How do I translate this information to 2nd graders? Do you have a site or suggestions?
I would say that, nature has an intricate network of biology, elements and energies that allows it to sense and understand many of the same things that humans can. Sometimes nature can sense the world better than humans. This is why nature and the physical world is so very important to us.
0 Replies
RexRed
1
Reply
Fri 10 May, 2013 03:44 pm
I got a lot of flack (no hard feelings though) with this thread saying how crazy I was for even proposing such a ludicrous claim...
The living things on earth are in a continued process of decay.
Plants were first before animals. Then, plants enjoy a more sophisticated structure of survival. It was 1990's and in a desert of Peru in South America, rain started to fall in a region where rain has been absent for centuries. This new and rare raining season lasted a few days but was enough to even form a temporary lake. What it called the attention more than anything was grass filing up the whole area. Grass grew right over sand.
Lets also analyze the "carnivore plants" as an example of "thinking". The plant creates a "bait", which can be a special aroma or an imitation of a small worm or similar. The prey will fall in the trick and will encounter problems to escape because the plant released a glued substance to keep it prisoner. Later, the plant will use the petals to wrap the prey and eat it (could be absorption means, etc.)
You must be capable to think in order to prepare the trap and catch the prey.
The unknown issue here is how plants can do it.
With all our current technology, we can't even guess how plants can perceive, simply because everything we have studied about "thinking" is based in "our way of perception", this is to say, having the brain specifically located in one area and receiving signals from stimuli through identified sensors.
But, to us, the way plants think and perceive still is unknown.
Here is where pride overcomes our poor understanding about plants, and many so called experts have decided to conclude that plants can't think, that plants can't hear, etc. simply because our ignorance not so because plants can't do it.
Unless the experiment itself was deeply flawed, in which case the results are meaningless, like this...
Quote:
How does this work? Well, according to the authors, this is evidence that acoustic signals are “generated in plants by biochemical processes within the cell, where nanomechanical oscillations of various components in the cytoskeleton can produce a spectrum of vibrations.” Never mind that the experimental design and methodology was laden with opportunities for experimental error. In particular, opening the petri dishes to water and count germinated seeds every day is deeply flawed. The easiest and least error-prone method would be to have the petri dishes sealed with parafilm to prevent water loss and inspected ONLY after the experiment was over. That is the standard method for testing for germination rates. Moreover, opening the dishes to count and water seeds every day really screws up the “covered to ensure darkness” part. In fact, chile seeds germinate better with light – which is what they got every day when they were opened. Was each dish exposed to light for exactly the same time every day? Exposure to light converts the seeds’ phytochrome to what’s called the active form, and phytochrome plays a crucial role in seed germination. The longer the light exposure, the more phytochrome is converted.
Now, plant scientists would know these things when they were designing their experiments. But as neither of the authors have degrees in plant sciences, it’s understandable. What’s not understandable is how this article got through peer-review. Unless none of the reviewers were plant scientists, either.
Only under controlled and absolutely identical conditions can an anomaly be detected.
It seems more scrutiny is warranted.
Water is a medium for communication, air, heat and even average human proximity. As with light, observation itself may skew the ultimate results.
It may take years before we discover the true essence of the "green thumb".
0 Replies
RexRed
1
Reply
Tue 30 May, 2017 04:36 am
"Science now shows that plants appear to be sentient beings. They perceive light, smell, touch, water, and many more variables than we do. They can learn, remember and communicate." - Kenny Ausubel, Bioneers Co-Founder and CEO
0 Replies
coluber2001
1
Reply
Tue 30 May, 2017 01:23 pm
Save
0 Replies
coluber2001
2
Reply
Mon 5 Jun, 2017 11:12 am
There have been experiments done to show that at least one plant, a mustard, the mousear cress responds to vibrations in the air caused by the chewing of a caterpillar on other plants. The chewing sounds of a caterpillar were recorded and played to a group of these plants for two hours. Later, the plants and a control group of plants were subjected to caterpillars feeding on their leaves. The result was the plants that had previously been exposed to the recordings produced more mustard oil, a chemical defense, than the plants in a control group. And it's not just the frequency, because other recordings of the same frequency produced no response.
There have been experiments done to show that at least one plant, a mustard, the mousear cress responds to vibrations in the air caused by the chewing of a caterpillar on other plants. The chewing sounds of a caterpillar were recorded and played to a group of these plants for two hours. Later, the plants and a control group of plants were subjected to caterpillars feeding on their leaves. The result was the plants that had previously been exposed to the recordings produced more mustard oil, a chemical defense, than the plants in a control group. And it's not just the frequency, because other recordings of the same frequency produced no response.
