Comments on: Tree Thinking http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/ We get only one. Wed, 16 May 2012 21:15:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: Pneumatic fittings http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-1093 Sat, 29 Jan 2011 08:24:59 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-1093 Classic exposition, I have also mentioned it in my blog article. But it is a pity that almost no friend discussed it with me. I am very happy to see your article. Classic exposition, I have also mentioned it in my blog article. But it is a pity that almost no friend discussed it with me. I am very happy to see your article.

]]> by: Howard http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-723 Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:34:52 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-723 1) No - the middle one swapped S and P 2) False 3) True 1) No - the middle one swapped S and P
2) False
3) True

]]> by: Yoke http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-688 Thu, 12 Feb 2009 04:05:31 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-688 i shall make an attempt to answer the questions later if i've time (i use office time for net surfing, great employee that i am). meanwhile...HAPPY DARWIN DAY!!! :-) i shall make an attempt to answer the questions later if i’ve time (i use office time for net surfing, great employee that i am).

meanwhile…HAPPY DARWIN DAY!!! :-)

]]> by: Mike Haubrich, FCD http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-638 Wed, 04 Feb 2009 14:09:41 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-638 In honesty, Felicia, I have never learned to read the cladograms, so it is hard for me to answer the first question. It doesn't seem to me that the diagram on the left as clearly illustrates the interrelationships between each of the branches as the two phylogenetic trees to the right. Secondly the two diagrams on the right focus on differing traits in drawing the relationships among "S" "C" and "P" and so, no they are not identical. 2. In the first diagram, it would appear that they are if this represents the order of appearance; however the diagram merely shows that they share a certain base set of traits. So, I would say it is false. 3 True. The last common ancestor is not labeled, but they share the same root. I actually hope that Carol (CL) wins, because I want to see what her question ends up being about. In honesty, Felicia, I have never learned to read the cladograms, so it is hard for me to answer the first question. It doesn’t seem to me that the diagram on the left as clearly illustrates the interrelationships between each of the branches as the two phylogenetic trees to the right. Secondly the two diagrams on the right focus on differing traits in drawing the relationships among “S” “C” and “P” and so, no they are not identical.

2. In the first diagram, it would appear that they are if this represents the order of appearance; however the diagram merely shows that they share a certain base set of traits. So, I would say it is false.

3 True. The last common ancestor is not labeled, but they share the same root.

I actually hope that Carol (CL) wins, because I want to see what her question ends up being about.

]]> by: Felicia Gilljam http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-625 Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:18:13 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-625 Steve - If only their motives were that honourable. I'm afraid they care little about who buys the mag so long as it's as many as possible. And it was incredibly poor judgement on their part to think that writing strong disclaimers in the editorial would get them off the hook for giving creationists free ammunition. Steve - If only their motives were that honourable. I’m afraid they care little about who buys the mag so long as it’s as many as possible. And it was incredibly poor judgement on their part to think that writing strong disclaimers in the editorial would get them off the hook for giving creationists free ammunition.

]]> by: Steve Bowen http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-624 Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:24:34 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-624 "New Scientist recently had a story on this with a frightfully dumb headline on the cover.)" I assumed they were trying to entice a few creationsts to buy the mag. You never know it might educate one or two :) “New Scientist recently had a story on this with a frightfully dumb headline on the cover.)”

I assumed they were trying to entice a few creationsts to buy the mag. You never know it might educate one or two :)

]]> by: Felicia Gilljam http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-605 Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:17:55 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-605 Hi C.L., I put your answers on moderation so other people can have a go without influence. ;) Will put it back in a week or so. Hi C.L., I put your answers on moderation so other people can have a go without influence. ;) Will put it back in a week or so.

]]> by: C. L. Hanson http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-604 Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:13:19 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-604 I hope I win, because I have an idea for a biology question I'd like to ask you to post about! :D I hope I win, because I have an idea for a biology question I’d like to ask you to post about! :D

]]> by: C. L. Hanson http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-603 Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:06:02 +0000 http://lifebeforedeath.blogsome.com/2009/01/25/tree-thinking/#comment-603 1. no, P & S are inverted in the middle one. 2. false 3. true 1. no, P & S are inverted in the middle one.
2. false
3. true

]]>