you notice these words: "Portmann's unwillingness to accept the extensive experimental work"?


Ah. But that's just one person. One person having an attitude doesn't imply that that attitude is common in the group that he's in.

Henry

You may have noticed that I quoted in fact two articles from "Evolution". Both of them claimed that professor A.Portmann was wrong, because spermatozoa in birds are cooled  - the claim which turned out to be wrong.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5375
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 18 2008,14:23   

V, have you managed to get around to proposing an alternative to the Darwinisumusov yet?

Please do make a point to let me know when you do that.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 19 2008,14:02   

Arnold B. Grobman in his article

An Alternative Solution to the Coral Snake Mimic Problem (Reptilia, Serpentes, Elapidae)


JSTOR:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?si.....CO;2-R

calls the whole issue of coral snakes mimicry as pseudomimicry. Next to maps and areas of distribution of "mimics" he presented in the article many other facts that are unexplainable by selectionist's fancies. The author dismissed selection as the source of resemblance between coral snakes and their mimics. Interestig is his examples of snakes that are "aposematic" only on their ventral side and so no predator can be warned/scared by it.

For instance ring-neck snake: † †



The author of the article (1978) was inspired by ideas †of Reighard (1908) who dismissed selection as source of some colorfull fish.

A. Grobman concludes:

 
Quote

With little or no selection pressure through predation, bright colors and bizarre patterns have arisen among a variety of unrelated species of secretive snakes. Among a substantial number of those species, several independently have developed color patterns of gross similarity although differing in detail. Snakes of similar size with grossly similar patterns bear a superficial
resemblance to each other. When such resembling species occupy approximately the same geographic area, the phenomenon might be called pseudomimicry. It is proposed that the superficial morphological resemblances among the coral snake, scarlet snake, and scarlet kingsnake in the southeastern United States comprise an example of pseudomimicry.


--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2777
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 19 2008,14:28   

Quote (VMartin @ Mar. 19 2008,14:02)
A. Grobman concludes:

     
Quote

With little or no selection pressure through predation, bright colors and bizarre patterns have arisen among a variety of unrelated species of secretive snakes. Among a substantial number of those species, several independently have developed color patterns of gross similarity although differing in detail. Snakes of similar size with grossly similar patterns bear a superficial
resemblance to each other. When such resembling species occupy approximately the same geographic area, the phenomenon might be called pseudomimicry. It is proposed that the superficial morphological resemblances among the coral snake, scarlet snake, and scarlet kingsnake in the southeastern United States comprise an example of pseudomimicry.

And until you give us another explanation for the phenomenon, your contributions here can be explained simply as pseudointellectual pseudoscientific posturing.

I'll ask again, even though I know it is futile.

What is your favored explanation of the origin of snakes that seem to mimic coral snakes?

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
† † † † † † † † † † † † - Pattiann Rogers

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 19 2008,16:27   

Quote

With little or no selection pressure through predation, bright colors and bizarre patterns have arisen among a variety of unrelated species of secretive snakes. Among a substantial number of those species, several independently have developed color patterns of gross similarity although differing in detail. Snakes of similar size with grossly similar patterns bear a superficial
resemblance to each other. When such resembling species occupy approximately the same geographic area, the phenomenon might be called pseudomimicry. It is proposed that the superficial morphological resemblances among the coral snake, scarlet snake, and scarlet kingsnake in the southeastern United States comprise an example of pseudomimicry.


What is the explanation of 'pseudomimicry', Marty? I can't help but notice there isn't any actual explanation in here.

Naming something is not an explanation.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
  494 replies since Sep. 06 2007,12:29 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (17) < ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]