[net.veg] Did you see it too?

pellegri@ittral.UUCP (Dan Pellegrino) (01/06/84)

I was watching a show on one of the PBS stations about a year ago and was amazed
at what I saw.  Unfortunately,  I cannot remember the title of the program and
cannot, for the time being, support the following information.

Scientists in Japan had attached sensors to a plant (I don't remember the
species or anything about the classification of the plant) and had fed the
information from the sensors through some kind of converter/amplifier so that
the output signal was audible to humans.  Latr in the experiment, the 
scientists placed a plant of the same type, with no sensors attached, next
to the first plant.  One scientist then proceeded to savagely destroy the
second plant, breaking it and tearing it to pieces until there was only a stub
left, while the reaction of the first plant was monitored.  The first plant was
actually screaming and seemed to be extremely upset during the entire act
and until shortly thereafter.  

Later in the experiment, the group of scientists walked slowly, in a single-
file line, past the monitored plant.  The plant did not react  until the
scientist that destroyed the second plant walked by, at which time the monitored
plant began to scream terribly.  Wow!  I couldn't believe it!  It remembered
not only the deed but the doer also!

Later still...one of the scientists (not the destroyer) was conducting an
experiment with phonetics.  She spoke various phonemes, one or two at a time,
and the plant was actually repeating the sound.  Mind you, the phonemes were not
that difficult - none that required skillful manipulation of the lips, tongue or
larynx - but were repeated with surprising fidelity.  The scientist said her 
goal was to teach it the entire alphabet, although this was not accomplished
during the course of the television program.

My question to y'all is did any of you ever see or read of this or similar
experiments?  If so, please acknowledge to me or, preferably, to the net.

What if all plants have this sort of consciousness?  If they do, maybe we
should just eat the fruits of plants, since they are produced to be shed
anyway, and refrain from killing and consuming whole plants.  This would
enable the eating of squashes, tomatoes, beans, grains, apples and scores
of others but would exclude such favorites as broccoli, carrots and cabbage
(which are three very nutritious vegetables) and many others.  Can anyone
speculate or confirm whether such a diet could be nutritionally complete?
Initially, without investigating, my guess would be yes, such a diet can be
nutritionally complete, especially if dairy products derived from milk (since
it also is produced to be shed without the sacrifice of the donor's life)
are added to the diet. 

If research, such as the experiment mentioned above, proves to be conclusive
it will mean another dietary modification for bleeding hearts such as myself.
It shouldn't have any more transitional impact or long-term effect than becoming
vegetarian after being a meat eater.  It would require the same type of
careful planning and careful execution of the plan as before.  Maybe modern
technology can retrofit our bodies with a system for photosynthesis.

                                        Dan Pellegrino
                                        ittvax!ittral!pellegri

jack@hp-dcde.UUCP (01/22/84)

#R:ittral:-33400:hp-dcde:40400006:000:241
hp-dcde!jack    Jan 15 16:07:00 1984

"The first plant was actually screaming and seemed to be upset..."

ACTUALLY screaming?  You mean that it was emitting loud sounds?
Also, how could you tell that the plant seemed to be upset?


						-Jack Applin
						 (hplabs!hp-dcd!jack)

jason@hp-pcd.UUCP (Jason Su) (01/22/84)

#R:ittral:-33400:hp-pcd:62400003:000:301
hp-pcd!jason    Jan 18 15:41:00 1984


	I seem to remember seeing a similar show on PBS.  Connected 
	to the sensors was an instrument like a seismograph (with
	the squiggly pens).  Those pens sure swung back and forth
	when the plant killer walked by!  Interesting, but nothing
	more.

			Rototiller 'em,
				Jay Su

 	P.S. &-)  &-)  &-)

johns@hp-pcd.UUCP (johns) (01/22/84)

#R:ittral:-33400:hp-cvd:1800004:000:1366
hp-cvd!johns    Jan 12 11:10:00 1984

There are several types of vegitarians. Let me try to describe them:

	no red meat veggies --- they eat anything except red meat
				(I don't see how this is veggie 
				but they seem to )

	Lacto-Ovo           --  They don't eat anything that requires
				Killing. Eggs and milk are the
				only animal products. ( You needn't kill
				to get them.

