Whimpy Roots

Hey Glenn,

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:08:28 -0500 <glennmorton@entouch.net> writes:

> Bill, when one wants really badly to believe something, one will go
> to great lengths to explain discrepancies. Face it, the simplest
> explanation is that the roots grew in place.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. I agree, Glenn, in
situ is indeed the simplest explanation for isolated vertical roots, and
it may even be the correct one.

Now, will you agree with me that the simplest way to preserve delicate,
thin, widespread partings is not to lift them above the base-level of
erosion and start growing "pioneering vegetation" roots through the
partings? Will you agree that grass, shrubs and trees growing in swamps
do have roots that sink into and bioturbate their substrate? Will you
agree that a single stand of pioneering vegetation is not sufficient to
support the entire root structure of all subsequent vegetation, and will
you agree that trees don't have to wait on a meter-thick layer of
pioneering-vegetation peat to accumulate before they bagin to grow, that
trees can and do begin growing in moist soil (and therefore could grow in
a bare parting - without veggie litter), and that trees growing in wet
soil can and do sink their roots below the water table?

Face it, Glenn, the simplest explanation is that partings in coal were
buried under water by floating organic debris.

Bill

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
Received on Tue Mar 2 23:05:21 2004