Re: For paleontologists: Is this true?

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (
Date: Sun Oct 21 2001 - 22:45:48 EDT

  • Next message: Lic. Mercedes Flores Castaņeda: "10 NOVIEMBRE, SEMINARIO EL CERRADOR DE VENTAS. CUPO LIMITADO."

    Keith gives a good answer from one viewpoint. But we may carry matters
    further back if we think of basic sensitivity to various types of
    stimuli. Touch is found in the sensitivity of bacteria to attachment, and
    also in the repulsion reflex of paramecia, for example. I recall that
    _Balantidium coli_ does not bounce off on contact, and so bores through
    the intestines of its hosts. Vision can probably be ascribed to the red
    spot of Euglena and certainly to the eye spots of helminths. But the
    algae and blue-green bacteria seem to have a more rudimentary ability to
    orient relative to light. However, the formation of images probably is
    first found in arthropods' compound eyes. I can't separate taste from
    smell at the most basic level of chemical sensitivity. It is evident in
    bacteria as well as fungi and protozoa. The earliest sensitivity to
    vibration that comes to mind is the earthworm. The earliest production of
    sounds for signalling is probably among arthropods. As Keith notes, just
    what does Jeans mean?

    On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 17:03:10 -0400 george murphy <>
            On skimming Sir James Jeans' Science & Music (first published in
    1937) I noted the closing sentence:
            "Students of evolution in the animal world tell us that the ear
    was the last of the sense organs to arrive; it is beyond question the
    most intricate and the most wonderful."
            Is the statement in the first clause now correct? If so, it
    suggests an interesting theological reflection.
    George L. Murphy
    "The Science-Theology Interface"

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 21 2001 - 22:51:23 EDT