Nature is wild

Cheimoon

Made of cheese
Scout
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
14,328
Location
Canada
Supports
no-one in particular
Absolutely no idea.
It's probably something obvious but it looks like a magic trick to me!

I also don't get how the grass can be totally OK despite having been deprived of sunlight by the pollen - except if the pollen had only fallen pretty recently.

So many questions! (Well, two.)
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
It's probably something obvious but it looks like a magic trick to me!

I also don't get how the grass can be totally OK despite having been deprived of sunlight by the pollen - except if the pollen had only fallen pretty recently.

So many questions! (Well, two.)
From a logical perspective, the pollen is light and highly combustible so it burns away before the green (and wet) grass can start to burn. The pollen likely covers the grass quickly, over a couple of days. Grass is very resilient, as you see in summer it can be dried out and brown but returns to brilliant green with on a little rainfall so a few days like this won't hurt it.

For the trees, the fire moves past so quickly there's not enough time for the bark to ignite. As well, like the grass, the flames are not intense enough due to the lack of flammable material in the fluffy pollen to start a big tree on fire.

Edit: a neat and similar trick you can try yourself is lighting your socks on fire.* Not all socks are compatible with this and from my youth I remember that white tube socks work best. You can light the fuzz of a worn in pair on fire and it will spread and burn out before your foot feels any heat. The sock itself won't start on fire because the burn takes place too quickly. This is a similar principle to what's happening with the pollen and grass.

*You probably shouldn't light your socks on fire. Be safe, not stupid.
 
Last edited:

Cheimoon

Made of cheese
Scout
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
14,328
Location
Canada
Supports
no-one in particular
From a logical perspective, the pollen is light and highly combustible so it burns away before the green (and wet) grass can start to burn. The pollen likely covers the grass quickly, over a couple of days. Grass is very resilient, as you see in summer it can be dried out and brown but returns to brilliant green with on a little rainfall so a few days like this won't hurt it.

For the trees, the fire moves past so quickly there's not enough time for the bark to ignite. As well, like the grass, the flames are not intense enough due to the lack of flammable material in the fluffy pollen to start a big tree on fire.

Edit: a neat and similar trick you can try yourself is lighting your socks on fire.* Not all socks are compatible with this and from my youth I remember that white tube socks work best. You can light the fuzz of a worn in pair on fire and it will spread and burn out before your foot feels any heat. The sock itself won't start on fire because the burn takes place too quickly. This is a similar principle to what's happening with the pollen and grass.

*You probably shouldn't light your socks on fire. Be safe, not stupid.
I won't try your socks experiment, but thanks for the explanation all the same! That's interesting. :)
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,468

This is a myosin protein dragging an endorphin along a filament to the inner part of the brain’s parietal cortex. This creates happiness…so we’re literally watching happiness.
 

giggs-beckham

Clueless
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
6,926

This is a myosin protein dragging an endorphin along a filament to the inner part of the brain’s parietal cortex. This creates happiness…so we’re literally watching happiness.
Oh and myocin. Saw a doc 10 years ago showing myocin taking a virus to cell nucleus and went "those things are real!" Little machines inside every cell, so cool.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...wqsBegQIBxAE&usg=AOvVaw0IrlPM8NZvqYEkY0QiLjIB
Every scene is so literally awesome your brain can barely keep up. A must watch for all in this thread (a bit ad heavy though)
 
Last edited:

Salt Bailly

Auburn, not Ginger.
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
9,416
Location
Valinor

Incidentally, I'm currently watching a new show on the BBC about this: Nature's Misfits, narrated by Bill Bailey, and his narration over this part was identical to David Attenborough's in the show above. Cheeky feckers.
 

Counterfactual

Full Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
3,289
Location
Mobil Avenue station

Incidentally, I'm currently watching a new show on the BBC about this: Nature's Misfits, narrated by Bill Bailey, and his narration over this part was identical to David Attenborough's in the show above. Cheeky feckers.
I quite enjoyed that, despite the premise not really being true which was said at the end. They weren't so much misfits as highly evolutionarily specialised... perhaps too specialised? It makes me wonder if we were seeing the end of an evolutionary road for some of them. I suppose with natural selection that's what happens. We don't see the "misfit" species who've already been eliminated, and some on the planet will always be close to joining them.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,578
Location
Florida
Wasn’t that where they filmed the final fight scene in the most recent Mission Impossible?
 

Cheimoon

Made of cheese
Scout
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
14,328
Location
Canada
Supports
no-one in particular
Very, very slowly.
I was thinking it might have been fairly quickly actually. I'm thinking a predecessor might have had random spots for camouflage, and the few specimens where the random spots have a meaningful shape would have had a huge advantage. Given the probably pretty large and short-lived population of those flies (or maybe I'm thinking of fruit flies too much), that might have happened relatively suddenly (in terms of usual evolutionary timelines).

Or not. :)
 
Last edited:

giggs-beckham

Clueless
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
6,926
I was thinking it might have been fairly quickly actually. I'm thinking a predecessor might have had random spots for camouflage, and the few specimens where the random spots have a meaningful shape would have had a huge advantage. Given the probably pretty large and short-lived population of those flies (or.maybe I'm thinking of fruit flies too much), that might have happened relatively suddenly (in terms of usual evolutionary timelines).

Or not. :)
Good point about the life cycles. I always say the secret ingredient with evolution is time. But an adaptation untill fully developed should be by and large useless so how does it get from nothing to fully developed.
While those incremental adaptation stages shouldn'tve given the creature any better chance of survival.
But with enough time and evolutionary dead ends there are enough chances for the spectacular to evolve. I guess its a game of numbers. Still mind blowing though.
 

Cheimoon

Made of cheese
Scout
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
14,328
Location
Canada
Supports
no-one in particular
Good point about the life cycles. I always say the secret ingredient with evolution is time. But an adaptation untill fully developed should be by and large useless so how does it get from nothing to fully developed.
While those incremental adaptation stages shouldn'tve given the creature any better chance of survival.
But with enough time and evolutionary dead ends there are enough chances for the spectacular to evolve. I guess its a game of numbers. Still mind blowing though.
Yeah, absolutely!