P.s-by discussing the things we dont know for sure in a "scientific matter" i didnt mean your everyday "we now know this as pure fact because..." kind of sceince. Obviously things like this have to be handled much more subtly and open-mindedly than that...and youre right, the honesty would have to remain.
The whole Lie Detector Test on Plants thing has been disproved many times. However,there is evidence that plants can communicate through chemical signals, much like insects communicate with pheramones... But it totally makes sense that they can communicate through other means as well, especially trees.
Of course trees and plants like all other living things communicate chemically, visually etc with the world around them - that's what blossom, flowers and fruit are, pure communication to other organisms with the aim of reproduction. The problem comes when you try to call a tree's communication "knowledge". Information, certainly, but without any mechanisms for memory, reasoning, language, etc (ie. no central nervous system) it would be a mistake to call it knowledge. An entirely natural mistake, it's commonplace to anthropomorphise and ascribe human-like attributes to the rest of the natural world, and often the first thing we think of (or sometimes the only thing) is the kind of knowledge, communication and abilities that humans have. So much goes on biochemically that we're not aware of, it's a real mistake to limit your understanding of nature to these anthropomorphic surfaces. The world is far more complicated, subtle and fascinating than that
in my life, there have been experiences that went beyond my physical knowledge. there were glimpses of an awareness that my knowledge was only trying to mimic in a very superficial way. there was communication that went beyond seperation, thinking and language. the only part my brain played was making a note that this had happened. if i had stayed in that place, there would have been no need for the mind, other than to try and communicate to those not sharing the same experience.
I believe trees are all part of an existence that we don't comprehend. Our minds are naturally too selfish to explore the posibility of other objects such as trees, rocks, or even dirt as having some sort of static energy that could retain feeling. Let alone spread it to another source in order to communicate. I drew this the other day based on how I was feeling like everything was connected. Wierd shit. . . . And to the member named DARKAIN You have a very closed mind. Explore possibilities. Don't end your thoughts on hard facts.
What about the idea that plants make certain chemicals, like psilocybin, mescaline, thc, etc, etc, (and there are countless examples of plants that contain neurotransmitter-like substances), that they don't serve any purpose to the plants functioning itself, but when ingest by another species, communicates its message through those chemicals to the ingester.
count yourself lucky you were born deaf... the first time your ears clear will be difficult for you, especially if it is on your deathbed, when it's too late to change
Those are designed to be unpleasant. THC is an evelotionary defense designed to keep deer/whatever else from eating the plants.
I really, really doubt that is what I'll be worried about on my deathbed. They're just trees. The same way animals are just animals and I don't feel bad hunting. Or fishing.
That's kinda funny, THC deterring people from using marijuana, well, if you ever looked in any of the marijuana forums, that is just not the case. And deer love to eat marijuana plants. THC is closely related to the human and animal bodies own endogenous cannabinoids, which in part serve as intercellular lipid messengers. There are many alkaloids and other chemicals in plants that humans and other animals find pleasurable and/or medicinally beneficial, and they seek those plants out. Describing those as a defense doesn't make sense. About 50% of today's modern pharmaceutical drugs are directly derived from plants.