	No animal products veggies. --- Self discriptive

	Religious veggies   -- there are several groups that are
				veggie by religion. They have restrictions
				that I can't catagorize generally. As an 
				example: Braman Hindus are
                                veggies but they also don't eat
                                mushrooms, onions, and many other
                                plants for religious reasons.

	Fruitarians	   --- These folks eat nothing that
                                requires killing. They eat nuts,
                                fruits and flowers. I have known
                                someone who did this and seemed
                                to remain healthy. I think that
                                you should be able to eat this
                                way since you can eat grains and
                                beans which will provide a
                                complete protein for you. 


			John Sechrest
			hp-pcd!johns

gam@tektronix.UUCP (Gregory Muth) (01/31/84)

How do you know the plant in question was screaming?  Perhaps it didn't
care for or even despised its neighbor and was revelling in  murderous
ecstasy as the other plant was being slaughtered, and when the human who
killed it came back in the room, the plant congratulated him...

One must remember that the sounds being emitted from electronic sensing
equipment are produced by that equipment, and not by the object being
monitored.  I don't doubt that the experiment measured electircal activity
in the plant, so the only conclusion that can be made is that there was an
alteration in electrical activity.

A possible explanation, of which there are no doubt many, is that the
first plant, when destroyed, dumped some chemicals into the air that the
second plant detected and reacted to.  The human who destroyed the plant
would surely have received a large dose of these chemicals, so when he
approached the second plant, it again reacted.

A Psychologist named Rosenthal said something to the effect that if we
don't remain objective, what we see is usually what we are looking for.


						Greg Muth

					...decvax!tektronix!gam  [UUCP]
				      ...gam!tektronix@rand-relay  [ARPA]

pellegri@ittral.UUCP (Dan Pellegrino) (01/31/84)

Yes, ACTUALLY screaming.  Look-up the word and you'll find a definition
that applies.  But, just for you, I'll change it to "actually reacting in
such a way as to cause an end sound that resembles a scream."

As far as the plant allegedly being upset, this is an assumption on my part.
The reaction that caused an end sound resembling a scream was very obviously,
definately directly related to the presence of the person that destroyed the
other plant. (Actually, now that I think about it, it could have been a
spontaneous outburst that occured coincidentally with the appearance of the
plant destroyer, but allow me to assume once again.)  Once I established 
(in my mind, that is) that that particular reaction was caused by that 
particular action, I assumed (darn, I keep doing that!) that it was a result
of being upset.  I admit that it could have been an expression of ecstasy,
or a cry for more, or something else.  I am open for any enlightenment you
may offer on this subject and I do concede that there may be a degree of 
reasonable doubt.  That is the reason I chose the words "seemed to be upset"
when describing the reaction (or spontaneous action) of the plant.  You may    
want to look up the word 'seem'.  It may be on the same page as the word
'scream'.  :-)    

                                             Dan Pellegrino
                                             ittvax!ittral!pellegri

 
              
                                  

pellegri@ittral.UUCP (Dan Pellegrino) (02/15/84)

In Article 107 of this newsgroup some truly fine examples of items that scream
were cited in order to demonstrate the meaning of the word 'scream' as stated 
in Definition 3 in Webster's (which is: to produce a vivid startling effect).
These examples are all valid but certainly not to the exclusion of the plant's
action that is described in the article entitled "Did you see it too?".
The verb transitive described in Webster's should not be ignored (~vt : to
utter with or as if with a scream).  The plant in question definately did 
"utter with a scream" or at least, if you won't accept the application of
Definition 3, did "utter as if with a scream".  I say that the plant screamed.

                                              Dan Pellegrino

                                              ittvax!ittral!pellegri 

P.S. - I already looked-up 'utter'.  It can be used in this context.