[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Land Plants Origins Pushed Back

Some molecular "clocks" are better than others, and the possiblility of skewing should be considered.
However, even if the dates are too early, it clearly points out the probability that there were primitive bryophytes (liverworts and possibly even mosses), fungi, and lichens on land during the Precambrian. The question is if there is any trace of them in the fossil record, and if we look hard enough, I bet someone will find such traces eventually. The fossil record is notoriously incomplete, especially when it comes to soft-bodied organisms.
P.S. I should make it clear that I do not buy Retallack's hypothesis that vendobionts were lichens. However, there are some controversial Cambrian fossils of "fungi" that should perhaps be carefully reexamined in light of these new findings.
From: ELurio@aol.com
Reply-To: ELurio@aol.com
To: rtravsky@uwyo.edu, dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Re: Land Plants Origins Pushed Back
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:11:55 EDT

Here we go AGAIN!!!! There's ample evidence that rapid evolution can squewer
the molecular clock bigtime. When the fossil record and the molecular
"record" disagree on chronology, always go with the fossil record.

eric l.

_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp