The green man is a fake

Jeff Wilson · 17 Jan 2011, 00:49 · from 2011-January.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: jwilson at io.com (Jeff Wilson)
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 18:49:09 -0600
Subject: (urth) The green man is a fake
In-Reply-To: <4D3372B1.1020001 at gmail.com>
References: <SNT123-W358B848CDF3BEC307BB043CFF50 at phx.gbl>	<F62DE84A31734BAA9E76586471608470@jill>
	<4D3372B1.1020001 at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D339205.5070805 at io.com>

On 1/16/2011 4:35 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> (Interestingly, one corollary of your idea is that a moving, talking
> plant is an evolutionary impossibility.)

perhaps not; an evergreen could become animated a few weeks a year, or a 
few months if it could deploy broad leaves for sun and furl them for 
activity, perhaps like a peacock's tail. Developing language would take 
proportionately longer.

-- 
Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com
Computational Intelligence Laboratory - Texas A&M Texarkana
< http://www.tamut.edu/CIL >

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net