[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Biological Origin of Earliest Fossils Substantiated
> Interesting. I can't say that I have heard of the 3.85 billion year old
Somewhere in Scientific American... long ago...
> Makes sense. Everything I've read has shown C12:C13 ratios to be evidence
of photosynthesis, but certainly lithotrophs would also influence said
Photosynthesizers are by definition photolithoautotrophic :-)
AFAIK some other lithoauthotrophs also use the Calvin cycle, like plants, to
take up CO2; there are 2 others that need less energy, but I'm pretty sure
all prefer 12C.
> >Microbiogeochemistry, to be exact (the word exists). :-)
> Probably only in German :-))
Possible. I've seen Mikrobiogeochemie in a book title. But the book was
almost certainly translated from English, as almost all science books
(popular or otherwise) are.
Oh, uh, yeah, dinosaurs... dinosaurs... <scratch, scratch> dinosaurs... I
don't think the sickle claws evolved as climbing aids, because then I'd
expect big claws on all toes and more of an ability to splay them, as in
IIRC all climbing birds that show adaptions to this lifestyle, as opposed to
birds that kick like seriemas or cassowaries. But let's wait for more
fossils, they're coming up at an incredible rate, so I assume it can't take