In article ,
"david taylor" writes:
|
| I do not stand corrected. I was quoting what an authoritative source said on
| the radio. Many natural and unatural events depend on sequences of
| operations with first in gaining major advantage.

Oh, I don't expect you to, and am certainly neither denying that it is
a factor, nor that an authoritative source said that it was the cause.
I am merely pointing out that, like so many such statements, it sounds
(and probably is) simplistic to the point of being misleading.

I am, as so often, basing my opinions on my own observations and
analysis from the basics. While I do fairly often contradict received
wisdom and have to retract later, over the past 40-50 years, I have
my views rather more often confirmed by a change in received wisdom.
You are welcome to make your own judgement as to which is likely in
this case :-)

I should point out that, in addition to what you say, authoritative
sources have also said that the reason is that beech produces a denser
canopy that oak, and I contradicted that too. Both sets of received
wisdom cannot be right, so I must be right in denying it at least once!


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.