Re: How grasses became grains
From: J Moore (anthrosciguy_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 09/08/04
- Next message: Bob: "Re: Is SCIENCE magazine 2 or more years behind; Re: Orrorin"
- Previous message: Bob Keeter: "Re: How grasses became grains"
- In reply to: Bob Keeter: "Re: How grasses became grains"
- Next in thread: Bob Keeter: "Re: How grasses became grains"
- Reply: Bob Keeter: "Re: How grasses became grains"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 02:07:15 GMT
Bob Keeter <rkeeter@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ibt%c.10401$Wv5.6673@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "deowll" <deowll@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:Eza%c.105547$_h.44596@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
> Snippage. . . . .
> >
> > But one that is found in many books. In some places people start growing
> > wheat and in a few years they have to hand sort it because local grasses
> > do
> > better if the head is non shattering and they end up with oats, rye,
> > barley
> > or something. In order to grow wheat they have to sort the wheat grains
> > out
> > of the mix or they would end up growing something else which
domesticated
> > itself.
>
> It would appear that you and I read some of the same books. 8-) The fact
> that they happen to be ARCHAEOLOGY related instead of purely ANTHROPOLOGY
> related might be the issue. Im thinking that maybe some just have not
> thought this through and were maybe a tad quick on the trigger.
>
> For myself, that shattering/non-shattering seed pod is the big "delta"
> between the grasses and grains and as you say, its a very automatic
> selective process as soon as the gatherers start collecting seedstock.
>
> Regards
> bk
It seemed to me that most of the posters in this thread were, like me,
responding to the completely inaccurate claims in the opening post -- that
wild grains do not exist and that grains cannot reproduce without human
help. I don't think anyone disputed that humans have selectively bred
grains to be better suited for their use just as they have with virtually
all other plants and animals they've domesticated (in fact I explicitly made
that point in my reply to the OP, which was the first reply in fact). In
fact, doing that is the process of domestication. It really has little to
do with what books you read, and I think you're reaching (to say the least)
if you think that people like, say, Mikey Brass for instance, don't read
archaeology books.
-- JMoore
- Next message: Bob: "Re: Is SCIENCE magazine 2 or more years behind; Re: Orrorin"
- Previous message: Bob Keeter: "Re: How grasses became grains"
- In reply to: Bob Keeter: "Re: How grasses became grains"
- Next in thread: Bob Keeter: "Re: How grasses became grains"
- Reply: Bob Keeter: "Re: How grasses became grains"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
